<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.2.1" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Link Crime &#8212; 21st century offence</title>
	<link>http://www.p2pnet.net/story/15781</link>
	<description>p2pnet.net offers not-your-lamescream news on movies music digital media P2P peer-to-peer TV television file sharing freedom of speech open source product news Wifi mobiles company</description>
	<pubDate>Sun, 07 Sep 2008 11:00:39 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.2.1</generator>

	<item>
		<title>By: Reader's Write</title>
		<link>http://www.p2pnet.net/story/15781#comment-446860</link>
		<author>Reader's Write</author>
		<pubDate>Sat, 03 May 2008 15:16:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.p2pnet.net/story/15781#comment-446860</guid>
		<description>I don't have the details but I remember a court case where they tried to whip out the federal law on CP: the state DA called it "contraband" using federal regulations, but the judge said that the defendant's civil rights would be violated, and that the case was not a federal case in a federal court, therefore because the risk of the defendant's rights being violated the judge would not allow the contraband law to be used.

Unfortunately the defendant had to plea out.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I don&#8217;t have the details but I remember a court case where they tried to whip out the federal law on CP: the state DA called it &#8220;contraband&#8221; using federal regulations, but the judge said that the defendant&#8217;s civil rights would be violated, and that the case was not a federal case in a federal court, therefore because the risk of the defendant&#8217;s rights being violated the judge would not allow the contraband law to be used.</p>
<p>Unfortunately the defendant had to plea out.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rekrul</title>
		<link>http://www.p2pnet.net/story/15781#comment-444129</link>
		<author>Rekrul</author>
		<pubDate>Fri, 02 May 2008 05:32:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.p2pnet.net/story/15781#comment-444129</guid>
		<description>Witches
Heretics
Communists
Pedophiles

Those who don't learn from the past are doomed to repeat it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Witches<br />
Heretics<br />
Communists<br />
Pedophiles</p>
<p>Those who don&#8217;t learn from the past are doomed to repeat it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bill Blogs</title>
		<link>http://www.p2pnet.net/story/15781#comment-442819</link>
		<author>Bill Blogs</author>
		<pubDate>Thu, 01 May 2008 10:24:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.p2pnet.net/story/15781#comment-442819</guid>
		<description>Well. It seems that the greatest crime is viewing the pictures. Not performing sex acts on children or doing the video and taking photos. These apparently are secondary. Not even uploading, profiting from, or distributing them is as bad. It's up to the experts to define CP, as they perve (sorry, pore) meticulously over material in question. Pity when some of the experts get caught out with it on their own PCs. Great job for pedos if they can get it.

Another thing is that all the 1000s of sites which do business in scantily clad little girls who claim that it's all legal, well most of it; guess what?

If you are suspected of having or downloading CP or are reported by your PC dealer or anyone framing mischief, this kind of material is quite sufficient to implicate you as a suspect, which can be just as bad to your reputation. This is because why else would you have such? If it becomes known you will be under suspicion and will be watched, shunned, disrespected, distrusted, hated, and restricted in any activity around children or otherwise.

Don't even glance at an underage girl down the street. Scary alright. Unfair and unjust? Certainly.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well. It seems that the greatest crime is viewing the pictures. Not performing sex acts on children or doing the video and taking photos. These apparently are secondary. Not even uploading, profiting from, or distributing them is as bad. It&#8217;s up to the experts to define CP, as they perve (sorry, pore) meticulously over material in question. Pity when some of the experts get caught out with it on their own PCs. Great job for pedos if they can get it.</p>
<p>Another thing is that all the 1000s of sites which do business in scantily clad little girls who claim that it&#8217;s all legal, well most of it; guess what?</p>
<p>If you are suspected of having or downloading CP or are reported by your PC dealer or anyone framing mischief, this kind of material is quite sufficient to implicate you as a suspect, which can be just as bad to your reputation. This is because why else would you have such? If it becomes known you will be under suspicion and will be watched, shunned, disrespected, distrusted, hated, and restricted in any activity around children or otherwise.</p>
<p>Don&#8217;t even glance at an underage girl down the street. Scary alright. Unfair and unjust? Certainly.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rekrul</title>
		<link>http://www.p2pnet.net/story/15781#comment-442394</link>
		<author>Rekrul</author>
		<pubDate>Thu, 01 May 2008 03:27:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.p2pnet.net/story/15781#comment-442394</guid>
		<description>The US also passed another nice little law a while back that I wasn't even aware of until just recently. Apparently, it's considered a "violation" of the children in such photos each and every time someone sees them. Also, the FBI considers child porn so dangerous that they can't take any chances that any of it will fall into the public's hands. To that end, the government passed a law that says that defense lawyers and experts hired by the defense are no longer allowed to have a copy of a suspect's hard drive to conduct their own investigation of the suspected images. It can only be examined at a federal facility, under guard. Never mind that this could violate client/lawyer confidentiality, it greatly increases the cost of having an expert look at the drive because rather than bring it to their own lab, they have to lug all of their equipment to a different location.

