Forum - View topic
NEWS: Virginia Court Convicts Man for Violating Supervised Release Terms With 'Anime Child Pornograp


Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next

Note: this is the discussion thread for this article

Anime News Network Forum Index -> Site-related -> Talkback
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Tuor_of_Gondolin
Team GurrenTeam Gurren


Joined: 20 Apr 2009
Posts: 3292
Location: Bellevue, WA
PostPosted: Tue Jan 22, 2019 7:02 pm Reply with quote
Lines on paper are real people, yo!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail My Anime
chronos02



Joined: 25 Feb 2009
Posts: 191
PostPosted: Tue Jan 22, 2019 7:22 pm Reply with quote
If I am to understand what is said in the article, someone who was previously convited for possessing art depicting fictional characters that were "minors" in lewd activities, has now been sentenced to 20 years of imprisonment for searching some new images of fictional characters that again can be considered as "minors" conducting lewd acts.

LOL

This isn't justice, it's the firggin inquisition of the 21st century.

And gods, there are still laws with terms as stupid as "average person" and "reasonable person"? That's too vague, who determines what an "average person" is like? It's like talking about "normal", nothing is "normal", ffs.

Oh, and then we get murderers sentenced to 5 years and going out after 1 because of "good behavior", or polititans that stole millions and never return them, to only get sentenced for a few years, but not going to jail in the end because "reasons".
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
micah007



Joined: 25 Jan 2017
Posts: 46
PostPosted: Tue Jan 22, 2019 7:28 pm Reply with quote
Child Pornography?

Sickening. Hope he gets mental help.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Sir Daniel Fortesque



Joined: 04 Jul 2013
Posts: 219
PostPosted: Tue Jan 22, 2019 7:32 pm Reply with quote
Imagine having such a cognitive dissonance that you defend child pornography... No, drawings aren't real but who in their right mind searches for even fictional stories about little children in sexual situations and thinks there's nothing wrong with it?

Lock creeps like that up.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
harminia



Joined: 24 Aug 2015
Posts: 917
Location: australia
PostPosted: Tue Jan 22, 2019 7:34 pm Reply with quote
Quote:
Elmer Emmanuel Eychaner III

surely he wasn't born with that name
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Lactobacillus yogurti



Joined: 17 Aug 2011
Posts: 536
Location: In your yogurt.
PostPosted: Tue Jan 22, 2019 7:44 pm Reply with quote
May he rot in jail.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
rinmackie



Joined: 05 Aug 2006
Posts: 1040
Location: in a van! down by the river!
PostPosted: Tue Jan 22, 2019 7:45 pm Reply with quote
So, did his first conviction involve actual children or was it drawn images?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
kotomikun



Joined: 06 May 2013
Posts: 566
PostPosted: Tue Jan 22, 2019 7:47 pm Reply with quote
Oh boy, here we go again.

Obscenity laws are seriously wacky. If you're trying to decide whether to send someone to prison based on whether a piece of media has artistic merit, you've already tumbled way down a slippery slope; something went wrong at the very beginning of whatever led to this situation. It really seems like these cases are driven more by the fusion-dance of our societal sex-phobia and obsession with protecting children, and not really by a reasoned plan to, er, protect children, even though that's ostensibly the purpose.

Since we're already on a slippery slope, though--moving from prosecution for (digital) possession to prosecution for a Google search--we might as well take it further. Criminalize BDSM, for sometimes involving rape fantasies. Criminalize sex toys for being involved in BDSM. Criminalize watching anything involving any of those things. I mean, I think Goblin Slayer is a load of misogynistic schlock, but I don't think anyone should be punished for watching it. For some reason, in certain categories, we've decided to ignore the general rule that you should only take people to court for either actually doing a bad thing to another person, or making unambiguous plans to do so. Anything beyond that is thoughtcrime, and there are numerous good and (normally) obvious reasons why we shouldn't go there. Trials punish the wrong person often enough without going into the hypothetical realm.

I don't approve of people making that sort of content. But jailing people just for looking at it isn't the answer. A better understanding of the psychology behind it would help, but because it's treated like evil-inducing Kyptonite for the human lizard-brain, it's a bit difficult for us to learn anything about it.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Hellsoldier



Joined: 21 Jun 2013
Posts: 456
Location: Porto,Portugal,Europe,Earth,Sol
PostPosted: Tue Jan 22, 2019 7:48 pm Reply with quote
Part 1 - Illustrated Child Pornography, no matter what you may think of it, is not made by harming children.

Part 2 - So the court decided to forbid even the visualization of porn involving consenting adults?

Part 3 - Possession of Real Child Pornography is really, really bad. But I do have to ask: Since he simply possessed it, rather than making it, is 10 years a penalty worth giving, rather than therapy? I don't care about the blowback or people feeling triggered by my question, I have to ask.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Yttrbio
SubscriberSubscriber


Joined: 09 Jun 2011
Posts: 3162
PostPosted: Tue Jan 22, 2019 7:52 pm Reply with quote
Sir Daniel Fortesque wrote:
Imagine having such a cognitive dissonance that you defend child pornography... No, drawings aren't real but who in their right mind searches for even fictional stories about little children in sexual situations and thinks there's nothing wrong with it?

Lock creeps like that up.
I suppose some people find little cognitive dissonance in the idea that it isn't just to bring the power of the state to imprison people who are 'not in their right mind,' are 'creeps,' or engage in behavior that has 'something wrong with it,' absent a finding that they've actually harmed someone.

I don't see anything in the article about this guy's original conviction, so maybe that part did involve harming kids, and you can draw a line from that to the restrictions he faced after release. But that doesn't seem to be what bothers you. You think it's outrageous for someone to raise an eyebrow at someone being locked away for being found to be a "bad person."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
CorneredAngel



Joined: 17 Jun 2002
Posts: 815
Location: New York, NY
PostPosted: Tue Jan 22, 2019 7:55 pm Reply with quote
rinmackie wrote:
So, did his first conviction involve actual children or was it drawn images?


I believe the original conviction did involve images of actual children.

"in December 2007, Eychaner pled guilty to Possession of Material Containing Child Pornography. In March 2008, he was sentenced to 120 months imprisonment and a term of lifetime supervision. See Judgment, United States v. Eychaner, No. 2:07cr183 (E.D. Va. Mar. 13, 2008), ECF No. 30."

I don't have access to the files right now, but will double-check tomorrow.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address
R315r4z0r



Joined: 30 Aug 2007
Posts: 679
PostPosted: Tue Jan 22, 2019 7:56 pm Reply with quote
Can someone explain to me how a drawing can be a "minor?"
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message My Anime
gloverrandal



Joined: 20 May 2014
Posts: 357
PostPosted: Tue Jan 22, 2019 8:03 pm Reply with quote
Sir Daniel Fortesque wrote:
Imagine having such a cognitive dissonance that you defend child pornography... No, drawings aren't real but who in their right mind searches for even fictional stories about little children in sexual situations and thinks there's nothing wrong with it?

Lock creeps like that up.


A blanket statement like this would essentially result in any mangaka who's drawn an underage character naked would be arrested, including legends such as Osamu Tezuka and Akira Toriyama. It also means any fanartists who have drawn erotic art of a good number of popular anime properties would also be arrested. My artist friend is a very big Kingdom Hearts fan, and she would be arrested based on this criteria given characters like Sora and Riku are under the age of 18.

I am very glad the law does not agree with statements like this.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
#891509



Joined: 11 Jan 2019
Posts: 37
PostPosted: Tue Jan 22, 2019 8:06 pm Reply with quote
Quote:
However, the court did dismiss a fourth count against Eychaner. Under this count, Eychaner would have received an additional term of imprisonment for his conviction on any "felony offense involving a minor" because he was already required to register as a sex offender. The prosecutors argued this wording can refer to both actual and non-actual minors, but the court ruled that the "involving a minor" element was not met as no actual minors were involved.


Smart judge. Not so smart prosecutor.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
CorneredAngel



Joined: 17 Jun 2002
Posts: 815
Location: New York, NY
PostPosted: Tue Jan 22, 2019 8:08 pm Reply with quote
R315r4z0r wrote:
Can someone explain to me how a drawing can be a "minor?"


Under current U.S. law, it's not that the drawing is "a minor" that makes it illegal. What's illegal is an "an image depicting minors engaged in sexually explicit conduct and is obscene."

Yes, there are some nuances (does the drawing have artistic merit, that kind of thing, but that's for the jury or the judge to decide).
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address
Display posts from previous:   
Reply to topic    Anime News Network Forum Index -> Site-related -> Talkback All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Page 1 of 4

 


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group