5 ms·

For arguments sake, if sho had 10gb of <7yo children in sexual acts distributed amongst photos and videos on his computer, would he be guilty in your opinion? S

by trapper 18y ago

For arguments sake, if sho had 10gb of <7yo children in sexual acts distributed amongst photos and videos on his computer, would he be guilty in your opinion? Sho - I would like to hear from you too.

ErrantX 18y ago
Well yes I would report that as a positive: i.e. that I had found material. Depending on the grading of the images the CPS would then decide what to prosecute him with (i.e. all level 1's would probably get you a talking too and advice on places to get help if required, a decent number of level 5's would prompt prosecution). I'd also look at how he organised them. For example if it was a few 100 MB's of borderline images (even if we know they are illegal) and they were spread randomly in his porn collection then I would possibly consider it a negative. If then I found google searches for "download lolita" etc. and evidence of hanging out on 12chan et al then I might revise that view. Each case varies considerably :) as I am sure you can imagine. Currently possession of the material in large quantities is a crime. What legal reason could there be for holding that quantity on disk? (bearing in mind the checks and paperwork we have to go through to hold the material per the requirments of our contracts). That amount of data (10GB is a lot) would prompt me to look very closely at the sources and other activity as it would suggest distribution too (indeed I would be surprised if there were no distribution at that scale). 1 image wont get you jail time. 100 would depend on the context & the grading. 1000+ is, I hope, fairly obvious :)
- trapper 18y ago
  The only thing I was thinking was if I were going to do something clearly illegal, and had technical ability, surely I wouldn't store my stash in plain site. E.g. hack someones machine, store the data on their computer. How do you prove 'intent'? I have known a few shady types throughout life, and none of them were stupid enough to store their stolen goods at their home, regardless of how poor their educational abilities :)
  - ErrantX 18y ago
    Ah yeh I see what you mean there. Well everything leaves traces - you juust have ot hunt it out and figureout where they hide things ;) That said your assuming technical ability: which these consumers dont really have. The mid level (i.e. community) distributors probably dont have it either. Top level distributors? Pfft try catching them :) barely happens. At the end of the day it is all about the trail. You tie together their chat, web activity, downloads, and where images are stored. Factor in things like times (can be useful to confirm who used the PC) and extraneous usage (eg: download images, followed by checking email followed by more downloads is pretty incriminating :D). You build up a picture of what happened and it quickly shows the intent. If you get someone googling for normal porn and downloading a couple of borderline CP zips it is fairly obvious compared to somone searching limewire for "lolita" and setting 100 related torrents off to download :) EDIT: example, that I am allowed to mention, try the case of a school computer teacher coming into class in the morning and setting Limewire off to download CP before teaching a class. He took steps to hide what he did (encrypted containers etc.) but in the end it was easy enough to prove via log files, thumbnails and internet usage etc. That is the most technical ability I have seen in a consumer.
    - trapper 18y ago
      Good to know you go to such lengths. From some of the posters here you would think it was as simple as looking at a website with CP gets you 10 years :) Respect, and good hunting :)
sho 18y ago
Well, your question is ambiguous. Guilty according to what? According to the law, of course this hypothetical person would be guilty. Very guilty. In terms of my own ideal moral boundaries? Well, it depends on the circumstances. I will refer to this hypothetical person as X. 1. If X made/caused to be made the images: Guilty beyond doubt. Lock X up and throw away the key. Sexual assault of a 7yo? Are you kidding? Absolutely wrong and absolutely should be removed from society before more harm is caused. 2. If X did not make the images but contributed to their creation via payment: Guilty. By payment, he has directly helped fund this and future crimes. 3. If X did not make the images but contributed to their creation by other means: Grey area. Could be considered part of a conspiracy to commit a crime. Would depend on the circumstances. 4. If X did not make the images and had no link to the person(s) who did: Not guilty, of course. There is no link between him and the crime. He merely has a visual record. Obviously a promising candidate for counselling, however. To be treated the same was as, say, someone found with 10GB of execution photos/videos. I wonder what answer you were expecting? I am sorry but I just cannot accept that making a copy of a file can be considered a criminal offence or even wrong. I consider anyone who rapes 7yo kids to be utterly reprehensible, by the way. That is fucking sick. Lock up anyone who does that, forever, and I will applaud you. But possessing an image of the crime in progress? That should not be a crime, that should never be a crime, that should not even be able to be a crime.
- ErrantX 18y ago
  FYI possesion of 10GB of actual execution porn would probably get you a significant jail sentence (I dont think it gets you on the sex offenders register though). Never come across a case though. The end users though do contribute to creating the crime: they create a market and a community. For example an individual may have innappropriate thoughts related to abusing children and creating the imagery - by creating a community from which he/she can gain access to the material they could well be encouraged to put thoughts into action. You cant pin any specific blame but removing them from society is always going to help :) Plus of course you dont know what they may do in th future. Looking at images may develop into actual abuse. Leave that person free? Or put them in jail and attempt to rehabilitate? Not a choice IMO. Whether the rehabilitiation process works is a seperate debate in my opinion (I would say it doesnt as it happens) but there isnt much I can do about that for now.

by trapper 18y ago

For arguments sake, if sho had 10gb of <7yo children in sexual acts distributed amongst photos and videos on his computer, would he be guilty in your opinion? Sho - I would like to hear from you too.

ErrantX 18y ago

Well yes I would report that as a positive: i.e. that I had found material. Depending on the grading of the images the CPS would then decide what to prosecute him with (i.e. all level 1's would probably get you a talking too and advice on places to get help if required, a decent number of level 5's would prompt prosecution). I'd also look at how he organised them. For example if it was a few 100 MB's of borderline images (even if we know they are illegal) and they were spread randomly in his porn collection then I would possibly consider it a negative. If then I found google searches for "download lolita" etc. and evidence of hanging out on 12chan et al then I might revise that view. Each case varies considerably :) as I am sure you can imagine. Currently possession of the material in large quantities is a crime. What legal reason could there be for holding that quantity on disk? (bearing in mind the checks and paperwork we have to go through to hold the material per the requirments of our contracts). That amount of data (10GB is a lot) would prompt me to look very closely at the sources and other activity as it would suggest distribution too (indeed I would be surprised if there were no distribution at that scale). 1 image wont get you jail time. 100 would depend on the context & the grading. 1000+ is, I hope, fairly obvious :)

trapper 18y ago
The only thing I was thinking was if I were going to do something clearly illegal, and had technical ability, surely I wouldn't store my stash in plain site. E.g. hack someones machine, store the data on their computer. How do you prove 'intent'? I have known a few shady types throughout life, and none of them were stupid enough to store their stolen goods at their home, regardless of how poor their educational abilities :)
- ErrantX 18y ago
  Ah yeh I see what you mean there. Well everything leaves traces - you juust have ot hunt it out and figureout where they hide things ;) That said your assuming technical ability: which these consumers dont really have. The mid level (i.e. community) distributors probably dont have it either. Top level distributors? Pfft try catching them :) barely happens. At the end of the day it is all about the trail. You tie together their chat, web activity, downloads, and where images are stored. Factor in things like times (can be useful to confirm who used the PC) and extraneous usage (eg: download images, followed by checking email followed by more downloads is pretty incriminating :D). You build up a picture of what happened and it quickly shows the intent. If you get someone googling for normal porn and downloading a couple of borderline CP zips it is fairly obvious compared to somone searching limewire for "lolita" and setting 100 related torrents off to download :) EDIT: example, that I am allowed to mention, try the case of a school computer teacher coming into class in the morning and setting Limewire off to download CP before teaching a class. He took steps to hide what he did (encrypted containers etc.) but in the end it was easy enough to prove via log files, thumbnails and internet usage etc. That is the most technical ability I have seen in a consumer.
  - trapper 18y ago
    Good to know you go to such lengths. From some of the posters here you would think it was as simple as looking at a website with CP gets you 10 years :) Respect, and good hunting :)

sho 18y ago

Well, your question is ambiguous. Guilty according to what? According to the law, of course this hypothetical person would be guilty. Very guilty. In terms of my own ideal moral boundaries? Well, it depends on the circumstances. I will refer to this hypothetical person as X. 1. If X made/caused to be made the images: Guilty beyond doubt. Lock X up and throw away the key. Sexual assault of a 7yo? Are you kidding? Absolutely wrong and absolutely should be removed from society before more harm is caused. 2. If X did not make the images but contributed to their creation via payment: Guilty. By payment, he has directly helped fund this and future crimes. 3. If X did not make the images but contributed to their creation by other means: Grey area. Could be considered part of a conspiracy to commit a crime. Would depend on the circumstances. 4. If X did not make the images and had no link to the person(s) who did: Not guilty, of course. There is no link between him and the crime. He merely has a visual record. Obviously a promising candidate for counselling, however. To be treated the same was as, say, someone found with 10GB of execution photos/videos. I wonder what answer you were expecting? I am sorry but I just cannot accept that making a copy of a file can be considered a criminal offence or even wrong. I consider anyone who rapes 7yo kids to be utterly reprehensible, by the way. That is fucking sick. Lock up anyone who does that, forever, and I will applaud you. But possessing an image of the crime in progress? That should not be a crime, that should never be a crime, that should not even be able to be a crime.

ErrantX 18y ago
FYI possesion of 10GB of actual execution porn would probably get you a significant jail sentence (I dont think it gets you on the sex offenders register though). Never come across a case though. The end users though do contribute to creating the crime: they create a market and a community. For example an individual may have innappropriate thoughts related to abusing children and creating the imagery - by creating a community from which he/she can gain access to the material they could well be encouraged to put thoughts into action. You cant pin any specific blame but removing them from society is always going to help :) Plus of course you dont know what they may do in th future. Looking at images may develop into actual abuse. Leave that person free? Or put them in jail and attempt to rehabilitate? Not a choice IMO. Whether the rehabilitiation process works is a seperate debate in my opinion (I would say it doesnt as it happens) but there isnt much I can do about that for now.