Forum - View topicNEWS: Twins, 20, Jailed for Child Porn Including 'Manga' Images
|
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 Next Note: this is the discussion thread for this article |
| Author | Message | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
ninjaclown
Posts: 199 |
|
|||
|
As a Canadian, I have mixed feelings. On one hand, I'm glad they've been sentenced and are getting the help they need. On the other hand...three months?
Our Justice System is becoming more and more of a joke every day. 
|
||||
|
||||
leftbehindxp
 Posts: 142 |
|
|||
If you don't mind me asking could you please explain your opinion a little bit more? I'm not being hateful or have that mindset, but I'm quite curious. Or perhaps I'm just misunderstanding what you and possibly others consider virtual, which I feel that it's anything digital on a computer (real pictures or not) |
||||
|
||||
|
james438
Posts: 19 Location: Iowa |
|
|||
I could cry. 
Please read the article and posts before responding. Your question was answered in both places... |
||||
|
||||
|
Triley
Posts: 14 Location: New Hampshire, US |
|
|||
Not too often you see other people from New Hampshire online either, I take it? lol Live down around Nashua myself. Yes, unfortunately there is. Not a lifetime like james438 said. 10 years. This also means that he can not visit the United States for the time being. ..Eventually I want to consult with a lawyer about that, and see if he can come in to the States, seeing as how what he was convicted of is not illegal here. Would only make sense, right? |
||||
|
||||
nadir-seen-fire
 Posts: 90 |
|
|||
|
Sankaku has a corresponding article: http://www.sankakucomplex.com/2009/10/23/shotacon-twins-jailed-manga-victimises-children/ (NSFW)
Reading the two stories together and the forum posts here actually makes it a bit of a scary case compared to what it was originally made out to be. |
||||
|
||||
|
Triley
Posts: 14 Location: New Hampshire, US |
|
|||
It's not what you intended, but thank you. I've finally got David thinking about the fact that it was a mistrial from the start. (He was questioned without a lawyer to start.) He is very timid, as the articles imply, so he hasn't wanted to step forward at all, even after I've talked to him about it. Now he's finally going to try to get in contact with his lawyer tomorrow, though I don't think it'll save him for this weekend, since he has to be in Dartmouth by 9. |
||||
|
||||
Richard J.
 Posts: 3367 Location: Sic Semper Tyrannis. |
|
|||
With child pornography that uses actual children as the source, a crime has to take place to produce the material. With hentai manga and anime or any other drawn/computer generated imagery, there are no actual children used to create it. Therefore it is victimless and should be classified at worst as a vice crime as the only "victim" if you want to call them that is the person consuming that media. Calling a shotacon hentai manga child pornography is like calling Saw a snuff film. No real child has been abused or had sex or anything in the shotacon and no real person has been mutilated or killed in Saw. This is, I think, the reason Hexon.Arq said that nothing virtual should be illegal. It isn't real. I feel for the guy in this case because if everything that is being talked about here is correct: the lack of a lawyer, the proposed deal that then was changed and how the materials that were most "offensive" are also apparently not of actual children, then I find the whole thing sounds like quite a case for appeal. (Not very familiar with Canadian law but I know enough about US law to probably win an appeal if this were in the US myself.) |
||||
|
||||
CCSYueh
 Posts: 2707 Location: San Diego, CA |
|
|||
Most people I know consider virtual to mean not real-created. Such as in Demolition Man where real sex was banned & only no body contact sex thru a simulator was allowed. One of my clients managed to appeal & get his requirement to register as a sex offender terminated so if David appeals, he might get that much. Considering bro confessed, I'd say push it. Take the homophobe line on the judge or prosecutor if need be. This reeks of overzealous on the law enforcement side. I don't think I could ever talk to the family member who turned them in were it my family. She could have at least talked to them to try to find out if it were 1 or both boys. What she did is so evil. If they were both guilty-fine, but that one seems to be innocent, it's so wrong to have gotten him involved in it. Even if he does eventually clear his name, she can never erase what he's been thru. |
||||
|
||||
|
leftbehindxp
Posts: 142 |
|
|||
Thanks for clearing that up. Misunderstanding on my part there and sorry about that. My first thought when the word virtual came up was just anything thats computerized. I was thinking way to deeply into it in a sociological context. |
||||
|
||||
|
Triley
Posts: 14 Location: New Hampshire, US |
|
|||
|
Thanks for all your input, I will be pushing him again when I talk to him this morning, to call his lawyer. Thing is though, what's the chance of getting the jail term tossed out before tonight? Like what, 0? I don't know how appeals work. I'm unsure of if you still have to follow the previous sentence, until the appeal process starts, or what.
