Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

VAN DAM vs. Westerfield, 6-24-02: Televised proceedings a far cry from O.J. fiasco!
Union Tribune ^ | June 24, 2002 | Alex Roth

Posted on 06/24/2002 9:06:32 AM PDT by FresnoDA

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 741-760761-780781-800 ... 821-840 next last
To: ~Kim4VRWC's~
And, didn't update it for three years. Not your active pervert.
761 posted on 06/24/2002 11:00:02 PM PDT by John Jamieson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 758 | View Replies]

To: ~Kim4VRWC's~
That's what I said momo..it's a tool used by some rapists, but I said it doesn't cause rape. Some rapists do use porn as a stimulus prior to the crime.. It's a LOOK IN TO THE MIND of the person who owned it, possessed it, protected it and kept it on his shelf.

False Kim Rape is not a sexual crime it is a crime of violence..it is the resistance that turns them on..not sexy pics

Damon had porn on his computer why do you think that is? And that is a look into the mind of the last person to se her alive..

762 posted on 06/24/2002 11:02:03 PM PDT by RnMomof7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 758 | View Replies]

To: sbnsd
Of course evidence matters...but he's not being charged with rape..he's charged with kidnapping, murder and the child porn which shows what kind of state of mind he would have been in. ALthough I wonder what the jury thought when they heard him say he had a blackout.
763 posted on 06/24/2002 11:06:08 PM PDT by Freedom2specul8
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 757 | View Replies]

To: RnMomof7
Danielle was surrounded by live porn at home. I hope she never saw it, but you can't get any closer to her than that.
764 posted on 06/24/2002 11:07:29 PM PDT by John Jamieson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 762 | View Replies]

To: UCANSEE2
What the heck does "bared" mean, in this context.

Same as "bared" anywhere: "Don't come around here no more"

"rubbing this in " (subjective) "JR and AM's face?" to bring it to their attention.

Kim & MizS got a bit pissy, no doubt. But I've seen worse flame wars on FR without folks getting tossed.
FresnoDA got a public "knock it off". Why did Kim & Miz get the 86 ?

The AM (IMO) should have told 'em to take it to mail.

765 posted on 06/24/2002 11:08:48 PM PDT by dread78645
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 691 | View Replies]

To: mommya
Well, my daughter is eight and at the last sleep over she attended they did pedicures and facials! I must say I was a bit taken aback. When I picked her up they asked me if I thought they all looked "younger"! My goodness, those fresh little faces. I know in the goody bags at birthday parties often there is nail polish and "lipstick".

I teach catechism as well-----my daughter's class--- and was very taken aback when one of my students last year appeared occasionally with lipstick! The sleepover play was one thing, but this little girl appearing in public another. And the child I am talking about was getting a religious education.

766 posted on 06/24/2002 11:08:56 PM PDT by cyncooper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 748 | View Replies]

To: RnMomof7
Of course it's a crime of violence.. porn feeds it for some rapists. Porn is also rape scenes and beastiality and bondage, leather whip and chains. Porn is not all about soft fluffy outfits in soft lighting. It's also got some raw, hard edge, cold power tripping...well you get the idea.
767 posted on 06/24/2002 11:09:07 PM PDT by Freedom2specul8
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 762 | View Replies]

To: ~Kim4VRWC's~
I expect the child porn charged to be dropped next Monday.
768 posted on 06/24/2002 11:09:51 PM PDT by John Jamieson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 763 | View Replies]

To: ~Kim4VRWC's~
"and kept it on his shelf"

This could be telling also, Kim.

It was "on his shelf". Not in the disc drive of the computer, where as you speculate, he got himself "in the mood".

There is nothing to indicate he had looked at it recently, or since it was archived, for that matter.

Remember, there is testimony in the PH, that were no recent downloadings of any of the purported porn.

769 posted on 06/24/2002 11:10:05 PM PDT by theirjustdue
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 758 | View Replies]

To: ~Kim4VRWC's~
soft core porn, playboy/hustler porn, hard-core rough porn..
770 posted on 06/24/2002 11:10:36 PM PDT by Freedom2specul8
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 767 | View Replies]

To: John Jamieson
I expect the child porn charged to be dropped next Monday

Tell me if you still believe that friday... I'll tell you if I agree, deal? :)

771 posted on 06/24/2002 11:11:32 PM PDT by Freedom2specul8
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 768 | View Replies]

To: ~Kim4VRWC's~
Do you have a link to the exact "porn" charge?
772 posted on 06/24/2002 11:12:31 PM PDT by John Jamieson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 763 | View Replies]

To: ~Kim4VRWC's~
Sure!
773 posted on 06/24/2002 11:13:11 PM PDT by John Jamieson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 771 | View Replies]

To: ~Kim4VRWC's~
Of course evidence matters...but he's not being charged with rape..he's charged with kidnapping, murder and the child porn which shows what kind of state of mind he would have been in. ALthough I wonder what the jury thought when they heard him say he had a blackout.

Good grief. You only seem to take a few words of what I say at a time. I said that there is no proof to the motive they are claiming. That's it. That's all I was saying. There is no evidence to his claim of sexual assault because he had thousands of porn. What if he just killed her because he wanted to and because he could? That would have nothing to do with his porn. What would be the motive then? He liked little girls? No, then his motive would be that he killed her because he could. What if it was as simple as that?

774 posted on 06/24/2002 11:14:37 PM PDT by sbnsd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 763 | View Replies]

To: John Jamieson
It use to be here but it's moved..

http://www.co.san-diego.ca.us/cnty/cntydepts/safety/da/newsroom/westerfield.html

So we'll have to get secondary source.hang on

775 posted on 06/24/2002 11:15:15 PM PDT by Freedom2specul8
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 772 | View Replies]

To: sbnsd
"I SAID..: Pedophiles and their motives are not like normal humans...so you have to think outside the box with molestors.. Does porn CAUSE rape? No, but it can be a tool USED by rapists for a variety of reasons.."

YOU SAID...I said it can't be proven. Unless there's proof he took her for sexual reasons, you can't make the motive stick. I completely understand the porn, rape, kid aspect. There is no provable evidence that that is what DW did. That's all I'm saying. There is no proof and therefore, there's doubt.

I SAID: I'm not so sure you're right on this one. Think of it like those cases in which a person is convicted of a murder without the body..

YOU SAID: "No proof and no evidence" doesn't seem to matter, does it?

I SAID: Of course evidence matters...but he's not being charged with rape..he's charged with kidnapping, murder and the child porn which shows what kind of state of mind he would have been in. ALthough I wonder what the jury thought when they heard him say he had a blackout.

YOU SAID: Good grief. You only seem to take a few words of what I say at a time. I said that there is no proof to the motive they are claiming. That's it. That's all I was saying. There is no evidence to his claim of sexual assault because he had thousands of porn. What if he just killed her because he wanted to and because he could? That would have nothing to do with his porn. What would be the motive then? He liked little girls? No, then his motive would be that he killed her because he could. What if it was as simple as that?


So to your last comments, sure, it could be simply cuz he killed her cuz he's could..but that doesn't make sense. WHY?

776 posted on 06/24/2002 11:24:00 PM PDT by Freedom2specul8
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 774 | View Replies]

To: sbnsd
Oh, I'm going to find jj's link and then hit the hay. G'nite..
777 posted on 06/24/2002 11:24:54 PM PDT by Freedom2specul8
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 774 | View Replies]

To: RnMomof7
Why of course all humans are born in sin, but PORN IS THE CAUSE OF NURTURING THAT SIN. Take a look at any stastistic of rape and the availability of porn, as well as the statistics of sex crimes and pornographic availability. There is an abundance of correlations.
778 posted on 06/24/2002 11:28:31 PM PDT by fiddlesticks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 755 | View Replies]

To: John Jamieson
Ok, I can't find it..

http://www.co.san-diego.ca.us/cnty/cntydepts/safety/da/

A copy is on the earlier threads but I'm too tired to look fo it.. yawn..

779 posted on 06/24/2002 11:31:14 PM PDT by Freedom2specul8
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 773 | View Replies]

To: ~Kim4VRWC's~
April 16, 2002
High Court Strikes Down Virtual Child Porno Law

Was that after he was charged?

780 posted on 06/24/2002 11:32:25 PM PDT by John Jamieson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 777 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 741-760761-780781-800 ... 821-840 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson