Photoshopping Adult Porn Nets Man 10-Year Sentence

CommanderFrank

CommanderFrank

Cat Can't Scratch It
Joined
May 9, 2000
Messages
75,399
Be careful what you Photoshop, the results could land you in the slammer, especially if you reside in Nebraska. An Appeals Court upheld an earlier ruling that by imposing a minor’s face onto adult bodies engaged in sex constituted child pornography.

Anderson argues that the law as applied here is not narrowly tailored because it encompasses an image that clearly depicts adult bodies and because it punishes 'private' distribution of a morphed image
Click to expand...
 
I agree that in and of itself, this is wtf, just some photoshopping right? It's worth looking at this within the context of the case itself. He used his 11 year old half sister's image in the shop, and then he sent it to her on Facebook. He also cleverly included the message "This is what we will do." So while no physical abuse had (yet) taken place, the courts obviously felt they had to bend the law to protect the child. Not saying it's right, just saying context matters in this case.
 
arnemetis said:
I agree that in and of itself, this is wtf, just some photoshopping right? It's worth looking at this within the context of the case itself. He used his 11 year old half sister's image in the shop, and then he sent it to her on Facebook. He also cleverly included the message "This is what we will do." So while no physical abuse had (yet) taken place, the courts obviously felt they had to bend the law to protect the child. Not saying it's right, just saying context matters in this case.
Click to expand...
Yeah, in that context, amen for the verdict. However, just an FYI that as far as I know even doodling a minor in a sex act on a napkin with a crayon is illegal and counts as child pornography. I never understood the logic behind throwing people in jail for drawing crap.
 
there are people out there who have killed others (willingly and by 'accident') that have gotten less time than this.

I can go get drunk - and kill a few kids on my drive home and get less time than this individual. (the same kids some of these judges/prosecutors seem so keen on protecting)

The fact of the matter it's not child pornography -- the child never took the pictures, or was in or around anything pornographic. The guy is a bit weird yeah.... but this is like putting me in jail for bank robbery because I went into a bank and thought about robbing it.
 
to add -- if I went into said bank and told everyone "im thinking about robbing this place". Warrants some investigation and maybe a police interview, but not throwing him away for 10 years. Because let's face it we have ALL thought about robbing a bank 99% of us are mature and smart enough to never do it though.

I'd be willing to bet large sums of money the people handing down these insane sentences for stuff like this are the pedos/sickos themselves. We have seen time and time again the people in positions of authority take hardcore anti-anything approaches. Usually are the ones that turn out to be pedos/gay/whatever themselves. As if handing out a 10 year sentence for just being creepy will somehow cover up their own insecurities and mental issues.
 
When you look at the facts involved,there's nothing outrageous about this. The creep was a pedophile trying to seduce an 11 year old girl,his half sister no less.
 
collegeboy69us said:
there are people out there who have killed others (willingly and by 'accident') that have gotten less time than this.

I can go get drunk - and kill a few kids on my drive home and get less time than this individual. (the same kids some of these judges/prosecutors seem so keen on protecting)

The fact of the matter it's not child pornography -- the child never took the pictures, or was in or around anything pornographic. The guy is a bit weird yeah.... but this is like putting me in jail for bank robbery because I went into a bank and thought about robbing it.
Click to expand...

exactly.

If they wanted to jail the guy, they should have started a real investigation and waited / caught him actually doing something illegal. Context or not, people shouldn't be jailed for only THINKING things. Truly ridiculous. Let's not make the act of 'thinking' illegal.
 
video games simulate crimes so as do movies and music. I don't know the right way to handle 'threats' of a crime or intentions but I do know this path is a slippery slope.
 
First offense? You usually don't wake up one day and say "hey .. I think I'll be a pedophile". I think for this case it would have been better served for court ordered psychiatry and probation.
 
It's almost a waste to even discuss this matter. The subject matter at hand reduces almost any chance of rational discussion because, despite no one being harmed/molested in this case, "the childrens". This was a thought crime prosecution, plain and simple. Today this, tomorrow schools are suspending kids because they draw a picture of a gun, oh...........yeah................well.............yeah, land of the free my ass.:eek:
 
collegeboy69us said:
to add -- if I went into said bank and told everyone "im thinking about robbing this place". Warrants some investigation and maybe a police interview, but not throwing him away for 10 years. Because let's face it we have ALL thought about robbing a bank 99% of us are mature and smart enough to never do it though.

I'd be willing to bet large sums of money the people handing down these insane sentences for stuff like this are the pedos/sickos themselves. We have seen time and time again the people in positions of authority take hardcore anti-anything approaches. Usually are the ones that turn out to be pedos/Rapists/whatever themselves. As if handing out a 10 year sentence for just being creepy will somehow cover up their own insecurities and mental issues.
Click to expand...

FTFY
 
Yeah ok the guys a sicko, but I don't think he should be in trouble for making that image...
his message to her on FB was creepy as hell but at the same time I don't think he should be in jail for it.
Rehab, counseling, restraining order. Any of those would have been more fitting.
 
Totally sick, but a total overreach by the courts. There is no child that is engaged in any sexual activity.

Seriously, there is a political battle raging right now that corporations aren't people and don't deserve rights, but we are to accept that a grouping of pixels have them?
 
10 years seems to a (WAY TO) common sentence. Not that this guy didn't deserve prison time, but really? Hack a site. 10 years. Murder. 10 years. Distribute Photoshopped child porn. 10 years. Distribute legit child porn. 10 years.
 
PCunicorn said:
10 years seems to a (WAY TO) common sentence. Not that this guy didn't deserve prison time, but really? Hack a site. 10 years. Murder. 10 years. Distribute Photoshopped child porn. 10 years. Distribute legit child porn. 10 years.
Click to expand...

Double manslaughter, 4-11 years.
 
If all crimes were scaled proportionally in relation to killing someone then either 2 things would happen:

1) The vast majority of crimes would get a slap on the wrist since killing is the #1 offense and therefore everything must rank beneath it in punishment

2) killing someone would result in an automatic death sentence every single time

In order to preserve some practicality to effective crime deterrence we have to do things like punish some scumbag with 10 years in jail for photoshopping child porn when a guy who runs over someone while driving drunk gets 8 years. Otherwise the guy with shopped child porn does 7 days in jail, learns nothing, and does it again. Most people arent repeat killers.
 
arnemetis said:
I agree that in and of itself, this is wtf, just some photoshopping right? It's worth looking at this within the context of the case itself. He used his 11 year old half sister's image in the shop, and then he sent it to her on Facebook. He also cleverly included the message "This is what we will do." So while no physical abuse had (yet) taken place, the courts obviously felt they had to bend the law to protect the child. Not saying it's right, just saying context matters in this case.
Click to expand...

Ok... now THAT makes sense. You don't send porn to an 11yr old half sister on Face Book telling her you want to have sex with her. Seriously? No wonder dude got charged! :eek:
 
Anyone thinking the law "overreached" on this one is just sick in the head. He didn't keep any of this to himself, he involved the victim. He actually sent her the offending content. It's one thing to "keep it to yourself", but another entirely to involve others.

Guy got what he deserved.
 
atp1916 said:
Anyone thinking the law "overreached" on this one is just sick in the head. He didn't keep any of this to himself, he involved the victim. He actually sent her the offending content. It's one thing to "keep it to yourself", but another entirely to involve others.

Guy got what he deserved.
Click to expand...

And here it starts, anyone that disagrees with you is "sick in the head". You leave little room for rational discussion.

Guy is a creepy dick for sending those shopped up pics, and typing out what he did. However a decade behind bars plus a lifetime on the sex offenders list for words and pictures where not a single person was stolen from, slandered, or even touched, let alone physically harmed in anyway, seems a bit much to me. I must just be sick in the head for looking at it as a thought crime with some inappropriate harassment thrown in. :rolleyes:
 
We had a drunk driver kill 3 people in my two earlier this year. He got 5-7 years. Not sure what that says about the sliding scales of justice.
 
atp1916 said:
Anyone thinking the law "overreached" on this one is just sick in the head. He didn't keep any of this to himself, he involved the victim. He actually sent her the offending content. It's one thing to "keep it to yourself", but another entirely to involve others.

Guy got what he deserved.
Click to expand...

I agree the guy should have been punished. However, a quick Google search pulls up that on average it costs $31,286 to house an inmate for 1 year.

Do his actions justify $312,860 in tax payer dollars? After that what are the odds he comes out of 10 years of ass raping, gang banging prison a productive member of society? This guy is now destined to become a burden of the state.

A more productive and significantly less expensive solution would be probation and mandatory therapy.
 
Spidey329 said:
Double manslaughter, 4-11 years.
Click to expand...
To clarify, the only similarity between murder and manslaughter is that someone dies. Otherwise they are completely different offenses and it would be extremely rare for someone convicted of murder to be released from prison after a decade.
 
Guy's obviously got a screw or two loose. Forget therapy, he needs to be locked up for 3 life-times, and possibly anyone he's friends with as well as he'd only be friends with pedophiles. Anyone who thinks otherwise is a pedo-sympathizer. :p
 
GORANKAR said:
And here it starts, anyone that disagrees with you is "sick in the head". You leave little room for rational discussion.

Guy is a creepy dick for sending those shopped up pics, and typing out what he did. However a decade behind bars plus a lifetime on the sex offenders list for words and pictures where not a single person was stolen from, slandered, or even touched, let alone physically harmed in anyway, seems a bit much to me. I must just be sick in the head for looking at it as a thought crime with some inappropriate harassment thrown in. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

He didn't just keep it in his head, he sent the pic + text. He actually acted on his perversion.

Society must draw the line when these perverts act on their perversions.

You defending someone like this speaks volumes of your ethics, and little of me.
 
atp1916 said:
He didn't just keep it in his head, he sent the pic + text. He actually acted on his perversion.

Society must draw the line when these perverts act on their perversions.

You defending someone like this speaks volumes of your ethics, and little of me.
Click to expand...

Followed by a personal attack on your perception of my ethics. Bravo.:rolleyes:

What he did was both disgusting and wrong, I certainly do not disagree with you on that. Jail him for a short while or put him on probation for harassment, or sending perv picks to a minor, and not child porn. Get him counseling, and maybe we will have a useful citizen down the road. A decade in prison wearing the child pornographer label, followed by a lifetime on the sex offenders list insures he will be destitute for a lifetime. Provided he survives prison, and does not just turn to crime when the best job he can ever get is burger flipping. Might as well just execute him or lock him up for life right now.
 
atp1916 said:
He didn't just keep it in his head, he sent the pic + text. He actually acted on his perversion.

Society must draw the line when these perverts act on their perversions.

You defending someone like this speaks volumes of your ethics, and little of me.
Click to expand...

FFS. This girl probably has her period already. I am not defending this guy but I am equally disgusted by people like YOU who label themselves "normal" which, of course, gives them right to judge others using fake morals.
 
GORANKAR said:
Followed by a personal attack basedon your perception of my ethics. Bravo.:rolleyes:

What he did was both disgusting and wrong, I certainly do not disagree with you on that. Jail him for a short while or put him on probation for harassment, or sending perv picks to a minor, and not child porn. Get him counseling, and maybe we will have a useful citizen down the road. A decade in prison wearing the child pornographer label, followed by a lifetime on the sex offenders list insures he will be destitute for a lifetime. Provided he survives prison, and does not just turn to crime when the best job he can ever get is burger flipping. Might as well just execute him or lock him up for life right now.
Click to expand...

LOL, I hate no edit sometimes.
 
dgz said:
FFS. This girl probably has her period already. I am not defending this guy but I am equally disgusted by people like YOU who label themselves "normal" which, of course, gives them right to judge others using fake morals.
Click to expand...

We run this shop, not you.

Perverts sexually harassing children will always sent on an extended vacation behind bars with Bubba.

End of story.

Cya :)
 
Pedophiles should be hung publicly. Let's see how daring they get when if caught and convicted, you get what's coming to you.
 
Do any of you "well he doesn't deserve THIS" guys have a eleven year-old daughter? You'd be fine with the incestuous offender getting off without significant jail time? Any parent would be liable to beat the shit out of the guy and want him behind bars, so it's clear you don't have kids.

I understand being offended by the "moral high horse" people in the thread but honestly when you say something stupid like "probation and counseling is good enough," you need to realize it's a bit like a guy holding a strong opinion on abortion: you're not the central part of the debate.
 
Maxx said:
Do any of you "well he doesn't deserve THIS" guys have a eleven year-old daughter? You'd be fine with the incestuous offender getting off without significant jail time? Any parent would be liable to beat the shit out of the guy and want him behind bars, so it's clear you don't have kids.

I understand being offended by the "moral high horse" people in the thread but honestly when you say something stupid like "probation and counseling is good enough," you need to realize it's a bit like a guy holding a strong opinion on abortion: you're not the central part of the debate.
Click to expand...
regardless of whether we have children or not, and their ages, some of us are recognizing the Grand Canyon chasm between "no significant jail time" and a decade in prison and a lifetime registration as a sex offender.
 
and to answer your question, Maxx, no I wouldn't beat the shit out of one of my relatives if he sent my daughter a picture of people having sex with or without her picture photoshopped onto it. I'd have to really sit down and think about my reaction but it wouldn't be physically assaulting him and demanding that he go to prison with people who actually significantly harmed others and can't stop robbing/burglarizing people.

Depends on what you want prisons to do, though. if you just want them to be places for retribution then it wouldn't really matter what happens in there. but it wouldn't function as a deterrent to the person or others so if that's your goal it wouldn't meet it.
 
Ducman69 said:
Yeah, in that context, amen for the verdict. However, just an FYI that as far as I know even doodling a minor in a sex act on a napkin with a crayon is illegal and counts as child pornography. I never understood the logic behind throwing people in jail for drawing crap.
Click to expand...

Are you sure? I'd swear that the courts ruled, several years ago, that virtual child pornography (i.e. digitally rendered) is not illegal.

I don't like this ruling, but I don't exactly dislike getting this guy off the streets. There's something inherently creepy about a 28 year old showing an 11 year old something sexually explicit (and I'm assuming it was, even though the article didn't spell it out).
 
dgz said:
FFS. This girl probably has her period already. I am not defending this guy but I am equally disgusted by people like YOU who label themselves "normal" which, of course, gives them right to judge others using fake morals.
Click to expand...

Fuck you sir for thinking having sex with your 11 year old sister should be ok and that us that don't think so have fake morals.

nilepez said:
Are you sure? I'd swear that the courts ruled, several years ago, that virtual child pornography (i.e. digitally rendered) is not illegal.

I don't like this ruling, but I don't exactly dislike getting this guy off the streets. There's something inherently creepy about a 28 year old showing an 11 year old something sexually explicit (and I'm assuming it was, even though the article didn't spell it out).
Click to expand...

you must have not read it correctly. The 28 year old took a picture of two people having sex, photoshopped his 11 year old sister's face on it and sent it to her telling her that "this is what we will do"

So yes the article did spell it out that it was sexually explicit and also that he planned on having sex with her.
 
What a piece of sh*t. Forget the prison sentence, the girl's father should be allowed as many shots as he wants at this guy with a spoon.
 
Shows it right in the wiki:
"Drawings, cartoons, sculptures, and paintings of minors in sexual situations that do not pass the Miller test were made illegal under 18 U.S.C. § 1466A."

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1466A

(a) In General.— Any person who, in a circumstance described in subsection (d), knowingly produces, distributes, receives, or possesses with intent to distribute, a visual depiction of any kind, including a drawing, cartoon, sculpture, or painting, that—
(1)
(A) depicts a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct; and
(B) is obscene; or
(2)
(A) depicts an image that is, or appears to be, of a minor engaging in graphic bestiality, sadistic or masochistic abuse, or sexual intercourse, including genital-genital, oral-genital, anal-genital, or oral-anal, whether between persons of the same or opposite sex; and
(B) lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value;
or attempts or conspires to do so, shall be subject to the penalties provided in section 2252A (b)(1), including the penalties provided for cases involving a prior conviction.
Click to expand...
Which basically means that possession of most hentai, where the characters are often portrayed as being under 18 years old, could get you thrown in jail. That said, I don't think the government is going out of their way to track this down, but if a girlfriend were to find a hentai or CGI story PDF and turn you in, the police would have to act on it.
 
Ducman69 said:
Shows it right in the wiki:
"Drawings, cartoons, sculptures, and paintings of minors in sexual situations that do not pass the Miller test were made illegal under 18 U.S.C. § 1466A."

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1466A


Which basically means that possession of most hentai, where the characters are often portrayed as being under 18 years old, could get you thrown in jail. That said, I don't think the government is going out of their way to track this down, but if a girlfriend were to find a hentai or CGI story PDF and turn you in, the police would have to act on it.
Click to expand...

Must be a false memory. Has the SCOTUS ruled on this? I'm not sure how you can prove a drawing is of minors. I've seen 14 year olds that look 20 and 20 year olds that look 14 (or younger in some cases). Hell I once saw a woman in a bar that I initially thought was 13.

Thus I question how this law would stand in court. This case has a victim, but a drawing or painting does not. That said, I don't really get hentai, though I can remember animated porn that played well as a comedy, but arousing it wasn't.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top