"Baal" <Baal@nym.panta-rhei.eu.org> wrote in message
news:20090609075904.03C61C32D4@panta-rhei.eu.org...
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA512
>
> Frank Merlott wrote in alt.fan.yardbird on Wednesday 03 June 2009 19:53 in
> Message-ID: <h072d2$f2k$1@news.albasani.net>:
>
>>> Someone recognized the girls and was able to anonymously notify the
>>> authorities and the girls were rescued.
>>
>> If he was arrested then he could not have been that anonymous...
>
> I don't recall where the original poster said anyone was arrested...
Uhhh, yes I did. Actually three people were arrested. One Russell Tombs
in whose possession the photos were found and were shown on
America's Most Wanted TV show where the girls were recognized.
The father, Dean Elton Williams, and his current wife were arrested
also as he was identified in the pictures.
>>> Unfortunatly LEA does not want any help from the public in ths
>>> matter. In fact if one tries to be a good citizen and report something
>>> like this they wind up being arrested and charged too.
>
> The situation gets even more bizarre, however. In some jurisdictions,
> like Manitoba, one is now required by law to report any child pornography
> they encounter.
>
> One is between a rock and a hard place here; you can you can potentially
> face prosecution if you don't report what you may have seen, and you
> potentially face prosecution if you do report what you have seen.
Makes good sense to have BCWipe installed on one's computer. A
seven pass overwrite and wiping the slack file and 'poof' it's gone.
> One is led to wonder how this will work; if you don't report what you
> may have seen, how are they going to know that you have it in the
> first place? I suspect that these provisions will be used to prosecute
> people who, upon discovery, claim accidental/unintential possession.
>
>> The law is very clear over this, nobody can INTENTIONALLY and legally
>> view child porn images unless it is a law enforcement officer during
>> the course of his work.
>
> The law in Canada is even more draconian in this regard -- one is
> forbidden
> to even /search/ for any illegal materials. The only good thing about that
> is that it keeps out groups like Peverted Justice and others of a similar
> ilk.
>
>> When some people use a password to encrypt child porn, they are making
>> it very hard for someone to view those images accidentally, anyone with
>> the aim of "helping the police", would have to download suspected child
>> porn files first, from a suspected child porn group and then
>> deliverately enter the password to view what he believed will contain
>> child porn, it would extremly hard to prove in court that the images
>> were viewed by accident and that persorn would end up prosecuted too if
>> his computer is ever taken away.
>
> Excellent point. I hadn't thought of it in those terms.
>
>> --
>> Privacylover: http://www.privacylover.com
>
> Baal <Baal@Usenet.org>
> PGP Key: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x1E92C0E8
> PGP Key Fingerprint: 40E4 E9BB D084 22D5 3DE9 66B8 08E3 638C 1E92 C0E8
> Retired Lecturer, Encryption and Data Security, Pedo U, Usenet Campus
> - --
>
> "Sed quis custodiet ipsos Custodes?" -- "Who will watch the Watchmen?"
> -- Juvenal, Satires, VI, 347. circa 128 AD
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
> iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJKKCosAAoJEAjjY4weksDoX9UH/0EqqXUdB6sRE7GzgovLWYu6
> IFqwvykiwCwta9I+YdEMCaH6KWOypDzHe9QNSr32ETyU9Ic440fnHHfpcSnLT6Ca
> fsvw8Pyzu+dnIkfQrH7vTPezRs0x/amnTJZME6xkZ9NWG7wnuye2OfwaRkYnCyG0
> 7OG79CZk/LkctwE3QAoeRi0vG5JKMnkLLOEHbG/4cH2EKTOJ9Pr/+8E1oXwiMnxf
> Xedh6ZESuE3Wm0o86gbt2DBLECyuGmhq8xPk/pud3Qv0axCDFUDTEvfzKL/CdDVZ
> Dix5oltai3lDL/UPt+JJCiD3NdPh8uk0adZA5Z2PYup/LOB8mLRC+mVoRnqy/YU=
> =leVG
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
|
| Follow-ups: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 |
|