Indefinite Prison For Suspect Who Won’t Decrypt Hard Drives

Except for CP, and secret installations, what other imagery is illegal in the US? Why?

I get that crimes against children are heinous, but then why is it OK to have a video/picture showing someone under 18 getting caned or beheaded OK, but a video/picture of someone under 18 naked will get you tossed in jail indefinitely and your life essentially ended by the sex offender registry if you do get out?

Not saying it's cool to be into CP, but, I don't consider it cool to see kids beheaded, blown up, or tortured, either. Why is one legal, and the other not without resorting to your personal feeling?
 
Mut1ny said:
Bad videos are bad situations are bad period. Doesn't matter how it's captured.
Click to expand...

It does to me. Kids (in private and in public) should be more protected than adults (in private and in public) and it should remain illegal to have those kinds of videos precisely because it's protecting the children in them. Allowing this kind of content to float around the internet freely will hurt the victims over and over again. Then some new software will pop up allowing people to age the children in the videos and find out exactly who they are as adults.

"Hey bro, that's why you got raped by your uncle when you were 11 and I can prove it" = Some fuckface.

So I guess all videos of bad things happening to humans under the age of 18/adulthood would have to be illegal online as it's the only path I have left to take to have this way of thinking. Time to update the laws! Which is what we'd get anyway, more laws restricting what we can watch, not less laws allowing people to watch kids getting molested.

I don't really get what your argument here is. And I'm not just talking some CCTV videos. There are personal hand shot videos every day of people or animals being killed and tortured. Those aren't illegal. It's not like SOME murder videos are illegal and some aren't.
Click to expand...
If they're adults it's happening to, fine, if it's happening to children, should all be illegal. As for the animals they're not humans and don't have our self-administered protections, unfortunately.

This is an emotion based argument and it's clouding your judgment on what's actually sensible. A child being molested is somehow worse then someone being tortured to death? Bad is bad. Wrong is wrong.
Click to expand...

Adults are supposed to protect the children, not fuck them. Clearly the child being molested is worse than some adult human being tortured while being set on fire and being stoned to death while having a Britney Spears song playing in the background. Adults are supposed to be able to defend themselves or die in battle not being taken alive to be tortured. Children can be lured away to their death by candy. Apples to oranges comparison.

If one bad video is punishable by prison time then why shouldn't they all be? If most aren't then why should some be? Again, it's a double standard. It's wrong because I say it's wrong while that other stuff is OK because I just don't care enough, not because it's less worse. You see? What's the difference?
Click to expand...

If the videos are regarding someone under the age of adulthood, they all should be, I guess. I'm fine watching adults do all the shit humans do to each other, I don't need to see it happening to kids. Let the cops handle that stuff as it's their job.
 
Last edited:
CreatedTheMultiverse said:
It does to me. Kids (in private and in public) should be more protected than adults (in private and in public) and it should remain illegal to have those kinds of videos precisely because it's protecting the children in them. Allowing this kind of content to float around the internet freely will hurt the victims over and over again. Then some new software will pop up allowing people to age the children in the videos and find out exactly who they are as adults.

"Hey bro, that's why you got raped by your uncle when you were 11 and I can prove it" = Some fuckface.

So I guess all videos of things happening to humans under the age of 18 would have to be illegal online as it's the only path I have left to take to have this way of thinking. Time to update the laws! Which is what we'd get anyway, more laws restricting what we can watch, not less laws allowing people to watch kids getting molested.

If they're adults it's happening to, fine, if it's happening to children, should all be illegal. As for the animals they're not humans and don't have our self administered protections, unfortunately.



Adults are supposed to protect the children, not fuck them. Clearly the child being molested is worse than some adult human being tortured and set on fire and being stoned to death while having a Britney Spears song playing in the background. Adults are supposed to be able to defend themselves or die in battle not being taken alive to be tortured. Children can be lured away to their death by candy. Apples to oranges comparison.



If the videos are regarding someone under the age of adulthood, they all should be, I guess. I'm fine watching adults do all the shit humans do to each other, I don't need to see it happening to kids. Let the cops handle that stuff as it's their job.
Click to expand...

While I'd love to fully agree with you I do have one major issue: Pedophilia is defined as a mental illness. Throwing people who commit the acts in jail is fine, they belong in there. However, throwing people in jail who have viewed it feels too much like jailing a person just because they're bi-polar or schizophrenic and MIGHT harm someone one day. You're jailing a person and ruining their lives for being mentally ill. Should viewing it be illegal? Probably, but the consequences should fit the crime. If someone is mentally ill and has not harmed anyone they need help, not jail sentences.
 
Nice violations of the 5th and 6th amendments going on here

You can't jail somebody indefinitely without a trial conviction

This judge is just some fucknut who hates that this guy is outsmarting him and is trying to make him "Crack"

Problem is if there is kiddy porn on the drive, the guy would go away for much longer so he has no reason to decrypt it

Some hilariously funny counter-sue lawsuits are going to take place after this I guarantee it
 
Also this, this right here:

"......and that he is only being asked to unlock the drives, not divulge their passcodes."

This is the single most retarded thing I've seen the government say this year.

"We don't want his passwords, we just want him to unlock the drives!"

What do they need to know the right combination of Gnome dandruff and unicorn horn shavings in order to unlock them?
 
Derangel said:
While I'd love to fully agree with you I do have one major issue: Pedophilia is defined as a mental illness. Throwing people who commit the acts in jail is fine, they belong in there. However, throwing people in jail who have viewed it feels too much like jailing a person just because they're bi-polar or schizophrenic and MIGHT harm someone one day. You're jailing a person and ruining their lives for being mentally ill. Should viewing it be illegal? Probably, but the consequences should fit the crime. If someone is mentally ill and has not harmed anyone they need help, not jail sentences.
Click to expand...

Mentally ill people that can't maintain with their particular issues should be hospitalized until they're better. If they never get better, they should stay there. The problem with our current social structure is that some of the super weak/twisted/etc ones get to survive because we can no longer just catch them and bury them outback by the shitter.

You're jailing a person and ruining their lives for being mentally ill.
Click to expand...

Evolution and bad luck (their upbringing) did it to them, nothing/no one else. Also everything is being called a mental illness today when I'm sure a lot of this stuff goes down into the gene level. Can I prove it, no, but time will tell. So fine, don't jail them, psych ward them.
 
Last edited:
I don't know what's funnier that a pig got caught with kiddie porn, or the constitution zealots acting all indignant about it or worse the closet pedophiles using the constitutional angle attempting to legitimize their deviance.
 
Legitimizing a deviance? That is not it at all, you really don't see how this one thing is treated differently than pretty much everything else? That if you condone this sort of punishment for this, then why not for people with images of murdered children?

As usual, once the term CP has been evoked, no rational discourse can continue so I am going to bail after leaving you with this little unfortunate truth. The definition of CP is broad, and poorly defined. If you think the definition of child porn is underage people engaging in sex, or naked in provocative poses, you would only be partly correct. Depending on the judge, a 17 year old in a typical bathing suit one would see at a public pool, and a semi nude 24 year old woman in pig tails or braces, are both CP. Perhaps you are a deviant criminal, and don't know it.
 
Lorien said:
I don't know what's funnier that a pig got caught with kiddie porn, or the constitution zealots acting all indignant about it or worse the closet pedophiles using the constitutional angle attempting to legitimize their deviance.
Click to expand...

Except he hasn't been caught. If he was caught with it they would have charged him. We can't arbitrarily apply the Constitution. You HAVE to look at issues like this as emotionally detached as possible. You can not discuss moral or ethical issues with an emotional bias. It doesn't work.
 
Imhotep said:
Haha, Government failing on so many levels. Can we talk about American Indians and the fact that black slaves were sold by blacks. Maybe we all just need to open our fucking eyes and smell the coffee.History aside.
Why is it up to government what is morally acceptable. Let just assume he has kiddy porn on his drives. Why not. As long as he is not part of it. I am more then convinced that some of these government clowns are even sicker than the guy in question. Its 21st century. Will I vote for a president in my lifetime that uses a slogan in his campaign. Lets stop being hypocrites. For a moment at least ....lol
Click to expand...

Please tell me you're fucking joking. For starters government did not decide that kiddie porn was morally objectionable, society did (except you apparently). Secondly, why not? Are you fucking serious? You think it's ok to possess child porn, just not create it? Because you do realize the nature of supply and demand, and that it would not be created if people were not trying to possess it.
 
The sick bastards creating it, are going to create it regardless of whether you view it or not. They are sick bastards after all. Mental sickness is not really subject to the law of supply and demand.
 
CombatChrisNC said:
He's not being forced to testify. He's being asked to unlock evidence already in possession of the authorities. Like unlocking a safe.

If he won't open it let him rot.
Click to expand...
THEY CAN'T just leave him if he waits long enough they will have to proceed without that evidence but it sounded like they had enough without it...

And people wonder why the police have no trust anymore...
 
Last edited:
i just don't like the indefinite part without it being from a judgement. People who abuse the law in such a way should be subject to criminal charges.
 
Hypergreatthing said:
i just don't like the indefinite part without it being from a judgement. People who abuse the law in such a way should be subject to criminal charges.
Click to expand...

Our laws strictly prohibit indefinite detention without due process. Our Bill of Rights guarantee this. If I were the cop. I would let them know verbally they are infringing my rights. Then I would sue them for millions, get rich, and get out.
 
tangoseal said:
Our laws strictly prohibit indefinite detention of citizens without due process. Our Bill of Rights guarantee this. If I were the cop. I would let them know verbally they are infringing my rights. Then I would sue them for millions, get rich, and get out.
Click to expand...

Fixed that for you. Rather, clarified.
 
Hypergreatthing said:
i just don't like the indefinite part without it being from a judgement. People who abuse the law in such a way should be subject to criminal charges.
Click to expand...

There was a judgement: contempt of court. A judge can basically order you to do anything, even things they don't actually have a right to order you to do, and then judge you to be in contempt if you fail to comply. You're in contempt and can be held until you comply or until the contempt judgement is overturned by a higher court on appeal.

Now, did they have a right to order him to do this? The whole 'self incrimination' thing protects you from being forced to testify against yourself, not against handing over evidence of a crime (even if you're the one that committed it). They can't order you to admit whether or not you murdered someone, but if they've proven that you have the body, they can order you to hand it over or tell them where it is. Maybe proving that you have the body alone isn't enough to convict you of murder, but the body surely is evidence of the crime (whether it points to you or not).

IANAL, but this is my perception of how our system (right or wrong) works.

It's occurred to me that you ought to in theory be able to dodge a password request by claiming that the password itself is an incriminating phrase, like "I_DID_IT" or something. Though they'll probably just prevent the phrase from being used against you in court and still order you to hand it over. A better, though probably equally unsuccessful tactic, is to claim that you lost it or forgot it.
 
tangoseal said:
Our laws strictly prohibit indefinite detention without due process. Our Bill of Rights guarantee this. If I were the cop. I would let them know verbally they are infringing my rights. Then I would sue them for millions, get rich, and get out.
Click to expand...
i dont see what the issue here is they had enough evidence to convict him why not let him get his guilty verdict then since he was uncooperative maximize the sentence.
 
Gorankar said:
Except for CP, and secret installations, what other imagery is illegal in the US? Why?

I get that crimes against children are heinous, but then why is it OK to have a video/picture showing someone under 18 getting caned or beheaded OK, but a video/picture of someone under 18 naked will get you tossed in jail indefinitely and your life essentially ended by the sex offender registry if you do get out?

Not saying it's cool to be into CP, but, I don't consider it cool to see kids beheaded, blown up, or tortured, either. Why is one legal, and the other not without resorting to your personal feeling?
Click to expand...

The idea is that allowing this material to circulate unimpeded will increase the amount of child sex crimes. It's hard to say WHY it should be illegal. In most peoples minds it's disgusting and vile and should be banned from the internet because someone is using the imagery for their own sexual gratification. I believe there should be a penalty for possession but I agree that some sentences are rather extreme. As far as what is illegal, every country is different and everyone has their own laws. In the end, it's up to the government to decide what they find obscene by majority vote.
 
Imhotep said:
Haha, Government failing on so many levels. Can we talk about American Indians and the fact that black slaves were sold by blacks. Maybe we all just need to open our fucking eyes and smell the coffee.History aside.
Why is it up to government what is morally acceptable. Let just assume he has kiddy porn on his drives. Why not. As long as he is not part of it. I am more then convinced that some of these government clowns are even sicker than the guy in question. Its 21st century. Will I vote for a president in my lifetime that uses a slogan in his campaign. Lets stop being hypocrites. For a moment at least ....lol
Click to expand...
I was reading this and then we got to the, "Kiddy porn, why not!" and I stopped.
 
Gordistatefult: 1042306935 said:
Legitimizing a deviance? That is not it at all, you really don't see how this one thing is treated differently than pretty much everything else? That if you condone this sort of punishment for this, then why not for people with images of murdered children?

As usual, once the term CP has been evoked, no rational discourse can continue so I am going to bail after leaving you with this little unfortunate truth. The definition of CP is broad, and poorly defined. If you think the definition of child porn is underage people engaging in sex, or naked in provocative poses, you would only be partly correct. Depending on the judge, a 17 year old in a typical bathing suit one would see at a public pool, and a semi nude 24 year old woman in pig tails or braces, are both CP. Perhaps you are a deviant criminal, and don't know it.
Click to expand...
There is a distateful tattoo in the hard Steve funny picture thread that would also qualify...

Another thing to think of alot of anime from Japan also qualifies.

Just think about this 90% of anime has a main character ages 12-16 very rarely are they older than that. Most anime has what is termed fanservice. Panty shots tits and crack are frequently seen in anime. About the only thing not typical is detailed crotch.
 
NickJames said:
The idea is that allowing this material to circulate unimpeded will increase the amount of child sex crimes. It's hard to say WHY it should be illegal. In most peoples minds it's disgusting and vile and should be banned from the internet because someone is using the imagery for their own sexual gratification. I believe there should be a penalty for possession but I agree that some sentences are rather extreme. As far as what is illegal, every country is different and everyone has their own laws. In the end, it's up to the government to decide what they find obscene by majority vote.
Click to expand...

Here's the problem with that mentality. Let's say you have a friend on facebook that has young kids. They take hundreds of pictures of them because they are that kind of parent. Normally it's cute and goofy or just a kid playing, but one day they upload a picture of the child naked in a bathtub or in some pose that is quite suggestive even though it was clearly unintentional, like an awkward camera angle during a game of twister or when the child is practicing for cheerleading. While the parents are totally off the hook for that because it's their right to have those images, every friend they have on facebook could be arrested for possession of child pornography because facebook autoloaded the image into the browser and it's on the hard drive somewhere to find. You could get 5-10 years and a sexual predator distinction for some dumbass friend on facebook. Does that seem fair? That's one of the problems with these blanket laws. They are made by people who barely were able to learn how to set the clock on a VCR, or people who think science is evil, and yet we still have to abide by them.

On top of that, there's been dozens of times incidences of people getting arrested for things they didn't even remotely do. All it takes is poor router management or a lack of knowledge about defending your wifi and you get your house raided by the cops who drag you away screaming your a pedophile and child rapist because some a-hole used your router to download or upload gigabytes of this stuff via a torrent. It could take months or even a year to get everything straightened out. That's the main reason courts are slowly moving away from IP addresses as proof of a crime (very slowly). If anyone.. and I mean ANYONE.. had access to that computer IP address, you can't specify one person's actions unless you have their webcam turned on and are filming them. Even then, a dedicated hacker could still manage to do all this stuff in the background if that person isn't paying attention or is an idiot.

