Judge Bans Man From Net For Life

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
When a judge bans you from the internet for life, you know you are screwing up. With that said, I think all of us know someone that we’d like to personally ban from the internet for life.

Specifically, one of the permanent conditions of supervised release is: "The defendant is prohibited from accessing any computer equipment or any 'online' computer service at any location, including employment or education. This includes, but is not limited to, any Internet service provider, bulletin board system, or any other public or private computer network."
Click to expand...
 
so basically the guy cant do anything... couldent even be a garbage man becuase those trucks generally have terminals on a radio data network....
 
If you read the whole article, it got thrown out by the appeal court. The reason is that the condition is so broad and so restrictive that it's more damaging. We can also forget about trying to enforce this since he could anonymously browse if he used a computer of a friend or any unsupervised computer.

However, if the condition is well written, it's a great condition...
 
<i>The jury has found you guilty, and by the powers invested to me by the morality of the universe I sentence you to 5 years 11 months in jail and upon your release you are ordered to be a hippie!</i>

I know it was over turned and it should be, it was too broad and crippling. If you read it by the letter of what was posted it says computer system <b>or</b> any online computer service at any location. This guy could own or do hardly anything and it would only get worse. Want a car? Ok the controlling computer <i>might</i> be omitted but you'd be dead if you had OnStar. No cell phone, no current video game system, heck if you could get to a chat room with a tivo you'd be in trouble too.. wait the newer models can revcieve movies from online, gone! Many many more things would follow too and I don't think it would do any good either.

I also don't agree with the second condition that he not own any sexual explicit material either.

Almost forces the guy to sit somewhere in the woods with nothing to do but sulk... and possibly dream of revenge.
 
Banned from the net?
I would relocate to another country. Period.

But I am not a pedophile(like this man), nor a hacker so I don't have to worry about such things.
 
Given the fact the guy was a pedophile who exposed his own 3 year old daughter on line,he got off too easy.Banned from the net?I'd have banned him from living.
 
Banned from the internet and computers :confused:

I still don't understand how the government can have that much power.

If he took the pictures with a camera would he be banned from all things photography?

If someone stabbed someone with a pencila nd tried to kill them with it are they forever banned from all pointy objects?

And as for the referenced case, if he called the girl, would he be banned from all phone communication and be banned from all vehicles since they obviously helped him commit the crime as well?

Not that I'm defending what these guys did but this shit is stupid.

Sweden has 100x better internet anyways :rolleyes:
 
Simple. Move to another country. As an American there are many countries that would litterally take you in with little questions asked.
 
Kristofff said:
Banned from the internet and computers :confused:

I still don't understand how the government can have that much power.

If he took the pictures with a camera would he be banned from all things photography?

If someone stabbed someone with a pencila nd tried to kill them with it are they forever banned from all pointy objects?

And as for the referenced case, if he called the girl, would he be banned from all phone communication and be banned from all vehicles since they obviously helped him commit the crime as well?

Not that I'm defending what these guys did but this shit is stupid.

Sweden has 100x better internet anyways :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

and Sweden has 100x better looking girls

To Ockie, whywould it be easier if you're american?
 
michael.pa2 said:
Given the fact the guy was a pedophile who exposed his own 3 year old daughter on line,he got off too easy.Banned from the net?I'd have banned him from living.
Click to expand...

Ditto.

I can't believe most are more concerned about the internet issue:
Nevertheless, we have never approved such an all-encompassing, severe and permanent restriction, and nothing on this record inspires confidence in the propriety of doing so now. The court in (the) Crandon (case) imposed the most severe restriction on computer and Internet use that we have thus far upheld. There, (Richard) Crandon, a 39-year-old New Jersey resident, met a 14-year-old girl from Minnesota online. Crandon communicated with the girl over the Internet for several months and eventually traveled to Minnesota to meet her. During his visit to Minnesota, the two had sexual relations, and Crandon took sexually explicit photos of her.
Click to expand...
 
I think the judge was pretty lenient. :)

Pervs showing off their children on the net? Boom. Headshot. If I am ever Emperor of Earth those fuckers will need to hide in the deepest, darkest hole they can find and not come out.
 
MC FLMJIG that isn't the same guy that was banned, his name is Wyndell Williams . That person who meet a 14 year old is Richard Crandon. Crandon is just somebody that the defense for Williams used to show that while what Williams did wasn't as bad as what Crandon did that Williams was given a harser punishment.

Williams flashed his 3 year old daughter butt on a web cam and was found to have child porn in his house.
 
