Viewing child pornography online not a crime
81
Needing a ride to Forest Hills and a ounce of weed. Please inquire within. Thanks. Or not. Posts: 58,276
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/sideshow/vi ... 25919.html
In a controversial decision that is already sparking debate around the country, the New York Court of Appeals ruled on Tuesday that viewing child pornography online is not a crime.
"The purposeful viewing of child pornography on the internet is now legal in New York," Senior Judge Carmen Beauchamp Ciparick wrote in a majority decision for the court.
The decision came after Marist College professor James D. Kent was sentenced to prison in August 2009 after more than 100 images of child pornography were found on his computer's cache.
Whenever someone views an image online, a copy of the image's data is saved in the computer's memory cache.
The ruling attempts to distinguish between individuals who see an image of child pornography online versus those who actively download and store such images, MSNBC reports. And in this case, it was ruled that a computer's image cache is not the same as actively choosing to download and save an image.
"Merely viewing Web images of child pornography does not, absent other proof, constitute either possession or procurement within the meaning of our Penal Law," Ciparick wrote in the decision.
See a copy of the court's full ruling on the child pornography decision.
The court said it must be up to the legislature, not the courts, to determine what the appropriate response should be to those viewing images of child pornography without actually storing them. Currently, New York's legislature has no laws deeming such action criminal.
As The Atlantic Wire notes, under current New York law, "it is illegal to create, possess, distribute, promote or facilitate child pornography." But that leaves out one critical distinction, as Judge Ciparick stated in the court's decision.
"ome affirmative act is required (printing, saving, downloading, etc.) to show that defendant in fact exercised dominion and control over the images that were on his screen," Ciparick wrote. "To hold otherwise, would extend the reach of (state law) to conduct—viewing—that our Legislature has not deemed criminal."
The case originated when Kent brought his computer in to be checked for viruses, complaining that it was running slowly. He has subsequently denied downloading the images himself.
81 is now off the air
Post edited by Unknown User on
0
Comments
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
don't worry, progressives have been fighting against child exploitation for over a century. Unless glenn beck kills us all off I think children will be protected.
Anyway, well said, Jason.
brilliant show.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
was in response to the previous political statement
horrow shows dont do it for me.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
-Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
reasoning?
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
If only it were just make-up.. No... dressing them up like tarts, strutting their stuff on stage in an attitude not at all appropriate for their age, singing inappropriate songs, pumping them up with 'go-go juice') etc.
Just asking for trouble. Wonder if the mothers & fathers submitting (yes submitting - how many 4 year olds will do all of this of their own free will?) their, mainly, daughters to this type of display realise what they may be enabling?
But to the OP... viewing is OK... damn... So OK, it's not possession or procurement, but it does 'say' something about the 'viewer'. Would it be the same type of person hanging around schools, gyms, etc. 'just looking.?
really? you've not followed what happens in the catholic church or the billions it has paid out to settle law suits?
In any event, I think it being "not a crime" is a fucking farce. I may get the origins of how some of these pedophiles (and yes, whether they view the images or go further than that - I believe it is pedophelia) came to be but in no way will I coddle, support or extend any kind of sympathy toward them. How were those images of children obtained? Who photographed them? What the holy hell happened to them after the shots were taken?
ugh.
And yeah, Toddlers & Tiaras. There is something seriously fucked up in that realm. The parent(s), the "emcees" of the events, and the soon-to-be fucked up (if not already there) toddlers themselves.
Exactly. And what is being done about that? Do the 'authorities' ever try and track back these photos viewed?
i have. but you just stigmatised millions of people worldwide. im sure catholics get tired and exasperated whenever things like this come up cause they know people are gonna point at them and accuse them. id prefer to know WHY they voted the way they did.. and just being catholic doesnt seem like a good enough reason to me. it may well be incidental.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
1) Judge ruled that if you receive a computer that unknowingly had child porn stored on it that you did not buy or download and you open program that prompts that link to open and you look through it, does not legally constitute ‘viewing’ child porn?
--the problem I have with that ruling is that it allows a person to legally share child porn by associating them with a cache file while shielding the end user from legal prosecution and limiting the ability of law enforcement to trace the makers and distributors of child porn.
2) The defendant was charged with child porn, because he ultimately did download the pictures and moved them into his own private files.
Here’s the entire ruling
http://www.scribd.com/doc/92997011/1205 ... orn-Ruling
Ahhh, whats the piont, she's already legal. Thanks for nothin New York.
"Hear me, my chiefs!
I am tired; my heart is
sick and sad. From where
the sun stands I will fight
no more forever."
Chief Joseph - Nez Perce
very classy!
should i have also added a winky so you knew i was joking? :think:
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
HA! doesnt matter.. im already here. theyll never find me. :P
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
Even with a winky, a joke about child porn is inappropriate, IMHO
she was commenting on the absurdity of the ruling, not making a joke about child porn. come on.
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
come on. the guy was obviously searching it out.
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
I may have missed the point here but IMHO this is not about being liberal or conservative. It's about being a normal, decent human as opposed to a very fucked up sick human and it has nothing to do with pro life/ pro choice.
-Eddie Vedder, "Smile"