Autistic (Asperger) Student had 900 child porn collection

Post Reply New Topic

Seems the thread has gotten tracked along the way... Unable to load the original article, I was able to find this:

http://www.newsshopper.co.uk/mostpopular.var.2031606.mostviewed.indecent_images_man_avoids_jail.php

It startles me to see the level of assumption made in regards to the situation... when outraged, it is easy to forget and fall into a mob mentality. First, there is no clear explanation as to the degree of severity the individual experiences, and names only one diagnosis. As many of us know, there are a lot of ancillary diagnoses that can also contribute. The reporter or lawyer may have chosen to only fixate on one in order to leverage a certain position or agenda. Having AS does not excuse his behavior, but may very well have extenuated it. He is being punished:

...but the judge is attempting to mitigate that with a suspended sentence that can still be imposed if there is further issue. Yes - the idea of some ******* messing with children is disturbing and liable to spark me to great anger in itself. I understand the point that RogueTech and others are trying to make regarding what defines pornography; I also understand the points of others that the pictures they are concerned with are more along the lines of pre-teens than individuals on the cusp of adulthood... however, I find it unfortunate that in zealous defense things devolved to accusations and insults in lieu of steadfast explanation. This article does not specify what age the material in question focused on; it appears that there are some conceptions of the content... is it from a source, or assumption? Curious, as I have not seen any additional information.

The behavior was illegal; the individual was arrested and punished for it, with some modification made for his diagnosis and condition. We don't know the extent of his problems, so we can't rush to judgment there lest it degenerate into a mob mentality. As the discussion has continued, it's become sensationalized to the point where it doesn't even appear that either side is reading the others' posts. Can we please get back to rational discourse with substantiated responses instead of this inflammatory and asinine opportunity for vitriol?


M.

I agree. I dont understand why people wanting to express him as a lesser evil. Who cares n who knows. They all just kiddy fiddlier scum.

That is not at all what I said; what do you agree with? That's just more incendiary material in what you said, to be honest.


M.

I dont understand really your point but all I know is what I feel n that waht I put.
Each to thier own. I just dont understand why people keep goin on about him as in to protect.
Who cares and who knows, theyre still doin the wrong thing 2 kids.
Im out of here

Last edited by SIXLUCY on 23 Jul 2008, 3:25 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Given the topic at hand, I think "incendiary material" is understandable, if not expected. It's the program of social reciprocity, all this righteous anger. Those who make attempt at apology, denial, or obfuscation are also villified.

Why does evry one have to use such comlex words. It hard to know what your on about. It really annoys me.

Sad - just evidence of an inability to step outside group-thought in my mind. I make no apology or denial for what he did; I refuse to get the torches out as a result. He is being punished, with acknowledgment and reservation in regards to his condition - people are spouting off with little to absolutely no information that he should be harmed or further punished. The whole concept of this public spectacle being respectable is a farce to me, SM - I don't find it understandable at all, and it is hard to understand your willingness to join in. What is enough? What benefit does it serve anyone here for him to be further punished? The very ideas espoused smack of self-satisfaction, not justice or balance.

SL: If you're just going to write what you feel, and not explain, I would appreciate it if you would not imply agreement with what I say, then - I do not want to be misunderstood. Thank you. While I agree that his actions are wrong, he should be punished and treated, I can not join you on this ranting rage. It does not make sense to me.


M.

Well none of your ranting ravings make sense to me. Why go on about em.. like they might not be such a bad

I think any crime involving children should make you mad. I can't understand why this doesn't bother you. I make no apology for anything I've said. Since I am belabouring the whole issue, I'l break off my commentary for the sake of good taste.

What the hell are ya on about

I do not discredit outrage; I find fault in attacks. Can I not be disgusted and appalled without venom dripping from my jowls? Why must I assume the worst in order to appease some unknown sense of public standards? I really don't get it.

SL: Why rant and rave? It does nothing but create more abuse, with yourself as the abuser.


M.

So are you sying paedophiles need to be protected from abuse..?

When it exceeds their punishment? Of course... or do you simply abandon people? Be angry - I would be frightened if any of us were not in some form - but these extremes are beyond me. It feels like a tool to make one feel superior to another; it does not punish the offender with any effect, it does not make right the crimes to the child... it's just empty and hollow to me.


M.

People who make child porn are the truly evil ones and not the ones who download it. The people who download it are sick. Literally. They have an addiction. Its no different from being addicted to crack cocaine. The pushers are those people who torture little kids and sell pictures of it to people who are addicted to it.

The addicts, like the boy in the story, need treatment not jail. Treatment may consist of castration, but its still treatment.

The people who are making this stuff and selling it, those are the ones who should be severely punished.

If you are addicted to downloading & viewing these images, you're still a criminal. You may not be as sick as the pornographers themselves, but you're not an inocent lambikins either.

unfortunately, I disagree.

as such, they need jail, because they pose a danger to the community as a whole (and I'm also refering to a CSI: Miami episode as well)