The best in arts & entertainment, news, pop culture, and your mom since 2002.

[Total: 22    Average: 3.9/5]
54 Comments - View/Add
Hits: 15094
Rating: 3.9
Category: Misc
Date: 07/14/11 07:55 AM

54 Responses to Convicted Felon Allowed to View Child Porn In Jail

  1. Profile photo of kitteh9lives
    kitteh9lives Female 70 & Over
    8044 posts
    July 13, 2011 at 9:32 pm
    Link: Convicted Felon Allowed to View Child Porn In Jail - A legal loophole is allowing a Washington state man accused of child sex crimes to view child pornography while in jail.
  2. Profile photo of Angelmassb
    Angelmassb Male 18-29
    15511 posts
    July 14, 2011 at 8:05 am


  3. Profile photo of iGamer
    iGamer Male 18-29
    192 posts
    July 14, 2011 at 8:10 am
    I thought too hard about what kind of loop hole would exist to allow that. . . so simple...
  4. Profile photo of CodeJockey
    CodeJockey Male 40-49
    5611 posts
    July 14, 2011 at 8:23 am
    They`re making it out like he`s jerking off to videos while in prison.

    He has access to the evidence being used against him.
    Change the law about that an mistrials would skyrocket.

    If anything, the problem is that he`s being hovered over by a guard and may not be allowed to view the evidence under the same conditions as he would if he weren`t representing himself.

    Non-story is non-story.
  5. Profile photo of Ajikan
    Ajikan Male 18-29
    1526 posts
    July 14, 2011 at 8:25 am
    So wrong I lol`d.
  6. Profile photo of slut_etta
    slut_etta Female 50-59
    3849 posts
    July 14, 2011 at 8:27 am
    so he gets to watch his victims on video tape that he shot and then go back to his cell and relive all his sick fantasies?

    why is he not in federal prison serving out his 20 years?

    and why do we coddle people like this? if you knowingly abuse/exploit a kid you should be taken out and shot twice behind the ear. no reprieve, no appeals, no throwing yourself on the mercy of the court. just die, you filthy scum.

    and don`t bother writing in to chastise me on my opinion.
  7. Profile photo of Oystah
    Oystah Female 40-49
    4032 posts
    July 14, 2011 at 8:28 am
    How awkward for the guard...
  8. Profile photo of Gottamgear
    Gottamgear Male 18-29
    670 posts
    July 14, 2011 at 8:28 am
    He gets to view child porn `he filmed himself`?! You can`t tell me he isn`t enjoying it. He probably decided to represent himself just so he could review the evidence over and over and over again. Sick child molesting F#CK!
  9. Profile photo of bliznik
    bliznik Male 30-39
    838 posts
    July 14, 2011 at 8:37 am
    I agree with CodeJockey. How the heck could you prevent this? Not allow defendants to review their own evidence? So if anyone is ever accused of anything obscene (pedophilia, rape, murder, etc.) they`re not allowed to watch any material related to the act that they`re accused of?

    Not that I support the guy watching videos and stroking himself (if that`s actually what he`s doing...doubtful, but it could be true), but if that`s the cost of allowing defendants the chance to review evidence, then I think that`s a worthwhile cost.
  10. Profile photo of NotTHATbored
    NotTHATbored Female 18-29
    1101 posts
    July 14, 2011 at 8:45 am
    This is disgusting and totally violates the victims rights! I don`t disagree that being able to review the evidence brought against you is an important right, BUT there should be some sort of law that requires a reason or a hypothesis of what you hope to find or be able to prove - by viewing the evidence IF IT IS OBSCENE. Maybe he should be granted a specific number of reviews before he has to go before a judge to get permission to review it again. I don`t think that would be a violation of his rights.

    It`s just sick to let this happen.
  11. Profile photo of CodeJockey
    CodeJockey Male 40-49
    5611 posts
    July 14, 2011 at 8:45 am
    "why is he not in federal prison serving out his 20 years? "
    That`s the thing: He is ALREADY doing 25 YEARS in the clink.
    They are using the same evidence to go after him in a different court for similar but different charges.
    If someone was already convicted, at what point do charges become excessive?
    At what point does someone consider the expense of additional trials?
  12. Profile photo of madest
    madest Male 40-49
    7378 posts
    July 14, 2011 at 8:53 am
    I like it. You can`t take away constitutional rights because it`s offensive. This man has not yet been convicted and in America we are innocent until proven guilty. When he is found guilty then his rights will be taken away. Until then he should be afforded every right every other American is granted.
  13. Profile photo of paperduck
    paperduck Male 18-29
    1745 posts
    July 14, 2011 at 8:59 am
    This law and the judge involved is dumb. why is *watching* the videos considered reviewing the evidence? Can a lawyer be allowed to suffocate someone with sock if he`s representing someone who is charged with suffocating someone with a sock, to review whether that works or not?

    There`s got to be a law somewhere that says you can`t "review" a crime by committing that crime again.
  14. Profile photo of Rick_S
    Rick_S Male 40-49
    3282 posts
    July 14, 2011 at 9:29 am
    "why is *watching* the videos considered reviewing the evidence?"

    Because he filmed some of it himself. His lawyer has to be ready to defend him against accusations arising from those tapes. To do that, his lawyer must know what`s on those tapes. Since he`s his own lawyer, he must watch the tapes to know what is on them, so he can defend against them.

    Personally, I think that if they were confiscated from him, he knows whats on them already, and they shouldn`t be viewed again.

    Also, a quick and easy way to stop him from viewing them is not to use them as evidence in the trial. If the prosecution decides not to admit them as evidence, he doesn`t need to view them. They must contain some key evidence against him.
  15. Profile photo of Calieb
    Calieb Male 18-29
    55 posts
    July 14, 2011 at 9:38 am
    as disturbing as it is i agree with madest " You can`t take away constitutional rights because it`s offensive."
  16. Profile photo of highonhuffin
    highonhuffin Male 40-49
    180 posts
    July 14, 2011 at 9:47 am
    @madest&Calieb : go on supporting this scumbags rights. Maybe the two of you share his perversion?

    Gilbert, who appears in several of the videos, was charged with child rape, child molestation and sexual exploitation of a minor in 2007, after the brother of two alleged victims called police, ABC News reported.
    Investigators seized from Gilbert`s possession more than 100 DVDs containing 28 hours of pornographic footage, komonews.com reported.
    Witnesses told ABC News that Gilbert, 50, would give the boys alcohol and spank their bare buttocks. In several cases, prosecutors told ABC, Gilbert allegedly engaged the teens in masturbation, oral sex and anal sex.
  17. Profile photo of MrPeabody
    MrPeabody Male 30-39
    1920 posts
    July 14, 2011 at 10:13 am
    @highonhuffin
    "Maybe the two of you share his perversion?" Accusing people making a valid point makes you look like an ass.

    In order to guarantee everyone equal rights, you unfortunately have to give them to scumbags too.
    Just remember the rights you would so quickly deny this man (as disgusting as what he is doing is) could them be just as easily taken from you.
  18. Profile photo of BigDaddyJeff
    BigDaddyJeff Male 40-49
    368 posts
    July 14, 2011 at 10:24 am
    @paperduck - why is *watching* the videos considered reviewing the evidence? ***because the evidence against him, that he had sex with the boys, is on the video***
    - Can a lawyer be allowed to suffocate someone with sock if he`s representing someone who is charged with suffocating someone with a sock, to review whether that works or not? *** No, because the crime is not if it `works` obviously it worked but if there was a video of the accused showing him suffocating the victim with a sock then the lawyer would absolutely be allowed to watch that.
    They are not allowing him to have sex with the kids again to `review the crime` they are allowing him to review the evidence that will be used against him so he might make a defense. Now obviously we all know he just wants a chance to relive what he did but unfortunately his rights do have to be upheld no matter how disgusting that may be.
    I once got a ticket from a red light camera, I go tot view the video so I could make a defen
  19. Profile photo of madest
    madest Male 40-49
    7378 posts
    July 14, 2011 at 10:46 am
    @highonhuffin, Yeah sure. Anybody who cares about their own constitutional rights must be a pedophile. You have the logic of a fruit smoothie.
  20. Profile photo of Altaru
    Altaru Male 18-29
    3483 posts
    July 14, 2011 at 10:47 am
    Alright. Let him review all the "evidence" he needs to.

