Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026

Man convicted of "child porn" after viewing *animated cartoons*

12467

Comments

  • #92
    token101
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,050 ✭✭✭token101


    This is a bit ridiculous. There's probably plenty of gamers salivating (and maybe more) over the release of GTA 5; a game where you can murder anyone with pretty much any kind of weapon you like! If they did happen to get carried away with the excitement, are they committing a crime now as well? Daft!


  • #93
    up for anything
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,791 ✭✭✭up for anything


    token101 wrote: »
    This is a bit ridiculous. There's probably plenty of gamers salivating (and maybe more) over the release of GTA 5; a game where you can murder anyone with pretty much any kind of weapon you like! If they did happen to get carried away with the excitement, are they committing a crime now as well? Daft!


    It depends on what you mean by getting carried away with the excitement?


  • #94
    Tombi!
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,689 ✭✭✭Tombi!


    up for anything wrote: »
    I am upset about what happened even though it was minimal thanks to my innate sense that it was wrong and that I should get the fuck out of there and never allow myself to be put in the position of being alone with him. For others it wasn't so easy. I am upset that an adult was able to take advantage of so many children. I am upset that people could or would even want to try to rationalise or excuse it in any way.

    I find it strange that you say your were taught that not everyone can help themselves. Is that even to the point of people not being able to stop themselves from behaving in a way injurious to others? That is a get out clause for so many things. "I couldn't help myself raping that 4 month old baby. It's a mental illness which wasn't exacerbated by watching a cartoon depiction of the same act."

    You're not listening to me. I'm not saying it's an excuse to do what you want. I'm saying it's excuse and it should be listened to and dealt with.

    If someone is mentally unstable and rapes a child, we shouldn't say "shoot them and forget it" we should say "lock them up, find out why they did it and try to prevent others from doing the same with the information we got from the psychologists".

    The attitude of child molestors that say "I can't help it" is true. Sometimes they can't help it. But normal people can. You shouldn't have to give up on a person. Some people are complete scum and show no remorse. Don't give those ones a second chance.

    Some honestly just can't help it and deserved to be help.


  • #95
    token101
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,050 ✭✭✭token101


    up for anything wrote: »
    It depends on what you mean by getting carried away with the excitement?

    What do you think I mean? :pac:

    It's a ridiculous case. It's thought crime. This are computer generated images, there's no victims here.


  • #96
    Tombi!
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,689 ✭✭✭Tombi!


    token101 wrote: »
    What do you think I mean? :pac:

    It's a ridiculous case. It's thought crime. This are computer generated images, there's no victims here.

    Alright so long as I'm not the only one who laughed when I killed a cop with a large pink sex toy, I'm okay. :D


  • Advertisement
  • #97
    up for anything
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,791 ✭✭✭up for anything


    token101 wrote: »
    What do you think I mean? :pac:

    It's a ridiculous case. It's thought crime. This are computer generated images, there's no victims here.

    Ah ok. I took it up as them getting carried away by the excitement and going out and emulating screen behaviour.


  • #98
    up for anything
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,791 ✭✭✭up for anything


    Brutal Deluxe wrote: »
    You're not listening to me. I'm not saying it's an excuse to do what you want. I'm saying it's excuse and it should be listened to and dealt with.

    If someone is mentally unstable and rapes a child, we shouldn't say "shoot them and forget it" we should say "lock them up, find out why they did it and try to prevent others from doing the same with the information we got from the psychologists".

    The attitude of child molestors that say "I can't help it" is true. Sometimes they can't help it. But normal people can. You shouldn't have to give up on a person. Some people are complete scum and show no remorse. Don't give those ones a second chance.

    Some honestly just can't help it and deserved to be help.

    Yes, teacher. :(

    For me anyone who just can't help themselves hurting and abusing a child are deserving of very little help and there seems to be very little help that could be given anyway.

    From Encyclopedia of Mental Disorders
    iThe prognosis of successfully ending pedophilic habits among persons who practice pedophilia is not favorable. Pedophiles have a high rate of recidivism; that is, they tend to repeat their acts often over time.

    The rate of prosecution for pedophiles through the criminal justice system has increased in recent years. Pedophiles are at high risk of being beaten or killed by other prison inmates. For this reason, they must often be kept isolated from other members of a prison population. Knowledge of the likelihood of abuse by prison personnel and inmates is not, however, an effective deterrent for most pedophiles.

    That is from the first link I pulled up on the subject to read about paraphilia when it was mentioned earlier on the thread.


  • #99
    Tombi!
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,689 ✭✭✭Tombi!


    up for anything wrote: »
    For me anyone who just can't help themselves hurting and abusing a child are deserving of very little help and there seems to be very little help that could be given anyway.


    That is from the first link I pulled up on the subject to read about paraphilia when it was mentioned earlier on the thread.

    Okay, fine. That's you! I'm sure millions would agree. But we're just going to go back and forward on this. So I get exactly where you're coming from. I feel the same way about someone who touches someone when they're unconcious from drinking too much. They're monsters and should be shot, beaten and left in the town square for mob justice to take care of it.

    That's how you feel about child molestors.

    But here's the thing, we still don't know enough about it as humans. Honestly, there could be just a simple thing we could do to stop it. But the attitude of locking them up and letting them rot doesn't help anyone.
    It doesn't help the victims, it doesn't help the future victims of other child molestors and it doesn't help potential molestors in the future. It just tries to ignore a problem that clearly does not need to be ignored.


  • #100
    Richard Hillman
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,033 ✭✭✭✭Richard Hillman


    Whilst agreeing with what most posters on here have said about the law being a bit silly and we would rather paedos got their kicks out of animated stuff than the real thing. You would also have to look at the scenario of a change in the law. Could you imagine the **** storm that would take place if the government ammended the law to allow such stuff. The opposition would have a field day and the media will go into overdrive. Joe Duffy would explode.


  • #101
    BeerWolf
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,122 ✭✭✭BeerWolf


    Soon, killing in video games is liable of murdering someone!


  • Advertisement
  • #102
    Lone Stone
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,404 ✭✭✭Lone Stone


    Quick arrest the animators !!

    Close down their studio's and parade them on tv for manufacturing and producing a fictitious cartoon with super powers monsters and school girls who may or may not be of a certin age as their age is never disclosed and entirely subject to the viewers imagination and or perception of what it is they are meant to be looking at.


  • #103
    Sinfonia
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,854 ✭✭✭Sinfonia


    *underage* ( . ) ( . ) *underage*


    Ha! Everybody in this thread is now a paedophile, worthy of conviction.


  • #104
    Richard Hillman
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,033 ✭✭✭✭Richard Hillman


    Just reading the article again, he was arrested for looking at "thumbnails" of the videos. So he didnt watch the videos, they were image links to the videos.


  • #105
    cocoshovel
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,036 ✭✭✭cocoshovel


    This genuinly makes me feel quite nervous about what I view online in this ****hole now. To think somebody could be just labelled a pedophile just for doing something like that (ignore his other convictions) is horrible. I think I would consider offing myself if that happened to me. Your entire life would just be destroyed in an instant. Family, friends, the whole country would hate you etc. and honestly, do the Gardai not have REAL PEDOPHILES to go after?

    We've all seen stupidly drawn cartoon porn of minors. I remember back in 1st year of school people were discovering these badly drawn ****e pictures of simpsons porn on their phones, and everyone was amazed by them!

    Those who are a bit more adventurous on the web have ALL wandered into that dodgey hentai board of a specific website, or that certain imgur /r/(or whatever its called). Even when browsing the "normal" porn sites they do pop up every now and then.

    Most people arent into it. A lot of people have viewed it out of pure curiosity. But to convict someone as a pedophile for viewing it just sickening imo. Its NOTHING like real child pornography. Christ almighty.

