Dumbest Pedo in a while

[MikeyIs4Dcats]

Link

"Can you back up my files for me?"

"Which ones?"

"The one's in the 'Kiddie Porn' folder"

 

[Specop 007]

Originally posted by: MikeyIs4Dcats
Link

"Can you back up my files for me?"

"Which ones?"

"The one's in the 'Kiddie Porn' folder"

Observe your sig....

 

[pontifex]

ROFLMAO!!

WTF? how can someone be that stupid?

 

[imported_LoKe]

All pedos are equally stupid.

 

[pinion9]

Originally posted by: MikeyIs4Dcats
Link

"Can you back up my files for me?"

"Which ones?"

"The one's in the 'Kiddie Porn' folder"

Yes. Mine is labelled "Not Kiddie Porn, I swear, it is older BBWs, don't even look here, it is sorta gross."

Seriously, people are retarded. However, here is the real stinker about this (and all child porn cases.) Unless you can PROVE that the person in the photo is in fact a child, and in fact REAL, then you don't have a case. Generally speaking, the officials need to be able to see video of the child and/or be able to locate the child in real life. Otherwise it is pretty difficult to prove the photos are not doctored and not CG.

I personally believe it should be illegal for even CG images of child porn to be produced. Sick fvcks.

Edit: From the Department of Redundancy Department: removed redundant words.

 

[MikeyIs4Dcats]

Originally posted by: LoKe
All pedos are equally stupid.

unfortunately not true

 

[JeffreyLebowski]

Excuse me officer, can you hold my joint while I get my expired license out of my wallet.

 

[MikeyIs4Dcats]

Originally posted by: pinion9

Originally posted by: MikeyIs4Dcats
Link

"Can you back up my files for me?"

"Which ones?"

"The one's in the 'Kiddie Porn' folder"

Yes. Mine is labelled "Not Kiddie Porn, I swear, it is older BBWs, don't even look here, it is sorta gross."

Seriously, people are retarded. However, here is the real stinker about this (and all child porn cases.) Unless you can PROVE that the person in the photo is in fact a child, and in fact REAL, then you don't have a case. Generally speaking, the officials need to be able to see video of the child and/or be able to locate the child in real life. Otherwise it is pretty difficult to prove the photos are not doctored and not CG.

I personally believe it should be illegal for even CG images of child porn to be illegal. Sick fvcks.

not entirely true. If the image is obviously of an underage person, they do not have to prove it. There have been some borderline instances where they have had to prove the age of the child, but not that often.

 

[thirdeye]

WOW, that's just insanely stupid.

 

[pinion9]

Originally posted by: MikeyIs4Dcats

Originally posted by: pinion9

Originally posted by: MikeyIs4Dcats
Link

"Can you back up my files for me?"

"Which ones?"

"The one's in the 'Kiddie Porn' folder"

Yes. Mine is labelled "Not Kiddie Porn, I swear, it is older BBWs, don't even look here, it is sorta gross."

Seriously, people are retarded. However, here is the real stinker about this (and all child porn cases.) Unless you can PROVE that the person in the photo is in fact a child, and in fact REAL, then you don't have a case. Generally speaking, the officials need to be able to see video of the child and/or be able to locate the child in real life. Otherwise it is pretty difficult to prove the photos are not doctored and not CG.

I personally believe it should be illegal for even CG images of child porn to be illegal. Sick fvcks.

not entirely true. If the image is obviously of an underage person, they do not have to prove it. There have been some borderline instances where they have had to prove the age of the child, but not that often.

Maybe it is just in Alaska. Generally they get the idiot to plea. However, given a picture of some random naked 8 year old, how can you prove that it is in fact a real human being?

 

[homercles337]

What are the laws on this? Seems like invasion of privacy or something. It seems to me that if someone wanted some files backed up the company should just do it and not go snooping through their computer. But to stay on topic: this guy is an idiot.

 

[waggy]

hahahahah this does not suprise me. NOT AT ALL.
.

 

[sinucus]

Thank god this guy was such an idiot and got caught so easily. Is there a Darwin award for stupid criminals?

 

[pontifex]

Originally posted by: homercles337
What are the laws on this? Seems like invasion of privacy or something. It seems to me that if someone wanted some files backed up the company should just do it and not go snooping through their computer. But to stay on topic: this guy is an idiot.

how can it be invasion of privacy when the guy walks in and says "Yeah, I want this kiddie porn folder backed up."?

 

[BrokenVisage]

ROFL what an idiot

 

[pinion9]

Originally posted by: homercles337
What are the laws on this? Seems like invasion of privacy or something. It seems to me that if someone wanted some files backed up the company should just do it and not go snooping through their computer. But to stay on topic: this guy is an idiot.

There are specific laws and University policies. If the man had his files in a folder labelled "private" and just wanted them backed up it may be an invasion. However, naming it Kiddie Porn gives probable cause....

The company didn't do anything illegal, but may lose business because they obviously snoop.

We had a case like this in town where the dude took his computer in for repairs. He had a stash of kiddie porn on it. He got busted for it.

 

[MikeyIs4Dcats]

Originally posted by: pinion9

Originally posted by: MikeyIs4Dcats

Originally posted by: pinion9

Originally posted by: MikeyIs4Dcats
Link

"Can you back up my files for me?"

"Which ones?"

"The one's in the 'Kiddie Porn' folder"

Yes. Mine is labelled "Not Kiddie Porn, I swear, it is older BBWs, don't even look here, it is sorta gross."