    But when it`s all over and done with, and he has no defense because everyone can clearly see that he committed the crime, put a f*cking bullet in his skull rather than keeping the sicko around.

    Not only does it cost the hard-working moral citizens money to give this freak three hots and a cot every day for however many years he gets, but if he survives until his sentence is up, he can get out of jail and start doing it again, like that one freak that, despite having been in and out of jail countless times, just keeps going around and drinking little boy`s piss.
  21. Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    32785 posts
    July 14, 2011 at 10:49 am
    Declare him a "dangerous offender" and lock him up forever: no appeals no need to view the "evidence". And it`s perfectly legal!

    Declare him criminally insane, that makes him unfit to be his own lawyer and he cannot review the "evidence" any longer. Also perfectly legal!

    Place an order from the Judge that the evidence is sealed and cannot be reviewed by ANYONE. Also legal, it`s been done hundreds of times.

    C`mon America! Smarten up and shut this nonsense down!
  22. Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    32785 posts
    July 14, 2011 at 10:52 am
    @madest - champion of human rights... for those he agrees with!

    Tea Party: Arrest them all! Shoot them in the street! How dare they oppose Obama!
    Convicted pedophile: He has EVERY RIGHT to watch child porn!

    Nice!
  23. Profile photo of CodeJockey
    CodeJockey Male 40-49
    5611 posts
    July 14, 2011 at 10:52 am
    "Personally, I think that if they were confiscated from him, he knows whats on them already"
    That`s an assumption. A person needs full access and has to be able to discuss it in detail with witnesses.

    It is >alleged< that he is the videos.
    He can refute that allegation and the prosecution has to convince a jury of his presence in the videos as well as WHY and WHAT he was was doing. That being said, the jury has to view the videos also.

    Most everyone involved will view the videos.
    That`s why I said it`s non-news.
  24. Profile photo of CodeJockey
    CodeJockey Male 40-49
    5611 posts
    July 14, 2011 at 11:00 am
    "Place an order from the Judge that the evidence is sealed and cannot be reviewed by ANYONE."
    Cats, you can shield evidence from anyone not involved in the trial (press.)
    This is a new trial apart from his previous conviction. He still needs access.
  25. Profile photo of avalon
    avalon Male 18-29
    187 posts
    July 14, 2011 at 11:02 am
    AMERICA...facepalm.
  26. Profile photo of paddy215
    paddy215 Male 18-29
    1677 posts
    July 14, 2011 at 11:05 am
    Innocent until proven guilty. If you take this right away from one man you`ll be doing it to everyone else. This individual case is drated up, obviously, but just calm down safe in the knowledge that this man is going to spend a very long time in a prison full of very violent people who hate pedo`s.
  27. Profile photo of jinxiejae
    jinxiejae Female 30-39
    2927 posts
    July 14, 2011 at 11:47 am
    isnt child porn in itself a crime? what the hell? so you going to let a crack dealer make crack in his cell? what about the poor kids in said porn? this is f*cked up!!
  28. Profile photo of Gerry1of1
    Gerry1of1 Male 50-59
    36653 posts
    July 14, 2011 at 11:58 am

    WHAT!!?

    A man on trial is allowed to review the evidence against him!

    This is an outrage!

    grow up people
  29. Profile photo of basketkase
    basketkase Male 18-29
    1183 posts
    July 14, 2011 at 12:06 pm
    its not really a legal loophole... its just how the law works.
  30. Profile photo of jendrian
    jendrian Male 18-29
    2516 posts
    July 14, 2011 at 12:20 pm
    @Gerry1of1

    WHAT!!?

    A man on trial is allowed to wank to child porn he shot himself?

    Why should we outrage?

    Avalon`s faceplant is seconded
  31. Profile photo of NATattack
    NATattack Female 18-29
    285 posts
    July 14, 2011 at 12:43 pm
    IT is what it is. I think its horrible and sad for these kids but he has a legal right to do this and if we take it away from him we take the right to view evidence from everyone else.
  32. Profile photo of Swaywithme
    Swaywithme Female 18-29
    3696 posts
    July 14, 2011 at 1:13 pm
    Throw him in gen pop- He`ll get his.
  33. Profile photo of BostonKaiser
    BostonKaiser Male 40-49
    1185 posts
    July 14, 2011 at 1:18 pm
    I`m pretty sure he already knows what`s on the tapes, since they were HIS collection to begin with!
  34. Profile photo of Anger
    Anger Male 18-29
    218 posts
    July 14, 2011 at 1:33 pm
    facepalm @ jendrian`s "faceplant"
  35. Profile photo of Jade_Phoenix
    Jade_Phoenix Female 18-29
    407 posts
    July 14, 2011 at 1:50 pm
    What tha F*CK?? I swear...this is why I am going to move to New Guinea and become the new God of a tribe of pygmies. I would be worshiped and adored and they would bring me gifts of woven clothing and animal sacrifices.
  36. Profile photo of QualityJay
    QualityJay Male 18-29
    303 posts
    July 14, 2011 at 2:10 pm
    Agree with paddy, Gerry, Basketcase, NATattack
  37. Profile photo of Fatninja01
    Fatninja01 Male 30-39
    25420 posts
    July 14, 2011 at 2:24 pm
    thats pretty fd up.. be careful he might be on IAB
  38. Profile photo of plastinum
    plastinum Male 30-39
    329 posts
    July 14, 2011 at 3:15 pm
    Not cool BUT the news is spinning it like he is sitting in jail looking up child porn on the internet and that is not true, he is looking at evidence that happens to be child porn that he owned...he already saw it. Now yes this time it is pretty messed up but the courts will attempt to stop people from representing themselves and seeing the evidence..there won`t be a clause to let people represent themselves and see evidence as long as it is not pornographic. The point being that in THIS case yes it is a crappy situation but changing the laws over 1 case will result in many people who won`t be able to view evidence when representing themselves. The government lives for little hot button issues like this because it gets people fired up and people act irrationally allowing the government to go behind our backs and change the laws so they screw us all!
  39. Profile photo of Angilion
    Angilion Male 40-49
    12387 posts
    July 14, 2011 at 5:04 pm
    In order to guarantee everyone equal rights, you unfortunately have to give them to scumbags too.

    That`s it in a nutshell.

    Either you keep these ideas:

    Innocent unless proven guilty in a court of law.
    A fair trial including review of the evidence.

    or you discard them and accept the numerous massive injustices that will result.

    Arguing that they should apply to some people but not to others just doesn`t cut it. They`re principles that either apply to everyone all of the time or they`re worthless.

    @highonhuffin: Clearly you`re opposed to those principles. Maybe you want to lynch people instead of having a criminal justice system that inconveniently gets in the way of you torturing people to death for your own pleasure?

    How do you like your style of argument being applied to yourself?
  40. Profile photo of sbeelz
    sbeelz Male 30-39
    2868 posts
    July 14, 2011 at 5:29 pm
    It`s already been said a bunch of times here- as disturbing as this is, we can`t take his right to adequate legal defense away because we wish not to be disturbed. Angilion, Madest, Gerry etc hit the nail on the head.
  41. Profile photo of sbeelz
    sbeelz Male 30-39
    2868 posts
    July 14, 2011 at 5:33 pm
    BTW- how does the prosecutor propose to "change the law" in order to stop this kind of thing from happening? Take away people`s right to defend themselves in court, or take away attorneys` right to review evidence?
  42. Profile photo of NotTHATbored
    NotTHATbored Female 18-29
    1101 posts
    July 14, 2011 at 6:42 pm
    @sbleez

    Why not just pass a law that requires the defendant to go before a judge and provide a reason, or a hypothesis of what they hope to find or be able to prove by viewing the evidence if it is obscene after say 5 guaranteed reviews? I don`t think that would be a violation of the defendants rights. It`s a violation of the victims rights to continue to let them be exploited.
  43. Profile photo of Subushie
    Subushie Male 18-29
    1646 posts
    July 14, 2011 at 8:22 pm
    what a sleazebag. It`s alright; he`ll get his fill of rapage in jail. I`m sure he`ll be put away alot longer this time.
  44. Profile photo of Subushie
    Subushie Male 18-29
    1646 posts
    July 14, 2011 at 8:28 pm
    @sbeelz, they will have to make a specific amendment that stops this kind of behavior. when there are sensitive materials involved; that satiate the lust of the defendant in ways that break the law, simply cannot be allowed.

    Seriously though, laws aren`t the word of Allah, when poo like this happens it shouldn`t be this hard to go to a judge and put a stop to this type of thing from happening.
  45. Profile photo of Jackson13W
    Jackson13W Male 30-39
    155 posts
    July 14, 2011 at 8:53 pm
    my solace lies in three facts.
    1: he`s getting piles of media coverage.
    2: prisoners watch television.
    3: even prisoners hate molesters
    this problem will solve itself.
  46. Profile photo of intrigid
    intrigid Male 18-29
    914 posts
    July 14, 2011 at 10:31 pm
    I am so sick of neo-cons finding any excuse they can to strip away individual freedoms and constitutional rights all because of a few bad apples.
  47. Profile photo of username3415
    username3415 Male 18-29
    362 posts
    July 14, 2011 at 11:11 pm
    that guy is smart!
  48. Profile photo of cubzrulz23
    cubzrulz23 Male 18-29
    61 posts
    July 15, 2011 at 1:49 am
    ummm no this is just not right, some times u gotta say fu ck the law there is no way this should be happening
  49. Profile photo of Angilion
    Angilion Male 40-49
    12387 posts
    July 15, 2011 at 2:47 am
    ummm no this is just not right, some times u gotta say fu ck the law there is no way this should be happening

    There are many situations where there is no option that is completely right all of the time.

    You have to look at which option is the least wrong.

    I argue that presumption of innocence and the right to review evidence is the least wrong option.

    You want to remove those two principles from your country`s legal system. I argue that would cause far more harm to far more people than having them does, therefore your choice would be more wrong.
  50. Profile photo of xCYBERDYNEx
    xCYBERDYNEx Male 18-29
    4903 posts
    July 15, 2011 at 5:05 am
    @Jackson13W, indeed, let him have his jollies now, once he gets to gen pop this guy is going to be every guy on the cell block`s housewife.
  51. Profile photo of MountainBord
    MountainBord Female 18-29
    1894 posts
    July 15, 2011 at 11:00 am
    hes definitely not guilty
  52. Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    32785 posts
    July 15, 2011 at 3:31 pm
    Cats, you can shield evidence from anyone not involved in the trial (press.)
    This is a new trial apart from his previous conviction. He still needs access.

    @CodeJockey: I`m thinking of Sirhan Sirhan, the guy who "allegedly" shot RFK. He pled guilty to avoid the death penalty, then tried to change his plea.
    The judge refused to let him change it, gave him life and sealed ALL the evidence. In all his appeals he was never allowed to see a single bit of evidence against him.
    idk if that`s normal, but I`m thinking it would take an order from a higher court to un-seal evidence, not likely in this case, eh?
  53. Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    32785 posts
    July 15, 2011 at 3:36 pm
    this is why I am going to move to New Guinea and become the new God of a tribe of pygmies.
    @Jade_Phoenix: Pygmies live in Africa (mostly) iirc. New Guinea has headhunters, cannibals and lots of Christian Missionaries.

    Well blow my lips off! I Wikied it and they DO live there! Have fun JP! Don`t forget to post pictures of your temple & stuff!
  54. Profile photo of sweatpeanis
    sweatpeanis Female 18-29
    418 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 1:25 pm
    What a drating loser

Leave a Reply