Posted on 11/10/2004 7:32:36 AM PST by TaxRelief
[Summary: A warrant for arrest has been issued for, Wesley Mincey, an eighteen-year-old freshman at NCSC. The warrant was issued following a call to police from his roommate, who had borrowed Mincey's computer. While using the computer, the roommate discovered that Mincey had downloaded child pornography.]
This summary avoids copyright violations.
(Excerpt) Read more at wral.com ...
Fine. He's accused, not convicted. But that doesn't change the fact that child pornography was found on his computer. That is evidence that is hard to deny. Would you offer the same view if a guy was caught in a bedroom molesting a small child? He was only accused, not convicted. But he was caught in the act.
These were not pictures of 17 year old girls. They were 6 and 7 year old girls. I don't see how any of you could try to take up for this person.
I know a little about computers and it takes no genius to figure out that...
1) files of any type have creation dates.
2) files also have creation times.
3) it is not easy to get rid of either.
This said, if the room mate had created the files himself the SBI would have been able to tell.
Well, I suppose we have two choices. We can infringe upon the right of the press, and demand they only publish information about people convicted of crimes. Or we can be so worried abut someone's reputation, should they possibly be innocent of the crime that we suspect they are committing, and ignore child porn on computers.
I don't like either one, frankly.
Great. Since I am a 30 year IT professional, I expect the same could be said of me. Setting aside my curiosity about why this thread decided to come back to life, what does all that have to do with anything?
Regardless of how many little intersting details are posted here, no one on this forum has enough information about this to prove the kid's innocence or guilt. Even if he is guilty as sin, no one on this board has any right to crucify him or anyone who objects to the lynch mob mentality.
Exactly. It is an ugly choice.
Wonderful, but you still don't get it do you? The discussion here doesn't even really have anything to do with this guy. It has to do with the attitude that convicts people without proof. It has to do with the lynch-mob mentality. Regardless of whether the guy is guilty or not, the point is that there are too many who are willing to find him guilty based on a story in the newspaper. I'm sorry if that is beyond your grasp, but I don't know of any way to say it differently than the thirty or forty times I have already said it.
Oh, and just for the record, I hope they put the guy under the jail. Right after a judge or a jury of his peers finds him guilty, and not a minute before.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.