    Im interested to know where exactly in the law books does it say "viewing drawn images of underage porn is illegal".


  • #106
    Millicent
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,559 ✭✭✭Millicent


    cocoshovel wrote: »
    This genuinly makes me feel quite nervous about what I view online in this ****hole now. To think somebody could be just labelled a pedophile just for doing something like that (ignore his other convictions) is horrible. I think I would consider offing myself if that happened to me. Your entire life you just be destroyed. Family, friends, the whole country would hate you etc.

    To be fair, he was a paedophile before this. You can't really ignore his other convictions in this context.


  • #107
    Tombi!
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,689 ✭✭✭Tombi!


    cocoshovel, he was on bail if I remember right.
    No doubt it was more of a "don't be an idiot" and he was an idiot.


  • #108
    cocoshovel
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,036 ✭✭✭cocoshovel


    Thats why I said ignore his previous convictions.

    Perhaps I over reacted to the sentence, but I read a similar story on RTE about 2 months ago. It makes me wonder that if without previous convictions could someone be convicted for something like this?


  • #109
    Millicent
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,559 ✭✭✭Millicent


    cocoshovel wrote: »
    Thats why I said ignore his previous convictions.

    But you can't. It's pertinent to the discussion. He's inseparable from his convictions and was labelled a paedophile before this sentence. Flouting the terms of your probation/bail and getting done for it is not the same as someone being done for watching a cartoon. He should have been on his best behaviour. I'm guessing that his behaviour was seen by the judge as disrespecting the court's ruling and was thus cracked down on.


  • #110
    LETS BE AVN IT
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 373 ✭✭LETS BE AVN IT


    Computer graphics are getting more realistic every year , what happens when the graphics look very like real humans ? Will people think it's acceptable to look at this stuff then. I think the law did it's job here , if someone on the sex register is looking around porn sites I'm glad he was monitored.


  • #111
    batistuta9
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,697 ✭✭✭batistuta9


    hatrickpatrick wrote: »

    This case really bothers me. Since when does the definition of abuse cover fictional, drawn characters? Who is being harmed in these images, exactly?
    This is straying dangerously away from the "protecting children" angle to the "thought crime" angle. In this particular case, no real human beings were being abused or harmed. Realistic or not, they weren't real. How does that count as a crime?

    I actually find the fact that the court considered this a real crime extremely disturbing. Where does it end, exactly? What if he had been reading x rated stories involving minors? What if someone views a fictional movie depicting adults engaged in an illegal activity, does that count somehow as a crime too? Slippery slop is ridiculously slippery. I can't think of any way to describe this other than "thought crime".

    Opinions from AH?
    hatrickpatrick wrote: »
    To all those saying the sentence is justified because he was convicted, if I get convicted of a bank heist tomorrow should I subsequently be arrested for watching Ocean's 11 or the Italian Job? Both are entirely fictional depictions of heists which never actually happened to any actual human beings.

    You and most other people here don't seem to understand what exactly is considered child pornography - or maybe you do but don't think it should be considered such.

    child pornography can be a photo, video, computer generated image or picture, drawing, cartoon, sculpture, painting, even writings that depicts a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct or the likes


    this is a site with U.S. laws regarding it but i'd say a lot of what's covered under child pornography there is the same in a lot of countries.
    http://www.missingkids.com/missingkids/servlet/PageServlet?PageId=1504


  • Advertisement
  • #112
    batistuta9
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,697 ✭✭✭batistuta9


    LordSmeg wrote: »
    Bit disturbing alright, is watching Jerry smack Tom in the face with a frying pan animal cruelty now :confused:

    No.

    But i'd say that woman - tom's owner, you only see her legs - hitting tom with a brush at times, wouldn't be a million miles away in some peoples eyes.


  • #113
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 25,909 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Millicent wrote: »
    To be fair, he was a paedophile before this. You can't really ignore his other convictions in this context.

    Well generally previous convictions are only used in court at the sentencing stage I thought.