Seriously, people are retarded. However, here is the real stinker about this (and all child porn cases.) Unless you can PROVE that the person in the photo is in fact a child, and in fact REAL, then you don't have a case. Generally speaking, the officials need to be able to see video of the child and/or be able to locate the child in real life. Otherwise it is pretty difficult to prove the photos are not doctored and not CG.

I personally believe it should be illegal for even CG images of child porn to be illegal. Sick fvcks.

not entirely true. If the image is obviously of an underage person, they do not have to prove it. There have been some borderline instances where they have had to prove the age of the child, but not that often.

Maybe it is just in Alaska. Generally they get the idiot to plea. However, given a picture of some random naked 8 year old, how can you prove that it is in fact a real human being?

simple. they can analyze the picture. if it can be proven that it is not a computer generated image, then it is assumed real.

 

[MikeyIs4Dcats]

Originally posted by: pinion9

Originally posted by: homercles337
What are the laws on this? Seems like invasion of privacy or something. It seems to me that if someone wanted some files backed up the company should just do it and not go snooping through their computer. But to stay on topic: this guy is an idiot.

There are specific laws and University policies. If the man had his files in a folder labelled "private" and just wanted them backed up it may be an invasion. However, naming it Kiddie Porn gives probable cause....

The company didn't do anything illegal, but may lose business because they obviously snoop.

We had a case like this in town where the dude took his computer in for repairs. He had a stash of kiddie porn on it. He got busted for it.

did you read the article? they didn't snoop...he told them what files he wanted backed up.

 

[pinion9]

Originally posted by: MikeyIs4Dcats

Originally posted by: pinion9

Originally posted by: MikeyIs4Dcats

Originally posted by: pinion9

Originally posted by: MikeyIs4Dcats
Link

"Can you back up my files for me?"

"Which ones?"

"The one's in the 'Kiddie Porn' folder"

Yes. Mine is labelled "Not Kiddie Porn, I swear, it is older BBWs, don't even look here, it is sorta gross."

Seriously, people are retarded. However, here is the real stinker about this (and all child porn cases.) Unless you can PROVE that the person in the photo is in fact a child, and in fact REAL, then you don't have a case. Generally speaking, the officials need to be able to see video of the child and/or be able to locate the child in real life. Otherwise it is pretty difficult to prove the photos are not doctored and not CG.

I personally believe it should be illegal for even CG images of child porn to be illegal. Sick fvcks.

not entirely true. If the image is obviously of an underage person, they do not have to prove it. There have been some borderline instances where they have had to prove the age of the child, but not that often.

Maybe it is just in Alaska. Generally they get the idiot to plea. However, given a picture of some random naked 8 year old, how can you prove that it is in fact a real human being?

simple. they can analyze the picture. if it can be proven that it is not a computer generated image, then it is assumed real.

Please tell me how to do such an analysis. How do you prove it isn't computer generated?

 

[ArchCenturion]

Lol, that is awesome what a dumbass.

This reminds me of Maddox's article about the pedosmile.

 

[pinion9]

As further point, what if I am a distributor and I make it a point to swap heads of children so there is always evidence of digital tampering....

 

[newParadigm]

IDK, but what a sick dumbfuck

 

[MikeyIs4Dcats]

Originally posted by: pinion9

Originally posted by: MikeyIs4Dcats

Originally posted by: pinion9

Originally posted by: MikeyIs4Dcats

Originally posted by: pinion9

Originally posted by: MikeyIs4Dcats
Link

"Can you back up my files for me?"

"Which ones?"

"The one's in the 'Kiddie Porn' folder"

Yes. Mine is labelled "Not Kiddie Porn, I swear, it is older BBWs, don't even look here, it is sorta gross."

Seriously, people are retarded. However, here is the real stinker about this (and all child porn cases.) Unless you can PROVE that the person in the photo is in fact a child, and in fact REAL, then you don't have a case. Generally speaking, the officials need to be able to see video of the child and/or be able to locate the child in real life. Otherwise it is pretty difficult to prove the photos are not doctored and not CG.

I personally believe it should be illegal for even CG images of child porn to be illegal. Sick fvcks.

not entirely true. If the image is obviously of an underage person, they do not have to prove it. There have been some borderline instances where they have had to prove the age of the child, but not that often.

Maybe it is just in Alaska. Generally they get the idiot to plea. However, given a picture of some random naked 8 year old, how can you prove that it is in fact a real human being?

simple. they can analyze the picture. if it can be proven that it is not a computer generated image, then it is assumed real.

Please tell me how to do such an analysis. How do you prove it isn't computer generated?

people are just now able to start rendering truely realistic images of people. they will need to be more careful in the future, but I expect legislation will be changed to encompass such realistic images. At this time, any CG images would be easily identified.

 

[homercles337]

Originally posted by: pontifex

Originally posted by: homercles337
What are the laws on this? Seems like invasion of privacy or something. It seems to me that if someone wanted some files backed up the company should just do it and not go snooping through their computer. But to stay on topic: this guy is an idiot.

how can it be invasion of privacy when the guy walks in and says "Yeah, I want this kiddie porn folder backed up."?

I read the article and was generalizing (some people here are horrifically judgemental) to less cut-and-dried situations. What if the dir had an encrypted file containing sensitive information unrelated to kiddie porn? Or what if he had a dir called "National Secrets" that had kiddie porn that he wanted backed up? I still see it as snooping. Just because there is a dir called "tits" on a HD does not mean it will contain images on said topic. I guess im also thinking about those poor bastards that try to hide their illegal porn, then get repairs, and get caught. Someone had to go looking to find illegal content.

 

[j00fek]

ROFLMAO!!!