I'm as against pedophilia as anyone else, but most of you are wishing for an instantly fatherless little girl.

Banned from the net? Have fun enforcing that.
 
Exavior said:
MC FLMJIG that isn't the same guy that was banned, his name is Wyndell Williams . That person who meet a 14 year old is Richard Crandon. Crandon is just somebody that the defense for Williams used to show that while what Williams did wasn't as bad as what Crandon did that Williams was given a harser punishment.

Williams flashed his 3 year old daughter butt on a web cam and was found to have child porn in his house.
Click to expand...

Ah ok...

My bad...
 
Wow, being banned from the Internet for life is like living in the Vatican and being excommunicated from the Catholic church. :eek:

May as well just blind him.
 
Well after reading the article, it became apparent to me that, while not only was the guy banned from the internet, he was banned from ever owning or reading any sexually explicit books.

I would have to say the judge did this solely for press coverage. He should have known better. It's shit like that which will eventually start making it harder and harder to get justice on these types of cases, that is, unless the system cracks under the pressure first. You can already see it happening considering the instant polarity and sensation that it causes.
 
I am amazingly liberal, and I don't see how you can possibly ban someone from using any computer network ever, for the rest of their lives.

That being said, this man is a pedophile who was exploiting his own daughter not to mention the other material in his possesion, he should be banned from life.

As far as a fatherless 3 year old, I would much rather her grow up with a loving family she was not related to than a fucking pedophile.
 
Jiffylush said:
As far as a fatherless 3 year old, I would much rather her grow up with a loving family she was not related to than a fucking pedophile.
Click to expand...

Have you ever known a girl who grew up without her dad?

If she ever finds out about what happened when she was three, the choice to keep him in her life becomes hers and not the government's.
 
Ockie said:
Simple. Move to another country. As an American there are many countries that would litterally take you in with little questions asked.
Click to expand...

I find many places in the world have respect for Americans and are seemingly overjoyed when one comes around. In the Philippines especially where they are almost worshiped :eek: .

If you are half Filipino and half Caucasian...well...your just in the gold there.

Or maybe they are just happy you left before Bush kills us all.
 
GJSNeptune said:
Have you ever known a girl who grew up without her dad?

If she ever finds out about what happened when she was three, the choice to keep him in her life becomes hers and not the government's.
Click to expand...

So your saying its better to leave the girl with her dad and let him rape her or let him have others rape her as opposed to taking her away and getting her out of harms way?
 
Exavior said:
So your saying its better to leave the girl with her dad and let him rape her or let him have others rape her as opposed to taking her away and getting her out of harms way?
Click to expand...

No, because I didn't say anything at all about her remaining in his custody.
 
GJSNeptune said:
Have you ever known a girl who grew up without her dad?

If she ever finds out about what happened when she was three, the choice to keep him in her life becomes hers and not the government's.
Click to expand...

I know plenty of people who grow up without fathers, mothers or both in some cases. A lot of them turn out to be great people living great lives.
Children in situations like that should most definitely be removed. Sharing ones genes with another person does not make them your father or mother in your mind. Ask any child who was adopted or grew up in foster care that...they will easily tell you who they think their parents are, even if they knew all the facts.
 
CopyCat said:
I know plenty of people who grow up without fathers, mothers or both in some cases. A lot of them turn out to be great people living great lives.
Children in situations like that should most definitely be removed. Sharing ones genes with another person does not make them your father or mother in your mind. Ask any child who was adopted or grew up in foster care that...they will easily tell you who they think their parents are, even if they knew all the facts.
Click to expand...

That's great. But I'm not talking about how she'll end up. I want her to have the choice, not courts.
 
CopyCat said:
I know plenty of people who grow up without fathers, mothers or both in some cases. A lot of them turn out to be great people living great lives.
Children in situations like that should most definitely be removed. Sharing ones genes with another person does not make them your father or mother in your mind. Ask any child who was adopted or grew up in foster care that...they will easily tell you who they think their parents are, even if they knew all the facts.
Click to expand...

I spent much of my childhood in foster care. It was pure unadulterated hell for the most part. In the case of child abuse, it's probably a good thing to take them out of the mother/fathers care, but it's a crapshoot, the foster home may be the same or worse.
 
Well, once we get some good pictures of this person, you know they are gonna get circulated on the net with a big banner saying "YOU SHOULD BE BANNED FROM THE INTERNET"
 
Evil Juggalo said:
Well, once we get some good pictures of this person, you know they are gonna get circulated on the net with a big banner saying "YOU SHOULD BE BANNED FROM THE INTERNET"
Click to expand...

Would or wouldn't that include "Pwned!" stamped across his forehead? :D
 
Have you ever known a girl who grew up without her dad?

If she ever finds out about what happened when she was three, the choice to keep him in her life becomes hers and not the government's.
Click to expand...
I spent much of my childhood in foster care. It was pure unadulterated hell for the most part.
Click to expand...
I've known lots of kids who grew up without their parents. I've seen plenty of circumstances where foster care has provided a loving, nurturing environment to grow up in. Matter of fact I've been foster-parenting for the best part of 30 years. and from what I've heard and studied during that time it seems to be a considerably better managed arrangement here in Australia than it is in your country, with far better training and checks in place and far less likelihood of placements becoming arrangements of abuse. The arrangements we have in place here with regard to child welfare in general is a long, long way from ideal, but from what I can tell it's also incredibly more responsive and appropriate than what you have in place there.


Anyways, I'd have to agree that the 'ruling' was likely not much other than an exercise in publicity. Either that or it's an exampe of complete incompetence. Surely such a ruling couldn't have been made by anybody competent and seriously expecting it to be upheld? And if publicity was indeed the aim, was it an exercise in self-aggrandisement/self-promotion or was it instead an exercise in highlighting the inadequacy of laws to provide warranted protections?

Those are the questions raised, IMO.
 
Catweazle said:
Anyways, I'd have to agree that the 'ruling' was likely not much other than an exercise in publicity. Either that or it's an exampe of complete incompetence. Surely such a ruling couldn't have been made by anybody competent and seriously expecting it to be upheld? And if publicity was indeed the aim, was it an exercise in self-aggrandisement/self-promotion or was it instead an exercise in highlighting the inadequacy of laws to provide warranted protections?

Those are the questions raised, IMO.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately when it comes to the pedophile hysteria in this country, everybody in media, law enforcement and politics want to grab a piece of the fame pie.. And curiously, the problem just seems to be getting worse. Instead of everybody trying to grandstand and one-up one another, maybe they should fix what's in place and broken, before moving on to harsher and harsher laws, which also will be horribly broken..

Of course in this country, the saying seems to be, "if its broke, fuck it.. I want my 15 minutes of fame!" :(
 
GJSNeptune said:
Have you ever known a girl who grew up without her dad?

If she ever finds out about what happened when she was three, the choice to keep him in her life becomes hers and not the government's.
Click to expand...

I knew a girl who grew up with her dad,and ended up a hopeless alcholic because no one was there to stop the abuse he inflicted on her.If she had had a choice,do you think she'd want him in her life?
 
ianken said:
I think the judge was pretty lenient. :)

Pervs showing off their children on the net? Boom. Headshot. If I am ever Emperor of Earth those fuckers will need to hide in the deepest, darkest hole they can find and not come out.
Click to expand...

I'd argue that people who would ever want to rule the world are much more dangerous than pedophiles. History supports this argument.
 
Riddlinkidstoner said:
I find many places in the world have respect for Americans and are seemingly overjoyed when one comes around. In the Philippines especially where they are almost worshiped :eek: .

If you are half Filipino and half Caucasian...well...your just in the gold there.

Or maybe they are just happy you left before Bush kills us all.
Click to expand...

Yeah it is kinda weird. In some places you are worshipped and in other places you have a target on your head.
 
michael.pa2 said:
I knew a girl who grew up with her dad,and ended up a hopeless alcholic because no one was there to stop the abuse he inflicted on her.If she had had a choice,do you think she'd want him in her life?
Click to expand...

Again, for the third time, I said nothing about her remaining in his custody or how she'll end up. Her choice, not the government's. That's as simple as I can put it.

No, she obviously would not want him in her life. It's unfortunate that no one intervened for the girl you knew/know, but this girl won't be growing up with her father, and eventually she'll get the choice whether or not to keep it that way.
 
It's almost like someone saw this linked on Fark and posted it, with a similar misleading headline.

Actual headline: Police Blotter: Court overturns man's Net ban for life.

(emphasis mine)

Judge bans man. Man appeals, another judge realised the first one was a moron and overturned it. There is no ban.
 
First judge included banning him from using a BBS...those still exist?
 
ashmedai said:
First judge included banning him from using a BBS...those still exist?
Click to expand...

The meaning of BBS has changed quite a bit, now it's inferred as a Forum or a online message posting board.
 
Ockie said:
The meaning of BBS has changed quite a bit, now it's inferred as a Forum or a online message posting board.
Click to expand...

Thought about that...but I thought it more likely that we had another "um...what's a webpage??" judge on our hands.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top