4 ms·
> ...and then kept the site online so they could make further arrests of people who viewed the site. > That's a massively different picture... No, it isn't.
by woodman 10y ago
> ...and then kept the site online so they could make further arrests of people who viewed the site.
> That's a massively different picture...
No, it isn't. The USG treats every instance of child pornography as a separate occurrence of a crime against the child. That is the way they've structured it so that they can convict as many people as possible, not just the individuals responsible for production. In this case the USG, by their own standard, committed an untold number of crimes against these children by keeping the site up and acting as a distributor. There is no difference between this and them setting up a honey pot full of CP.
- aliakhtar 10y ago> keeping the site up and acting as a distributor They kept the site online so they could distribute malware to people who viewed it. What's the actual evidence that they distributed CP?
- woodman 10y agoSo you didn't read any of the stories linked in the comment you replied to? First one, top of the page: "...including more than 9,000 files that users could download directly from the FBI. Some of the images described in court filings involved children barely old enough for kindergarten."
- aliakhtar 10y agoThat's what the site had before the FBI took charge of it and replaced the CP with malware. Where's the evidence that they distributed CP and not just cp.jpg.exe?
- woodman 10y ago> Where's the evidence... In the court filings described by the previously linked stories, one of which I quoted in the comment you just responded to. What do you think they were charging people with, intent to download cp.jpg? Are you having such a hard time believing that the USG would distribute CP that you are mentally blocking all the evidence available to you? Because I have bad news for you, they've done much worse than that.