You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login

Reply #24: Don't take this the wrong way, but I am going to look at the case [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
rebel with a cause Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-15-08 01:36 PM
Response to Original message
24. Don't take this the wrong way, but I am going to look at the case
through the investigators eyes and this is with the assumption that everything you said is true and with the fact that I believe it should be illegal to own kiddie porn. Explotation is Explotation, and owning kiddie porn encourages the person that took the picture to take more. And it encourages the owner of the kiddie porn to perhaps take pictures themselves or obtaining more photos which will encourage others to continue.....You get my gest. And yes, I have experience in child welfare and working with exploited children.

Okay, on to the case. It is established that there has been a crime committed, no argument. We then follow the trail left on the computer. Was your nephew in sole possession of the computer during the time it was probable the porn was downloaded? NO!

Who else had access to the computer? The aunt, uncle, boarder and the computer repair shop. Does the aunt, uncle, or boarder remember seeing these files on the computer while it was in the basement? No, they state they do not remember seeing the files on the computer. Does the nephew remember seeing the files on the computer the last time he had access to the computer. According to him the answer is..No!

Is it likely that the four people who had access to the computer prior to the fire in the house are in league with each other and as a group are guilty of dealing in child porn? No proof of this being the case.

How many times was this file on the computer accessed while it was in the possession of the repair shop? Several and this began five months prior to it being reported. Question those that had access to the computer at the repair shop on why this was not reported immediately and why they continued to open files on the computer following the discovery of the porn file. No satisfactory reason given but no proof that any wrong doing occured at the shop.

Results of investigation: according to the facts given there is no clear proof of who possessed the computer when the porn file was downloaded and no prosecution should take place at this time. Case closed with a possibility of it being reopened if further evidence becomes available.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC