I'm not defending anyone. I'm stating facts. Just like the fact is that blacks reoffend at a higher rate than whites and if you say so you're called a racist even though it's true, sex offenders reoffend at a lower rate than any other crime and if stating that FACT gets me called a sex offender defender, oh well. So be it.
I'm not sure but it was 3 or 4. I know one guy had no photos in his possession at all, no matter what they did, so he walked scott free. One guy got caught with an ounce of weed during the search and another guy got caught with illegal music. But only Eric actually got caught with photos, that were digitally brought back from the dead on a dead computer in an attic.
Really? He must have had some of those files in the open for his college to find out about them. That would be the first instance of stupidity. Second instance would be admitting those were his photos. Why did he tell the college, the cops and the judge that those were his pics if he were unwilling to face the consequences? Third instance, staying where he feels he's being unjustly punished. If it's all that bad, leave for a state that has no such provision. In short, I think your friend is whinging about something that was remediable at the time and remains so.
Ok, you're assuming a lot where you have no information. 1. His college didnt find out. THE MOTHER OF THE GIRL FOUND OUT. I already stated this, try to keep up. 2. He didn't admit they were his photos. He didn't have to. The computer was found in his possession in his attic. He's not accused of taking them, just of possessing them. 3. He didn't tell the college, the cops or the judge they were his pics. He told nobody anything. He spoke not a word to the cops when they came with the search warrant. 4. He can't afford to just up and move. He has a mortgage and a family to tend to. It's not that easy to just "up and move to another state."
Somebody sends me one of those spam mails everyone knows (Penis enlargement or Generic Viagra from Pakistan). I look at it and delete it. Later somebody restores all deleted files and charges me for having had the file on my comuter or even having looked at them. What else could I have done with those files NOT to commit an offense?
1) The OP said he was in college. I somehow got the idea this was relevant. 2) If the cops had to reconstruct the photos from his hard drive, he could claim that he bought the computer secondhand and had no knowledge. 3) So he didn't plead guilty? Forgive me, that was in the OP too. 4) Actually it is. If he wants it. It appears he doesn't.
Ok, apparently you know even less about this than I thought you did. 1. I said he was in college AT THE TIME. He's not in college now, genius. 2. If you are in possession of a computer that has illegal images on it, YOU ARE IN POSSESSION OF CHILD PORN. It doesn't matter if you bought the computer or not. 3. He did plea guilty. Pleading guilty is not telling the cops they are his images. Pleading guilty is trying to avoid the sledgehammer and hoping for just the mallet. He had to plea guilty or else he was looking at 10 years in a federal prison if convicted. They had the images they undeleted off of his hard drive. What chance do you think he honestly would have had in court? All they had to do was put up one image on the screen that they found on his computer and he's guilty. You tell me what you'd do. Plea guilty: 20-something months and 3 years probation. Plea not guilty and be found guilty: 120 months with 5 years probation. 4. Actually, no it's not. I don't know if you know this, but thanks to your man Obama, 90 million are out of work. One with a felony cannot find work as easily as someone without and considering without a felony people are struggling to find a job, he's very smart to just stay where he has work.
So why mention college at all? So now you admit his guilt. Before it was your contention he pled guilty in order to make the whole thing go away. It appears that was not the case. I am not the person in question. I think he had no chance in court because he was guilty. First off, the fact that he stays where he is means that he lacks the courage of his convictions (snicker). I mean really, if he feels abused by the society he lives in he should leave for another less abusive one. Second, Obama is not my man. I voted for Gary Johnson for POTUS. But I doubt your statistic that 90 Million people are out of work, ynless we're counting kids too. After all, only about 60-65% of our population is between 18 and 65. Given a population of 316 million, having 90 million out of work would be an unemployment rate between 25 and 30%. I don't think it's that high. Please leave me a source for your figure. Mine is the US Census Bureau. Third, hey genius, he should find the job before he moves. Remember that carts and horses have to go in a certain order. You're coming off pretty whiny on the subject of moving and full of reasons why he shouldn't.
Because his AGE AT THE TIME means a lot. It's far different if a 19yo guy has pics of his 17yo gf or a 50yo guy has pics of a 17yo girl he doesn't know. If a 19yo guy takes pics of his 17yo gf and saves them for 30 years, now he's a 49yo guy with those same pics. He got older, but his gf in the pics didn't. I know many kids in high school made videos of themselves having sex with their boyfriends/girlfriends. None of them were caught except for this guy. Did you know in our state its legal for a 19yo guy to screw the hell out of his 17yo gf, but not take a photo or video of her having sex with him? I NEVER SAID HE WAS INNOCENT. In fact, please show me in a quote where I said this guy was innocent of the charges. I said they had to use sophisticated technology to pull back the pics he had from 5 years prior. I said that shows he had no intention of having these pics anymore and could not delete them any more than they were already deleted. It's readily apparent I'm wasting my time with you because you read stuff that isn't posted.
Cars manufactured before the seatbelt law became mandatory are NOT required to be fitted with seatbelts. Because its illegal to apply a law retroactively. Ever noticed that sticker on your car that says "This vehicle complies with all NHTSA standards effective on the date of manufacture?" There is a reason for that. The ACA is illegal on many grounds, retro-activity not even being considered.
It wouldn't really be retroactive to say 'Any car being driven on public roads as of /date/ must be equipped with a seatbelt.' Such a law would be enforceable the same as the insurance laws. What you're talking about here is a grandfather clause. In any case what your friend did was illegal when he did it, it was illegal when he was arrested and convicted for it and it remains illegal. There's no way he could be subject to a grandfather clause.
Nobody ever said it was legal. The part that is not right is ADDING MORE THINGS FOR HIM TO DO after!! It's not about his conviction, it's about his drivers licence. This thread has gotten so far off topic. Nobody ever said his pics were legal or that he was innocent.
The clear implication was that it was a technical violation. Do you not understand civil penalties? They're all about his conviction! Once again, the clear implication was that he was in technical violation, not direct violation of the law.
Do you not understand what civil penalties are? Apparently not. If he doesn't get the licence, it's not a civil penalty, it's criminal. And not a misdemeanor, but a felony. You can't get civil penalties without a civil trail. Civil penalties are never criminal, in this case, its a criminal penalty, not a civil one. I'm done with you, it's apparent this whole situation flew well over your head.
Retroactive laws are undesirable because the crooks don't even give you a heads up before seizing your sovereignty and sending you off to a cage. At least we currently have the courtesy of knowing what they'll punish you for.
No, you just flat out don't get it. You think Eric having to do this drivers licence thing is civil, when refusing to do it is criminal. That alone shows you are clueless and continued conversation with you on this is futile. Anyone else who is educated on this have an opinion?