  • #114
    batistuta9
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,697 ✭✭✭batistuta9


    Millicent wrote: »
    But given that he was on a sex offenders list and was being monitored, it gets a bit more murky than that. I would assume he would have been instructed to keep away from any materials or images linked to the abuse of children.

    As I said, I'm in two minds. At least he wasn't complicit in children being harmed but he wasn't being whiter than white either. Again, some treatment would be in order, I would think, to help him deal with those impulses.

    What are you basing that on though? I don't know that I would agree that paedophilia is innate. I can't find any studies to suggest either way at the moment either.
    Millicent wrote: »
    Ah no, I know you're not trying to defend it. Don't worry. :)

    I just wonder is innate or learned. A massive proportion of paedophiles have been abused themselves. That would suggest to me that it is learned as are other fetishes.
    Millicent wrote: »
    See this I most strongly agree with. I think paedophiles are ****ed up people who need help.

    you seem to think it can be cured or something they learn. maybe it is something that is brought on by a abuse experience but you'll have to take my word for this as i seen it in a program...

    that when monitoring the brains of different paedophiles whilst viewing images of men, women and children the only time the part of the brain that is stimulated - or whatever it's called - by attraction showed any reaction at all was when the image was that of a child, nothing what so ever for any other image as if they were asexual

    so how can you cure that? it'd be like trying to cure a homosexual or trying to make a heterosexual person stop being attracted to the opposite gender.


  • #115
    Denise90
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 158 ✭✭Denise90


    My worry here is that they have taken away the one safe(to children) outlet this person had that "gratified" him. Does he try to find a new (or old) way to act out his fantasies? Everyone would like to think that being punished would alleviate him of his problems but we know that isn't true for the most part. Worse yet, he may become more creative.


  • #116
    Ellis Dee
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,510 ✭✭✭Ellis Dee


    Richard Hillman wrote: »
    --- Could you imagine the **** storm that would take place if the government amended the law to allow such stuff. The opposition would have a field day and the media will go into overdrive. Joe Duffy would explode.

    I'm just having a delightful vision of that happening - literally, with bits of him flying all over Dublin.:D:D:D

    I suppose that makes me guilty of some pretty major-league thought crime in addition to wishful thinking.:)


  • #117
    CodyJarrett
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 307 ✭✭CodyJarrett


    Won't somebody please think of the ink.


  • #118
    Crooked Jack
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,679 ✭✭✭Crooked Jack


    Sinfonia wrote: »
    *underage* ( . ) ( . ) *underage*


    Ha! Everybody in this thread is now a paedophile, worthy of conviction.

    No way those bad boys are underage. They are clearly the product of the long trek through puberty and a womanly dose of oestrogen.


  • #119
    smash
    Closed Accounts Posts: 34,808 ✭✭✭✭smash


    I watched Rambo last night... does that make me an accessory to 500 fake murders?


  • #120
    Millicent
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,559 ✭✭✭Millicent


    batistuta9 wrote: »
    you seem to think it can be cured or something they learn. maybe it is something that is brought on by a abuse experience but you'll have to take my word for this as i seen it in a program...

    that when monitoring the brains of different paedophiles whilst viewing images of men, women and children the only time the part of the brain that is stimulated - or whatever it's called - by attraction showed any reaction at all was when the image was that of a child, nothing what so ever for any other image as if they were asexual

    so how can you cure that? it'd be like trying to cure a homosexual or trying to make a heterosexual person stop being attracted to the opposite gender.

    A person's brain function can change over time in response to different events. That doesn't mean the change has to be permanent or that paedophilia is biological. As someone else posted, it is a paraphilia meaning it is a learned sexual preference. Anything learned can be unlearned with enough work and will.


  • Advertisement
  • #121
    wilkie2006
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,053 ✭✭✭wilkie2006


    humbert wrote: »
    I think it crosses the line between harming children and committing thought crime.

    Humbert?

    Humbert Humbert?


Advertisement
Advertisement