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

[Total: 22    Average: 2.8/5]
50 Comments - View/Add
Hits: 21730
Rating: 2.8
Category: Funny
Date: 10/04/11 09:04 AM

50 Responses to Does This Man Look Like A Child Molester? [Pic]

  1. Profile photo of orange_panty
    orange_panty Female 18-29
    596 posts
    October 4, 2011 at 9:06 am
    Link: Does This Man Look Like A Child Molester? - According to the Sudbury Star newspaper, the answer is... maybe?
  2. Profile photo of schuey63
    schuey63 Male 18-29
    179 posts
    October 4, 2011 at 9:12 am
    he doesn`t look 39 to me, Photo fail!
  3. Profile photo of MrHoobToYou
    MrHoobToYou Male 40-49
    405 posts
    October 4, 2011 at 9:14 am
    How is it "maybe". He pled guilty and got 90 days.
  4. Profile photo of Birdfather
    Birdfather Male 18-29
    346 posts
    October 4, 2011 at 9:17 am
    According to the paper, it`s definitely.
  5. Profile photo of elderban
    elderban Male 30-39
    390 posts
    October 4, 2011 at 9:18 am
    Whether or not the man pictured is a pedo, why did the man in the article itself only get 90 days?
  6. Profile photo of DrCat
    DrCat Male 30-39
    70 posts
    October 4, 2011 at 9:22 am
    newspaper editing lesson #1:
    Make the picture on the front page match the headline & not be related to some other story.

    I wonder how many times this poor clown got harassed because of this stuff up.
  7. Profile photo of Burguntea01
    Burguntea01 Male 18-29
    41 posts
    October 4, 2011 at 9:29 am
    that isn`t the child molester... (I suppose I`m going to get shouted out my man i-am-boreders for not realizing the sarcasm?)
  8. Profile photo of Raicuparta
    Raicuparta Male 18-29
    137 posts
    October 4, 2011 at 9:30 am
    I feel like some people who cmomented didn`t get it. This was bad editing, the picture doesn`t relate to the headline (you can see on top of the picture that it is in another category than the headline).
  9. Profile photo of ashyboomstik
    ashyboomstik Male 30-39
    133 posts
    October 4, 2011 at 9:30 am
    I thought that was Patch Adams!!!
  10. Profile photo of schuey63
    schuey63 Male 18-29
    179 posts
    October 4, 2011 at 9:34 am
    also why are we only just seeing this now? April 5th... finger way off the pulse there buddy!
  11. Profile photo of Rick_S
    Rick_S Male 40-49
    3291 posts
    October 4, 2011 at 9:54 am
    "I wonder how many times this poor clown got harassed because of this stuff up."

    I wonder how much money he`s going to get in the settlement. I would certainly contact a lawyer, because you know the correction will be buried somewhere in the paper and be a little one liner that no-one reads.

  12. Profile photo of Birdfather
    Birdfather Male 18-29
    346 posts
    October 4, 2011 at 9:59 am
    Ah. I see it now.

    RACHEL PUNCH. What a great name.
  13. Profile photo of DrProfessor
    DrProfessor Male 18-29
    3894 posts
    October 4, 2011 at 10:06 am
    If you actually look at the picture, you`ll notice that`s a picture for the upcoming comedy festival, unrelated to the article about the molester.
  14. Profile photo of MrPeabody
    MrPeabody Male 30-39
    1920 posts
    October 4, 2011 at 10:14 am
    "also why are we only just seeing this now? April 5th... finger way off the pulse there buddy!"

    Links by schuey63
    (schuey63 has not added any links)

    We were kinda hoping you schuey63 would man up and submit it, but we got tired of waiting for you.
  15. Profile photo of tedgp
    tedgp Male 30-39
    3287 posts
    October 4, 2011 at 10:15 am
    wonder how much money he`s going to get in the settlement. I would certainly contact a lawyer, because you know the correction will be buried somewhere in the paper and be a little one liner that no-one reads.
    -----------

    He wouldnt get anything. As long as a publication prints an apology or correction somewhere in the print, then they have done all they are required to do by law.
  16. Profile photo of Sidragasum
    Sidragasum Male 18-29
    169 posts
    October 4, 2011 at 10:27 am
    Unfortunate image placement. Poor guy.
  17. Profile photo of Cajun247
    Cajun247 Male 18-29
    10742 posts
    October 4, 2011 at 10:48 am
    Bad positioning
  18. Profile photo of doran127
    doran127 Male 13-17
    46 posts
    October 4, 2011 at 10:53 am
    go sudbury...
  19. Profile photo of LazyMe484
    LazyMe484 Male 18-29
    10441 posts
    October 4, 2011 at 10:59 am
    I don`t get why possession of child porn is such a crime. Nobody is being harmed by possession alone. Shouldn`t they be going after the creators of child porn instead? Stupid laws. We have them too in Canada.

    This one is easy to bypass though.
  20. Profile photo of canusuck
    canusuck Male 30-39
    796 posts
    October 4, 2011 at 11:16 am
    Lazyme-I hope you are kidding-if there wasn`t sickos out there for this crap then you wouldn`t need to worry about it being created
  21. Profile photo of Corpsecrank
    Corpsecrank Male 30-39
    930 posts
    October 4, 2011 at 11:27 am
    "I don`t get why possession of child porn is such a crime. Nobody is being harmed by possession alone. Shouldn`t they be going after the creators of child porn instead? Stupid laws. We have them too in Canada.

    This one is easy to bypass though."

    You are actually going to defend the possession of child porn? The reason you can`t posses it is because if you posses it then you are into it and last I checked being into kids like that was considered sick and illegal. So why shouldn`t it be a crime to posses kiddie porn? Please explain to us instances where it would be acceptable.
  22. Profile photo of yusuksomuch
    yusuksomuch Male 40-49
    1008 posts
    October 4, 2011 at 11:42 am
    lazyme484 i just gotta assume you are trying to troll or something no one can be that stupid , even in canada
  23. Profile photo of akabane
    akabane Male 18-29
    1093 posts
    October 4, 2011 at 11:46 am
    "I don`t get why possession of child porn is such a crime. Nobody is being harmed by possession alone. Shouldn`t they be going after the creators of child porn instead? Stupid laws. We have them too in Canada. "

    Possession is wrong since you are promoting it, but i do have to agree we should focus more on the source of where thee sick things are coming from.
  24. Profile photo of DuckBoy87
    DuckBoy87 Male 18-29
    3279 posts
    October 4, 2011 at 11:53 am
    I get what LazyMe84 is saying. Punish the publisher, not the pocession of. Sort of like how it`s illegal to grow tobacco, without a license, but not illegal to pocess tobacco.

    But I disagree with what he`s saying. I would say that if you are the creation of child porn, then you are in pocession of it; ultimately covering the bases.
  25. Profile photo of tommy2X4
    tommy2X4 Male 50-59
    3447 posts
    October 4, 2011 at 11:56 am
    Aim for the red dot! FIRE!
  26. Profile photo of LazyMe484
    LazyMe484 Male 18-29
    10441 posts
    October 4, 2011 at 12:28 pm
    Wow, you people sure are emotional, reactionary and stupid. You`re not going to stop it by removing the possessors. There are a thousand ways to "possess" any sort of porn without anyone`s notice. If some pervert is turned on by this sort of thing, it won`t matter what sort of law is in place. Furthermore what if someone had some sort of genetic defect that attracted them to children, what then?

    A person who makes it also does so for profit.

    The only way to actually protect children is to remove the source. ...and isn`t protecting children the whole point?

    Possession is wrong since you are promoting it
    One can be in possession without promoting it.
  27. Profile photo of Swaywithme
    Swaywithme Female 18-29
    3696 posts
    October 4, 2011 at 12:48 pm
    "One can be in possession without promoting it."

    The whole terrible situation of it is called `supply and demand` of course you want to go after the source of it first- That`s where the most of the real hurt and danger starts from but it`s only such a lucrative business because there is demand for it. Cut out the demand- why make the supply?
  28. Profile photo of Swaywithme
    Swaywithme Female 18-29
    3696 posts
    October 4, 2011 at 12:49 pm
    He wouldnt get anything. As long as a publication prints an apology or correction somewhere in the print, then they have done all they are required to do by law.

    Sure, that`s if he decided to press criminal charges, but if he goes for a civil suit with defamation of character or some business like that, he could get some moneys
  29. Profile photo of SlothOfDoom
    SlothOfDoom Male 30-39
    2033 posts
    October 4, 2011 at 12:53 pm
    Damn Sudburians.
  30. Profile photo of Khalfani
    Khalfani Male 18-29
    92 posts
    October 4, 2011 at 1:14 pm
    Those are two separate articles aren`t they?
    The pic is under the light blue box entitled "Tons of Fun" while the other is under "Court"

    Misleading pic >.<
  31. Profile photo of Fatninja01
    Fatninja01 Male 30-39
    25420 posts
    October 4, 2011 at 1:57 pm
    I think these are not related
  32. Profile photo of Jewzis
    Jewzis Male 18-29
    8 posts
    October 4, 2011 at 2:20 pm
    That`s Mike Birbiglia, not a pedo, just a funny guy
  33. Profile photo of xCYBERDYNEx
    xCYBERDYNEx Male 18-29
    4903 posts
    October 4, 2011 at 2:57 pm
    Hahahaha
  34. Profile photo of Rick_S
    Rick_S Male 40-49
    3291 posts
    October 4, 2011 at 3:33 pm
    "He wouldnt get anything. As long as a publication prints an apology or correction somewhere in the print, then they have done all they are required to do by law."

    Of course, this is the UK we`re dealing with here, but in the US, you can get $3,000,000 for spilling coffee on yourself. I`m sure in the US this guy could get something. Also, set the bar low enough, and settling without accepting blame or fault, or admitting guilt, can be cheaper than fighting it in court.

    If it were me, I`d ask for that days sales, not profits, and a front page above the fold apology.
  35. Profile photo of Angilion
    Angilion Male 40-49
    12387 posts
    October 4, 2011 at 3:45 pm
    in the US, you can get $3,000,000 for spilling coffee on yourself.

    Bad example. The infamous coffee case was actually a legit case - a business knowingly, deliberately and repeatedly sold a dangerous product that was unfit for purpose and as a result hundreds of customers were severely injured before one of the most badly injured ones sued. 3rd degree burns over 16% of her body, 2 years of medical treatment required, permanent scarring. She got $640,000, not $3,000,000, and 2 years of medical treatment in the USA is rather expensive.

    There are some silly litigation cases, but that isn`t one of them.
  36. Profile photo of Angilion
    Angilion Male 40-49
    12387 posts
    October 4, 2011 at 3:54 pm
    It`s a bit surprising that he was only charged with possession, as UK law is written in such a way that most possession can also be counted as creation. If someone downloads an illegal picture from the internet, that can be counted as creation (because they created a copy on the device they downloaded it to).
  37. Profile photo of Toomuchcoffe
    Toomuchcoffe Male 30-39
    43 posts
    October 4, 2011 at 5:00 pm
    OMFG, thats my City...you guys have any Idea how messed up my city is? its the worst place in Canada...
  38. Profile photo of PringleMan
    PringleMan Female 13-17
    1356 posts
    October 4, 2011 at 6:11 pm
    the picture and the article are unrelated....

    I went to sudbury to visit family. If you can get past the mines and smoke chimney`s, it`s a very beautiful city.
  39. Profile photo of Yap71
    Yap71 Male 30-39
    150 posts
    October 4, 2011 at 8:14 pm
    I think thats Mike Birbiglia in the picture (a hilarious comedian)
  40. Profile photo of ZsaZsaGoar
    ZsaZsaGoar Female 18-29
    144 posts
    October 5, 2011 at 4:20 am
    hahaha, sucks to be that guy
  41. Profile photo of richa23
    richa23 Female 18-29
    6 posts
    October 5, 2011 at 5:34 am
    Absolutely entertaining!!!!!
  42. Profile photo of EgalM
    EgalM Male 30-39
    1707 posts
    October 5, 2011 at 8:12 am
    I`ve been to Sudbury, Toronto is far worse, on all accounts.
  43. Profile photo of uhmerikin
    uhmerikin Male 18-29
    876 posts
    October 5, 2011 at 8:38 am
    By Jove, I believe Yap71 may be on to something.
  44. Profile photo of IRockYeah
    IRockYeah Male 40-49
    2619 posts
    October 5, 2011 at 10:15 am
    Guilty as charged. Fuc*ing A&F T-shirt :(
  45. Profile photo of ExtraCredit
    ExtraCredit Male 50-59
    451 posts
    October 5, 2011 at 9:29 pm
    Short answer: potentially.
  46. Profile photo of asianchamp
    asianchamp Male 18-29
    414 posts
    October 6, 2011 at 5:17 am
    haha, people here get years in jail for kiddie porn
  47. Profile photo of SoberGuy
    SoberGuy Male 18-29
    347 posts
    October 6, 2011 at 1:13 pm
    is that Mike Birbiglia?
  48. Profile photo of bongsmoka420
    bongsmoka420 Male 18-29
    290 posts
    October 6, 2011 at 2:47 pm
    WAIT! HOLD THE PHONE!

    he was arrested and jailed for POSSESSING child pornography? That`s illegal? I thought it was only illegal if you`re respobsible for creating the material.

    someone, please clarify.
  49. Profile photo of jadedtortois
    jadedtortois Female 18-29
    779 posts
    October 7, 2011 at 2:45 am
    @Bongsmoke: It is 100% illegal to own, support, create, and distribute. You have something you want to tell us?
  50. Profile photo of Edgarska19
    Edgarska19 Male 18-29
    1045 posts
    October 7, 2011 at 7:46 am
    I don`t know about pedophile, but when i saw him my butt cheeks clenched tight.

Leave a Reply