This post is for all the hypocritical people that think they are so Lilly White and respectable, and that DW is a PERVERT because he had computer disks with files that were sexually oriented.In the meantime, the parents of the VICTIM in this case, seem to be allowed to commit WIDE OPEN ADULTERY, DRUGS, and admittedly didn’t even pay attention to their daughter’s whereabouts until it was too late .
PORN found on their computers and in their garage is not allowed to be discussed during the TRIAL. They are not the criminals (or are they?)
The problem I have seen is that we have a nation that is DISGUSTED that DW had PORN. They make the leap from possession of PORN (without any proof he ever viewed any of the allegedly illegal PORN) to MURDER. They assume murder after sexual assault. There is no evidence, due to the condition of the body, that that crime was committed and DW is not being charged with it either.
But the MINDS of the public have already made that leap. WHY? PORN is BAD. He shouldn’t have it. He is a PERVERT if he does. If he had CHILD PORN he had sex with KIDS. POSSESSION=Intent to commit crime.
WELL FOLKS. Let me explain something. You can possess something and have no interest in it, other than idle curiousity. You don’t have to possess it to be affected by it. You can be a pervert and have NO PORN WHATSOEVER in your possession.
If we JUDGE DW on the basis of HAVING VIEWED PORN, then 99% of the NATION is GUILTY and needs to be investigated for every murder and rape committed.
The REASON. I have heard so many ‘innocent’ men and women make remarks about the PORN. Like they have never seen any, don’t watch it, aren’t exposed to it. If being exposed to PORN makes you commit sexual assault, then exposure to MURDER scenes on film MAKES YOU COMMIT MURDER.
Silence of the Lambs
Halloween I,II,III,IV,V
How about GANG RAPE of a MINOR and EXTREME VIOLENCE? CLOCKWORK ORANGE.
NIGHTMARE ON ELM STREET (1,2,3,4,etc)
and THOUSANDS MORE.
PORN. “No, I don’t have any in MY HOUSE. I would NEVER WATCH IT”
B*LLSH*T !
I know you have a computer, else you couldn't read this. Have PORN on your computer? This has been discussed relentlessly on FR, but for the blind, YES YOU DO. Unless you have specifically purchased software designed to remove it, or are a 'geek' and know where/how to find/get rid of it (and even then it may be recoverable, even if you write over it again, and again, and again) then maybe you don't (for about the next 2 seconds. Spam hits you relentlessly while on the net, and can contain porn)
You have a TV SET, you watch PORN.
You Have CABLE TV, you watch more risqué forms of PORN.
You have a SATELLITE DISH, you get the MOST HARDCORE PORN that is available.
You don’t possess it to the point the police have EVIDENCE they can cart off, BUT YOU HAVE IT AVAILABLE. If just having access to it is all that counts, YOU ARE GUILTY. Think that because you don't watch it your kids don't. Then you really are a fool.
Don’t have TV, OK, do you read ?
Romantic Women’s Novels. PORN.
ELLE magazine, PORN.
MAXIM magazine, PORN
COSMOS magazine, PORN
VOGUE magazine, PORN
thinly veiled, widely accepted, but PORN.
BIG BROTHER (3) On you local broadcast TV station coming soon . VOYEURISTIC PORN.
VICTORIA SECRET UNDERWEAR MODELS SHOW., PORNPORNPORNPORN.
Hubby ever go to a BACHELOR PARTY for a relative or a friend, LIVE IN YOUR LAP/FACE PORN.
Hubby go to TOPLESS BARS with the guys after work occasionally? (No) Well, you mean he doesn’t tell you that is where he went. PORN IN YOUR LAP.
In some of the EASTERN states, they are showing FILMS to your CHILDREN explaining to the how to PLACE THEIR FISTS in another persons ANAL ORIFICE for SEXUAL PLEASURE. If that isn’t PORN, I don’t know what is. And this is being done by TEACHERS to your CHILDREN.
SO, before you go condemning DW for having some sexual material, that he may have viewed some of , and probably got completely JADED with, remember this.
YOU TOO HAVE PORN.
If you do possess it, you WILL view it.
Save your breath, doofus. I was born at night, but not last night.
Why on earth are you defending possession of child pornography?
The best thing for you to do is to QUICKLY advise DAW's top notch attorney, Feldman, Esq. to get the necessary experts to go before the jury, and state there is no statistical correllation, between CHILD porn possession, and child molestation/child rape/child murder.
As for me, one way or the other, I have no idea. You may be entirely right, or dead wrong. One reason I can't tell, is that you provide no EVIDENCE.
It doesn't really matter what you scream at the FR readers, as far as the jurors in this trial are concerned. And at the intuitive level, I expect the jurors are mightily swayed by the audio/visual experience of viewing the CHILD rape scene, from Westerfield's bookshelf.
For weeks, I have been discussing the trial, with a female co-worker. CHILD porn pushes her button, like no other single aspect of the trial. She says there is porn, but CHILD porn is entirely unacceptable, to her. Exactly the same with my wife. Were they jurors, you see the impressions left, if Feldman does nothing?
FYI I'm not much impressed by Feldman, yet. Maybe he will rise in the home stretch, with brilliant closing arguments. The SaveDave gang needs him to do this, or face, IMO, a hung jury at best.
And just a little more to add to a terrific rant.
http://www.crimelibrary.com/serial/pedophiles/3.htm
It should be said from the very beginning that no one knows how many pedophiles exist in America since the overwhelming majority never fulfill their fantasies, nor do they come to the attention of law enforcement agents.
They seem content to fantasize in the safety and comfort of their own homes.
The pedophile collector falls into three general categories: closet, isolated and the sharer. The closet collector maintains and views his erotica in secret and does not molest children. This type of collector builds his collection in a clandestine manner and keeps its existence a secret. Sometimes, he will maintain this collection for years without the knowledge of a live-in spouse.
The isolated collector is actually engaged in molestation and will display the material to a victim. The sharer-collector trades and displays the material with others and may do so for profit. He also will molest children and keeps company with other pedophiles.
If DW falls anywhere in the catagories of a pedophile it would be the one in bold print.
BTW something to think about, the DA introduced the child porn for a reason. If he felt that DW really was a pedofhile or child molestor do you think he would hesitate to have an expert give us some profiles that DW fits?