On mySimon: Battlestar Galactica The Complete Series
BNET Business Network:
BNET
TechRepublic
ZDNet
TalkBack 19 of 34:
Next »
« Previous
True, True...
but you also have to take into consideration that there was at least one other person residing in the house, whose name was very similar to the person who sent the porn in the first place, and it would have been relatively easy to leave a CD where it could be found. In the end, it was probably easier for the man charged to plead guilty, and get a lighter sentence, rather than contest the charges, and wind up in jail for a much longer period. Yes, I believe that a miscarriage of justice has most likely happened, but how can you prove it? I remember a case a few months ago, where a person was dismissed from work for being in possession of illicit material. It was on his computer, in a shared area, so anyone could have placed it there that had access to the share, and it would have been relatively easy to ensure that the files that were there were in the person's name, and not somebody else's, but that wasn't all. The office in which this person worked was rather lax about security policies, and anyone in the office could have committed the offense. Then there was the case, that another judge, disallowed evidence that showed that the accused was absent when the alleged offense occurred, because, he said, "The accused could have set things up on his computer so that the material was downloaded in his absence." So, it has now reached the point, that if any criminal proceedings arise as a result of computer use, you may as well plead guilty at the start, and hope that you receive a light sentence, because there is no way that you will be found not guilty.

Unfortunately, when it comes to such things as child porn, pedophilia, and related matters, many people, not just law enforcement officials, are absolutely convinced that you are guilty, even when there is little or no evidence to support that conclusion.
Posted by: RealAusTech   Posted on: 04/18/07 You are currently: a Guest | Members login | Terms of Use

Alert moderator to an offensive message

Subscribe to this discussion via Email or RSS

Guilty or not, he's guilty of  bjbrock | 04/18/07
Destruction of Email  mighetto | 04/18/07
Americans demand what?  jhand47201 | 04/22/07
Some police do understand these issues, or at least listen  jscully@... | 04/18/07
I thank you for educating them....  el1jones | 04/18/07
modern day witch hunt  conspicuouschick | 04/18/07
Child Porn is extremely nasty...  JohnBoyTheGreat | 04/18/07
RE: "looking at something"  mikebellman | 04/19/07
no you don't have to seek it out  jhand47201 | 04/22/07
Thank you indead  mighetto | 04/18/07
"Possession" as crime is a crock  stormculture | 04/18/07
Absolutely right!  JohnBoyTheGreat | 04/18/07
very dense housing  JJohnson@... | 04/18/07
This will limit open WIFI use  sstevens@... | 04/18/07
Government supplied what?  markdean | 04/18/07
but when it's YOUR property  nancyjones36507@... | 01/17/08
Will be a problem  mames1701 | 04/18/07
Open WiFi doesn't put physical media in the house.  felix52 | 04/18/07
True, True...  RealAusTech | 04/18/07
another question  conspicuouschick | 04/18/07
Can't this type of info be spoofed?  frankv@... | 04/18/07
it happened to me  jhand47201 | 04/22/07
WiFi blame is misplaced  intrepi@... | 04/18/07
Partly right  markdean | 04/18/07
No one is Blaming The WiFi  frankv@... | 04/18/07
Kiddie Porn  GeneBuettner | 04/18/07
this is  KingSatan | 04/18/07
Guilty of bad legal advise?  jc williams | 04/18/07
The issue isn't whether he actually had porn  Jack&Jill | 04/18/07
Where is the harm.  joe6pack_z | 04/18/07
How did you hurt anybody?  G Fedorchuk | 04/25/07
Blackmail  Mnighthawk | 04/18/07
RE: The harm - children and sex  mikebellman | 04/19/07
Here's the problem...  backwards | 10/20/07

What do you think?

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

advertisement
advertisement

SmartPlanet

Click Here