Also, I'd like to clear something else up as well. Long story short, the "sister-in-law" was never really a sister-in-law. They were never married. Her mother supposedly kicked her out of their house when she was 15, and she moved in with her boyfriend (David's younger brother) and family. Before she went to the police, she had broken up with her boyfriend, and was actually having sex with the neighbor, while still returning to sleep in the same bed as the younger brother.
Our theories as to why she really brought the case up, was because the police where keeping her from her baby, and it was likely that they were going to give sole custody to the boyfriend an the family. There was a rumor floating around from her best friend, that she was actually going to plant kiddy porn on the computers, to get them in trouble. She was scheduled for a polygraph, but never ended up going in for the appointment, so who knows if she added the real kiddy porn, to cause even more trouble. (Just to point out, now the baby is with David's father, and we actually just yesterday found out that now David's mother or younger brother can't see the baby at all, for an unknown reason at this time. The mother of the baby is suppose to be the same, from what I know.) |
||||
|
||||
|
sumomolover
Posts: 2 Location: USA |
|
|||
|
i think no matter what treatment they go through this will all be in the back of there mind and sometimes it could just come right back to the surface. This is one of those things where you stuck with only a few options that may or may not work well.[/list]
|
||||
|
||||
Ktimene's Lover
 Posts: 2242 Location: Glendale, AZ (Proudly living in the desert) |
|
|||
|
If the more of the general public stopped to look at Japanese culture, they might realize that shoutacon is widely accepted to certain people in Japan. Anyone who thinks they can arrest someone for owning comic depictions of child porn is clearly messed up. It's not real. Arrest only people who have real child porn. As much as I dislike shoutacon/lolicon, it is someone's First Amendment right to own it provided they don't go creepy with it.
|
||||
|
||||
hikaru004
 Posts: 2306 |
|
|||
|
Ignorance of the law is no excuse.
Somehow I don't think that they would let someone convicted of child porn in the US. These types would be called "undesireables". He's going to need an immigration attorney anyways. |
||||
|
||||
|
gorbal
Posts: 114 |
|
|||
|
Triley- I wouldn't give out any more information unless your boyfriend was absolutely sure he wasn't going to fight the ruling. Lawyers are ingenious in finding tiny little details that will hurt his case. (At that point I would tell everyone and get people riled up enough to protest!!!)
If he isn't going to fight it...did he (Your boyfriend) only look at the virtual porn? If so than this IS about virtual child porn if someone looking at real child porn and someone looking at manga are given the same sentence. |
||||
|
||||
|
Melinda-chan
Posts: 6 |
|
|||
|
Did the policeman read him his rights before questioning him? Because if he did and he chose not to call a lawyer, then the policeman can question him anyway. You don't need a lawyer in Canada though your chances of winning your case is a lot higher if you do but they do cost a lot of money in most cases.
If anyone wants to move to this country and province, they should be familiar with our legal system. Because I can guarantee that if you get in any trouble, they'll send you back home ASAP. This happened to my sister's husband. One also should be familiar with the legal system because the lawyer doesn't always act in your best interest. The full article can be read here: http://thechronicleherald.ca/NovaScotia/1148912.html I am also from Nova Scotia and I have to say that this isn't surprising. It appears that these men didn't know it was illegal and were willingly honest and remorseful. Hopefully these men would be more careful next time. |
||||
|
||||
 |
All times are GMT - 5 Hours |
|
|
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group