Revenge Porn Website Operator Facing 20 Years

Status
Not open for further replies.
H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
Remember how smug this guy was before he was arrested? Now look at him, convicted of 27 felony charges and facing twenty years in the big house. :eek:

A San Diego man charged with running a so-called revenge porn website where people posted nude pictures of their ex-lovers—and then charging the victims to take down the images—was convicted Monday of 27 felony charges. Kevin Bollaert, 28, was found guilty Monday of identity theft and extortion. He faces up to 20 years in prison.
Click to expand...
 
Hmmm, maybe that wasn't such a great idea?

Could have just called it revenge porn and used pro's in the actual movies lol
 
" - and then charging the victims to take down the images - " Despicable. Absolutely despicable.
 
As long as they don't try to go after the people who looked at the pictures as "sexual predators"
 
How much did the guy charge them? I'm assuming that's what got him pinched. If he would have just honored take down requests he would probably still be sitting pretty.
 
Kardonxt said:
How much did the guy charge them? I'm assuming that's what got him pinched. If he would have just honored take down requests he would probably still be sitting pretty.
Click to expand...

Very likely. Had he just hosted videos people uploaded, most likely he just would have civil suits or just C&D's out the well you know...
 
savoirfaire said:
Don't worry, I'm sure you're safe. For now...
Click to expand...

Well the only "revenge porn" video I've seen have obviously been pros, but it's more the principle of the matter just like the whole "fappening" thing people were equating that with rape (of the people who viewed the pictures)
 
and yet the guy who beats his gf to a bloody pulp gets 6 months...
 
People who take those kinds of photos deserve to have them leaked for all to see.
 
Kardonxt said:
How much did the guy charge them? I'm assuming that's what got him pinched. If he would have just honored take down requests he would probably still be sitting pretty.
Click to expand...
If that was the case it'd be less objectionable. In this situation, however, California legislatures specifically passed a law banning "revenge porn" and then applied it to him. The first person convicted under the law a few months ago only got a year of probation and fined. Now our AG is going after residents in other states for posting images of California women and these kinds of prosecutions could easily become something that undermines civil liberties.
 
sfsuphysics said:
Well the only "revenge porn" video I've seen have obviously been pros, but it's more the principle of the matter just like the whole "fappening" thing people were equating that with rape (of the people who viewed the pictures)
Click to expand...

There's always somebody who screams about that sort of thing, even as far as "eye rape" (yeah she's a real person) and expected men to lower their gaze in her presence. Nobody listens to them, like, nobody. Lawmakers giggle and somebody weak enough in the knees pats their heads and tells them it'll all be OK. Nothing ever comes of those sorts of extreme claims because it seems everybody wants to be somebody's victim.

This son of a bitch is just a public black mail scammer, he needs a prison boyfriend named Thunder and a web cam someone else controls.
 
Kardonxt said:
How much did the guy charge them? I'm assuming that's what got him pinched. If he would have just honored take down requests he would probably still be sitting pretty.
Click to expand...

Nope;

In 2013, Gov. Jerry Brown signed a law that prohibits anyone from putting identifiable nude photos online after a breakup, punishable with $1,000 or six months in jail.
Click to expand...

Besides, they also got him on 6 charges of ID theft along with the Extortion Charges. He was cooked.
 
Youn said:
and yet the guy who beats his gf to a bloody pulp gets 6 months...
Click to expand...

Yes, and he would get much more then just 6 months if he's whipped up on 30 women or 300. It's not just what you do, it's how many you harm along the way.
 
mope54 said:
If that was the case it'd be less objectionable. In this situation, however, California legislatures specifically passed a law banning "revenge porn" and then applied it to him. The first person convicted under the law a few months ago only got a year of probation and fined. Now our AG is going after residents in other states for posting images of California women and these kinds of prosecutions could easily become something that undermines civil liberties.
Click to expand...

No they didn't. You're mistaken, he was not charged under that law, he was charged with ID Theft and Extortion.
 
Extortion = charging for the takedown.

ID Theft= not entirely sure that it was directly related, would have to be able to see the proper article...

Still pretty dang stupid to run any kind of shady or semi shady business while being a citizen, living in the state... i do not condone ilegal shit, but come on, if you are gonna do something like that GTFO to a place were legality matters less than the states.
 
Mope54, you mean because they say one thing when the reality is something different?
 
lcpiper said:
Mope54, you mean because they say one thing when the reality is something different?
Click to expand...
Yeah, everywhere I looked the headlines and articles are tying it into the new legislature. The fact that it would have only been a misdemeanor explains why the guy I cited received a minimal sentence but even in that article it wasn't explained. Strangely, the fact that it's a misdemeanor offense is mentioned in the article regarding this case (even though the law wasn't applied) and the AG is going to make a statement later today about the new law and this case in particular. This strange way of hyping the public perception about a new law while it not actually being leveraged in the specific case is disturbing to me. Regardless nothing we've discussed detracts from my initial concerns over the "revenge porn" legislation. Perhaps even more concerning given the fact that the prosecutor and public are conflating the issues.
 
Dude will get passed around by the homies and learn what it feels like to be a victim.
 
In that case, we find ourselves in agreement.

I wonder if the article was written by a woman?

What do know, two women ;)
06b41c9.jpg

https://www.linkedin.com/pub/andie-adams/22/279/692

3e718b8.jpg

https://www.linkedin.com/pub/candice-nguyen/41/b9a/991
 
Cmdrmonkey said:
Dude will get passed around by the homies and learn what it feels like to be a victim.
Click to expand...
he'll be fine. he didn't do anything that any common criminal would find offensive. need to kill a baby or rape a kid to raise the ire of a common criminal. he might have to do a few things here and there to prove he he's not a punk but he's just going to do standard prison time and be viewed as a "victim" of some overzealous prosecution, come out really pissed off, and nearing retirement age ready for the rest of us to pick up the tab for his medical expenses.
 
^^, I don't know Mope54, in Cali? I'm thinkin they'll dump him out the back door in two years due to over crowding or something like that.
 
Chunder said:
This, or had them taken without one's knowledge. Some people are closed minded and don't understand how things work!
Click to expand...

How things work are:

1) Absent signed legal agreement photographer owns photos and can do whatever they like with them. Subject would need to prove photos were taken without consent.

2) If you've seen any of these sites it is clear these images were taken with knowledge and consent of the subject.

3) Allowing compromising photos of yourself to be taken and failing to retain 100% control of said photos = failure in understanding human nature.

4) We already have laws concerning secret filming/peeping that apply to photos taken without consent.

This guy screwed up when he tried to get in the business of what amounted to extortion. Had he stuck to allowing Exes to post photos of exes they had taken there would be little that could have been done. I would not expect the new revenge porn law in CA to withstand review per item 1.
 
Nicklebon said:
How things work are:

1) Absent signed legal agreement photographer owns photos and can do whatever they like with them. Subject would need to prove photos were taken without consent.

2) If you've seen any of these sites it is clear these images were taken with knowledge and consent of the subject.

3) Allowing compromising photos of yourself to be taken and failing to retain 100% control of said photos = failure in understanding human nature.

4) We already have laws concerning secret filming/peeping that apply to photos taken without consent.

This guy screwed up when he tried to get in the business of what amounted to extortion. Had he stuck to allowing Exes to post photos of exes they had taken there would be little that could have been done. I would not expect the new revenge porn law in CA to withstand review per item 1.
Click to expand...

Personal responsibility is an unknown concept for these people. Everyone is a victim. Wahh wahh.


inb4 someone calls me a 'true Neanderthal' (must be SJW code for anyone who doesn't bow down to feminazi ideas).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top