So to sum up, the definition of a crime being committed is dangerously poor at the moment and there's no way to confirm someone specific is responsible if the router is open or anyone else in the house has access to it. I'm not saying that if you can prove it beyond a shadow of a doubt, don't punish the guy. However, proving it is becoming more and more troublesome and the laws themselves aren't specific enough.
 
Ruoh said:
Lol. Not a citizen? "Fuck you! Get back in that hole until we've tortured you, enough to implicate anyone we want you to..."
Click to expand...

You just described Guantanamo to a T. A place where a nation which is "against torture", shoves tubes up someone's ass repeatedly, and tells the world with a straight face that, "We were feeding the individual". /In a world where scientists have determined beyond a shadow of doubt that you cannot "feed" someone through their ass. You can hydrate them in that manner, but you can also hydrate through an IV.

/Hmm. Makes me wonder if the people at Gitmo are sexual predators, or just twisted motherfuckers.......


YEAH! America!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ruoh
like this
Did a predator search of my area and found lots of people with viewing cp charges many from 10-15 years ago. Should it be a punishable offense? Yes, but I don't feel it should label you as a predator for life. That provides no chance for rehab (as we have labeled this as an illness right?) only ridicule. The punishment for cp viewing is such an emotional bias. Like that case that was brought up earlier where the guy was charged for having anime sketches of naked kids. So technically I could draw naked girls and be jailed for cp manufacturing? You can't say any children were harmed in this, it is based on that "errmagerd ther chirldren" emotion we get. So once we have all the pot smokers, hentai viewers, and software pirates in jail, where do we put the murderers, rapists, molestors?
 
I did not intend to come back, but.....After thinking a bit. Perhaps the "forgone conclusion" is due to them using extra legal means, or means they are unwilling or unable to disclose, to get the information or evidence they wanted. It may be a case of "we have the evidence, but we can't convict without exposing how we obtained the evidence", and we can't have that.

We get so blinded by the term CP that we often don't look at the rest of the particulars.
 
CreatedTheMultiverse said:
Adults are supposed to protect the children, not fuck them. Clearly the child being molested is worse than some adult human being tortured while being set on fire and being stoned to death while having a Britney Spears song playing in the background. Adults are supposed to be able to defend themselves or die in battle not being taken alive to be tortured. Children can be lured away to their death by candy. Apples to oranges comparison.
Click to expand...

I agree which is why the people CREATING the content should be locked up forever, or until they have an accident in prison. Just like the person watching a video of murder doesn't receive some fraction of the punishment for murder. People watching this crap shouldn't be labeled as and receive the same punishment as the creators. Its absurd the creators of this filth get off so easy, while the mentally ill consumers of it are over punished. The consumption of this evil is not the same as its creation.
 
Mong00se said:
I agree which is why the people CREATING the content should be locked up forever, or until they have an accident in prison. Just like the person watching a video of murder doesn't receive some fraction of the punishment for murder. People watching this crap shouldn't be labeled as and receive the same punishment as the creators. Its absurd the creators of this filth get off so easy, while the mentally ill consumers of it are over punished. The consumption of this evil is not the same as its creation.
Click to expand...

People watch kiddie porn for the same reason as watching any other porn, to become sexually aroused. This is simply the type of person than can NEVER be alone with children.
 
There are soooo many people who wouldn't be living and breathing today if it was still the wild west era. Shit would be settled in the middle of the street, or at the end of a rope. /just a random thought
 
Lunas said:
i dont see what the issue here is they had enough evidence to convict him why not let him get his guilty verdict then since he was uncooperative maximize the sentence.
Click to expand...

He has a right to trial and until said trial has a right to not self-incriminate. What is hard to understand about this?

What if you were in his shoes but were actually innocent even if the media said you were not? Do we know for a fact he is guilty just because some police or media claimed it so? You do not know that and I certainly do not know that. That is what a trial by jury is for. And that is why we can't armchair convict people. Again put your self in his shoes and how would all these armchair convictions feel, if you know you are innocent? Perspective and legal rights - they matter!
 
tangoseial said:
He has a right to trial and until said trial has a right to not self-incriminate. What is hard to understand about this?

What if you were in his shoes but were actually innocent even if the media said you were not? Do we know for a fact he is guilty just because some police or media claimed it so? You do not know that and I certainly do not know that. That is what a trial by jury is for. And that is why we can't armchair convict people. Again put your self in his shoes and how would all these armchair convictions feel, if you know you are innocent? Perspective and legal rights - they matter!
Click to expand...
Go read the article he is guilty the examiner saw and has evidence they don't need this drive unlocked. This is more president they are trying to set.
 
Lunas said:
Go read the article he is guilty the examiner saw and has evidence they don't need this drive unlocked. This is more president they are trying to set.
Click to expand...

I admit I didn't read the article. I was making a blanket comment. If the case is that without the shadow of a doubt he is guilty, he either needs to plead guilty or have a trial. But he still isn't required to turn over evidence against himself regardless. Not that I am arguing with you at all.
 
tangoseal said:
I admit it I didn't read the article. I was making a blanket comment. If the case is that without the shadow of a doubt he is guilty, he either needs to plead guilty or have a trial. But he still isn't required to turn over evidence against himself regardless. Not that I am arguing with you at all.
Click to expand...
He is guilty enough his sister saw the evidence on his mac and he showed a video to another relative the examiner also saw some and supposedly they have logs and such they don't need his drive really the only thing opening the drive would do is tie the case up in a bow and possibly add more charges if there is any home made in the drive...

All and all it is a clear case of 5th amendment or 6th protections despite the article saying it is not in violation... but they are not giving him the option it is being held in contempt and he will be held in a sort of reoccurring loop until the judge decides to continue the trial or he resigns himself... Or if the case can be reassigned and the new judge decides they don't need the evidence on the drive...
 
Physical key = not protected
Combination to lock = is protected.

Now the question is whether or not something like a password is considered a key or a combination, being as there is no physical key aspect to a hard drive, it seems like it could technically forever be protected rights...
 
CombatChrisNC said:
He's not being forced to testify. He's being asked to unlock evidence already in possession of the authorities. Like unlocking a safe.

If he won't open it let him rot.
Click to expand...
By supplying the keys he is essentially confessing ownership of the drives on its content. That is essentially testimony. If he is a kiddie porn user torch him. But I don't want to be manipultated into allowing a precedent that robs us of any practical level of privacy in the digital era.
 
jpm100 said:
By supplying the keys he is essentially confessing ownership of the drives on its content. That is essentially testimony. If he is a kiddie porn user torch him. But I don't want to be manipultated into allowing a precedent that robs us of any practical level of privacy in the digital era.
Click to expand...
If only that was the case...

This is his laptop he already has ownership... His sister and another family member saw the porn on his Mac book and on top of that an examiner for the prosecution has seen some of the pictures on the macbook...

Some of the hard drive is encrypted and the prosecution wants what is in there too that is what they want him to open... This is all about setting a precedent not convicting a child porn user or what ever...

Also this dirt bag was a Philadelphia police sergeant.

This whole case is what seems to be a never ending attempt to get encryption declared not 5th amendment protected... It is as if the federal government wants to get their hands slapped for trying to find a loop hole in the bill of rights... Financial fraud, terrorism, now child porn it seems they are escalating trying to find a crime people at large hate enough that they don't care how many of the civil liberties get trampled...
 
Last edited:
Makes me genuinely wonder whether the CP in question is even of real children. There's so much drawn and CGI-made stuff out there, so much Japanese anime stuff, so much that is considered "indecent depictions of children" that never involve an actual child. I'd be angry if the authorities were wasting time arresting and detaining people for such harmless crap.

But it's the discussion impossible to have without people casting vile aspersions.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top