Posted on 06/09/2011 8:26:44 AM PDT by Bed_Zeppelin
A Milpitas man who used a computer to paste photos of his 13-year-old daughter's head onto bodies of women in graphic poses shouldn't have been convicted of possessing child pornography because the pictures didn't show minors engaging in sex acts, a state appeals court ruled Wednesday.
California's child porn ban, punishable by up to three years in prison, "requires a real child to have actually engaged in or simulated the sexual act depicted," said the Sixth District Court of Appeal in San Jose.
(Excerpt) Read more at sfgate.com ...
I was eating when I read this. I may break my throw up streak. YUK, YUK, YUK. And a court upheld his ‘right’??? What about his 13 year old daughter’s rights? She ought to counter sue.
Get that girl a firearm because dear old Dad is off his rocker.
“My girls know Krav Maga”
Excellent choice! My son and daughter both know it. In fact, my son made the level 2 adult class at 14. What I especially like about Krav is that you don’t need to be big, muscular etc... There is not one thing wrong with a child knowing an “eye gouge” or other technique is truly needed. Personally, I think that if kids take this at a good place, they learn self control more than anything.
In the old days the family would just commit the guy to an insane asylum. Why is that no longer an option?
She might, but a court may deem otherwise and 'dad' may get visitation regardless. Especially now, in light of his court win. Yuk, yuk, yuk, so very gross.
The mothers hands are not exactly clean here either. Urging the girl “to build a relationship” with the father. I doubt, the father discovered drugs and developed his little perversions, all after separating from the mother.
Exactly!
The reason for the illegality is that you have to harm children to make the product, and anyone downstream who possesses the product contributes to the harming of the children. But no children were involved in the porn itself, so there’s nothing to criminally prosecute him for.
However, social services would be negligent if they didn’t make sure he never saw his daughter as a minor again.
Because we've become civilized as a society(sarcasm alert).
Will Rogers never met this guy....
Good thing too, when our dear leader invades my television set the SS would arrest me on the spot if they could read what I was thinking...
They better keep their eye on this sicko.
He is a pedophile looking for a place to happen.
I know what a Hate Crime is.
My post was a roundabout way of refuting the “We don’t prosecute Hate Crimes” garbage!
I thought to myself, "Ya might not have wanted to share that one."
Pretty much everybody who had been at that meeting avoided him from then, on.
I agree, but it would make for some interesting civil 'loss of parental rights' action, that's for sure...
Once pornography was legalized thanks to a leftist SCOTUS, porn producers and the ACLU, this and worse was inevitable.
this guy should not have been allowed to have children.
His thought became an action and a perverted one at that.
“The mothers hands are not exactly clean here either.”
Possibly, but she did divorce him.
And, the societal pressure to ‘have a relationship’ with the birth father is not to be underestimated.
Oh, let’s not forget that this was published in the San Fransicko paper, so given the ‘community matrix’ - what can one say?
The story states "they had been separated". We don't know who left who, or if there is a divorce. But. If it was her who divorced him, it would implicate her all the more since she would have had some grounds to sue for divorce. Possibly his drug driven debauchery.
What would fill in some blanks here is knowing what sort of ongoing contact, if any, existed between the mother and father. We can assume there was little to zero contact with the daughter previously or there would be no need “to build a relationship”.
I'm betting mom knew about dads sexual habits and drug use. She may not have known just how twisted he was, but that's no excuse. She should have vetted this guy before green lighting visitation.
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.