As if the above wasn't bad enough, there are documented cases where the FBI has mistaken adult performers for children and sworn under oath that they were no older than 13, even when the girl in the photos had been involved in similar cases previously. (look up Melissa Ashley) Even when it has been proven that the photos are 100% legal and no actual CP is found, the FBI will STILL try to prosecute someone on the grounds that the person might have THOUGHT that the pictures were CP and therefore they should be treated as a pedophile.

Thought-crime is here, welcome to 1984.

Are you scared yet?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The US also passed another nice little law a while back that I wasn&#8217;t even aware of until just recently. Apparently, it&#8217;s considered a &#8220;violation&#8221; of the children in such photos each and every time someone sees them. Also, the FBI considers child porn so dangerous that they can&#8217;t take any chances that any of it will fall into the public&#8217;s hands. To that end, the government passed a law that says that defense lawyers and experts hired by the defense are no longer allowed to have a copy of a suspect&#8217;s hard drive to conduct their own investigation of the suspected images. It can only be examined at a federal facility, under guard. Never mind that this could violate client/lawyer confidentiality, it greatly increases the cost of having an expert look at the drive because rather than bring it to their own lab, they have to lug all of their equipment to a different location.</p>
<p>As if the above wasn&#8217;t bad enough, there are documented cases where the FBI has mistaken adult performers for children and sworn under oath that they were no older than 13, even when the girl in the photos had been involved in similar cases previously. (look up Melissa Ashley) Even when it has been proven that the photos are 100% legal and no actual CP is found, the FBI will STILL try to prosecute someone on the grounds that the person might have THOUGHT that the pictures were CP and therefore they should be treated as a pedophile.</p>
<p>Thought-crime is here, welcome to 1984.</p>
<p>Are you scared yet?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Stray Mongrel</title>
		<link>http://www.p2pnet.net/story/15781#comment-441937</link>
		<author>Stray Mongrel</author>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Apr 2008 20:57:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.p2pnet.net/story/15781#comment-441937</guid>
		<description>I understand the problem and importance to enforce laws against kiddie porn, but this is absolutely the most ridiculous method to approach it.

While I oppose this "illegal link" business, I support the FBI's efforts to catch some truly disgusting people.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I understand the problem and importance to enforce laws against kiddie porn, but this is absolutely the most ridiculous method to approach it.</p>
<p>While I oppose this &#8220;illegal link&#8221; business, I support the FBI&#8217;s efforts to catch some truly disgusting people.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jon</title>
		<link>http://www.p2pnet.net/story/15781#comment-441569</link>
		<author>Jon</author>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Apr 2008 16:30:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.p2pnet.net/story/15781#comment-441569</guid>
		<description>^^ Which country is that?

Cheers!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>^^ Which country is that?</p>
<p>Cheers!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sam</title>
		<link>http://www.p2pnet.net/story/15781#comment-441545</link>
		<author>Sam</author>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Apr 2008 16:03:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.p2pnet.net/story/15781#comment-441545</guid>
		<description>Old news. I can't see this lasting very long, any convictions overturned, and if we're lucky, fines to the asshats that approved this. Living in more sane country, they couldn't touch me. On the other hand, I'd like to get a link or two for that and post on *chan. &#62;:D</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Old news. I can&#8217;t see this lasting very long, any convictions overturned, and if we&#8217;re lucky, fines to the asshats that approved this. Living in more sane country, they couldn&#8217;t touch me. On the other hand, I&#8217;d like to get a link or two for that and post on *chan. &gt;:D</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
