"General harassment" in the workplace is not even a civil action here in the States. In the US, equal opportunity asshole bosses are not violating the law. Harassment in the workplace is harassment BASED ON sex, race, national origin, disability, and some other stuff. Depending on the state or locality, sexual orientation is sometimes thrown in there.Svartalf wrote:and Here, it was a crime... until 10 days ago.
If only because a civil action was pretty limited in scope, not to mention the problem of the competent judge (since we do have special courts for workplace conflicts... but nobody would trust those to handle that kind of case).
and "general harassment" is something I've known in the work place... I might have made some dough from it if I'd known how to proceed gathering something that a court would have accepted as proof.
Viewing Child Porn - Court Rules Legal
-
- Posts: 32040
- Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 2:03 pm
- Contact:
Re: Viewing Child Porn - Court Rules Legal
- Warren Dew
- Posts: 3781
- Joined: Thu Aug 19, 2010 1:41 pm
- Location: Somerville, MA, USA
- Contact:
Re: Viewing Child Porn - Court Rules Legal
It's easy to show "some degree" of intent. If a person clicks on a link, that's intent. If the result of the link is that child porn is downloaded, that's "intentional downloading of child porn", even if the user didn't know what the link led to.Robert_S wrote:I would like it if they had to show at least some degree of intent. I believe that a lot of sites make money per click so even if someone doesn't make a penny they're still facilitating, in some roundabout way, they porn they're viewing.
Seth provides a good analysis of what would be needed, and I think it's just too complex to expect it not to be perverted by a prosecutor, judge, and jury who all think that any pornography is evil. As a result, I'm coming around to Coito's point of view.
Re: Viewing Child Porn - Court Rules Legal
No, the crime is possession and/or distribution. If it's on your computer screen, you "possess" it for the purposes of the federal (and most state) laws, because you have in your possession a digital copy of contraband, which you can then store, forward, copy, send, print out or otherwise make use of.Audley Strange wrote:I may be wrong about this, but isn't the crime to have the images deliberately downloaded and stored on computers rather than to have merely and perhaps accidently "viewed" it?
The law doesn't care HOW you came into possession of the contraband, and that's exactly the problem. If I hated you, I could send you an email with an attached file filled with kiddie porn and then rat you out to the cops, who would arrest you first and maybe ask questions later.
In the past, if you obtained a photo print or printed copy of a contraband image, particularly through the mail, the presumption was that you ordered it and since you didn't immediately call the police to report and turn in the unsolicited contraband, you therefore had intent to possess.
This is EXACTLY how federal postal officials entrapped many men they suspected of being "perverts," by sending them UNSOLICITED PORN (not just kiddie porn) and then raiding their homes when they failed to report the unsolicited contraband on several occasions. The cops would get a warrant to search the house and would find the porn THEY SENT and then arrest the individual.
Nowadays, with computer security holes all over the place, a botnet operator can invade your computer and use it to cache and distribute thousands or millions of contraband images WITHOUT YOUR KNOWLEDGE if you fail to keep track of the files on your computer, as very many people do. This insulates the purveyor from the police, and implicates YOU because factually you do have the contraband and unfortunately it usually ends up that YOU have to prove that your computer had been taken over and the contraband placed without your knowledge.
However heinous and objectionable child porn is, there should still be a presumption of innocence and a burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt that you actually, knowingly and intentionally accessed, downloaded, stored, viewed and/or redistributed the contraband before a case can be brought.
"Seth is Grandmaster Zen Troll who trains his victims to troll themselves every time they think of him" Robert_S
"All that is required for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." Edmund Burke
"Those who support denying anyone the right to keep and bear arms for personal defense are fully complicit in every crime that might have been prevented had the victim been effectively armed." Seth
© 2013/2014/2015/2016 Seth, all rights reserved. No reuse, republication, duplication, or derivative work is authorized.
"All that is required for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." Edmund Burke
"Those who support denying anyone the right to keep and bear arms for personal defense are fully complicit in every crime that might have been prevented had the victim been effectively armed." Seth
© 2013/2014/2015/2016 Seth, all rights reserved. No reuse, republication, duplication, or derivative work is authorized.
Re: Viewing Child Porn - Court Rules Legal
I assume someone would have to show evidence that you deliberately obtained the material for a conviction, but this is going to be have be done after an arrest (or at least the equivalent of a digital search warrant to look throuhg your PC)
When only criminals carry guns the police know exactly who to shoot!
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests