All those cult member Subway fans packing that restaurant during lunch makes me sick! Bunch of creepy weirdos!
Yeah. It is odd that 2/3 to 3/4 of that article is about the other guy. The rest of it is a rehash of what is "known" to date, with the addition of unsourced rumors of a pending plea.
You got my question, Cincy. Thanks.I don't want to put words in nits74's mouth, but I don't think he was insinuating it's victimless, but rather was engaging in the discussion of whether child porn on the comp conclusively says you're a pedophile who acts out on it. To which I would say, I don't think it's any kind of guarantee someone acts out on it, but that person is still a pedo as one doesn't have to act out on it in order to be one. If you're into watching that sort of sick crap, you're a pedo whether you act on it or not.
Understand, ChitownLion. But thinking about it, that same line of thinking could be applied to probably many other areas, albeit not nearly so diabolical, and also considered to be transgressions. As Cincy noted, my inquiry related more to understanding the law around all of this. Both of your replies were good ones.nits74, the law takes action against collectors of child pornography because it is not a victimless crime. Every click/hit/viewing/etc essentially results in a partial funding of continued child sexual abuse and human trafficking. I can see why some might question the merits of punishing the so-called uninvolved observer, but present-day law recognizes these people as sponsors of crimes against humanity. I'm not sure if this is the appropriate response for someone who types the subject line into a google search for purposes of research and unwittingly winds up with a hard drive contaminated by images of child abuse... but, this seems to be a subject that requires a little more awareness. For example, think of the med school student at Michigan who had 100+ images of children engaged in horrific sex acts with adults... how would you feel if you found out your kids' pediatrician was none other than Stephen Jenson?
The mere POSSESSION of child porn is a crime as is the mere POSSESSION of illegal drugs. I am fairly sure they do not even have to prove you viewed it, just like they do not have to prove you ate the drugs for you to go to jail.Understand, ChitownLion. But thinking about it, that same line of thinking could be applied to probably many other areas, albeit not nearly so diabolical, and also considered to be transgressions. As Cincy noted, my inquiry related more to understanding the law around all of this. Both of your replies were good ones.
Got ya. Another example I thought of is the communication with ISIS or other terrorists over the internet with the perceived intent of committing an act of terrorism. Don't get me wrong, the guy should go to jail. But, I question whether he will.The mere POSSESSION of child porn is a crime as is the mere POSSESSION of illegal drugs. I am fairly sure they do not even have to prove you viewed it, just like they do not have to prove you ate the drugs for you to go to jail.
The mere POSSESSION of child porn is a crime as is the mere POSSESSION of illegal drugs. I am fairly sure they do not even have to prove you viewed it, just like they do not have to prove you ate the drugs for you to go to jail.
Oh I have my own doubts about his jail time, but this is not mere possession, it is statutory rape as well. I would be shocked if he just simply walks.Got ya. Another example I thought of is the communication with ISIS or other terrorists over the internet with the perceived intent of committing an act of terrorism. Don't get me wrong, the guy should go to jail. But, I question whether he will.
Dem, I read somewhere that the age of consent in Indiana is 16 and the girl was 16. I must be missing something?Oh I have my own doubts about his jail time, but this is not mere possession, it is statutory rape as well. I would be shocked if he just simply walks.
He'll do time alright. Update from the article I linked:Oh I have my own doubts about his jail time, but this is not mere possession, it is statutory rape as well. I would be shocked if he just simply walks.
There were others in New York, not Indiana. "The plea agreement says Fogle traveled to New York and paid for sex with at least two minors between about 2010 and 2013 at the Plaza Hotel and the Ritz Carlton Hotel. The victims were 16 and 17 years old."Yes, and it seems as if mainstream age-of-consent porn isn't victimless either.
Dem, I read somewhere that the age of consent in Indiana is 16 and the girl was 16. I must be missing something?
How do you know that there are "plenty" of foot longs in prison? What's your experience?It would be totally inappropriate to mention that he'll get plenty of foot longs in prison so I won't do it.
Individuals observing and commenting on the potentially obvious is one thing. News headlines dragging someone's name through the mud publicly before anyone is even accused of wrongdoing is something else entirely. While some might argue we shouldn't even spread rumors at the individual level, the latter is still unacceptable IMO, regardless of the fact that in this example the end may have justified the means.Yeah, some of us tried saying the FBI doesn't "raid" homes without a warrant. And the warrant doesn't come without probable cause. But others here are now so worried about rushes to judgment that they think it's a crime to connect any two dots. I agree there shouldn't be a rush, but we also shouldn't be forbidden from observing the obvious.
So are all the victims lying in this case as well? Just wondering.Here's a freak they obviously found porn on the computer, yet there was a lack of any on JS computer?
Hmmmmmmmmmmmm...that hogwash excuse pedos don't keep porn on computers just went down the commode with the rest of JJ's turds.
Emmert weighing in.....
All Subway sites going back to when J was hired as spokesman do not exist
In yet another example of their obsession with us, the Lair currently has a thread that looks to tie Subway, Jared, JS, and PSU into a huge pedophile chain that seemingly leaves nobody in the U.S. unsullied, except perhaps for Pitt grads, even though most of them work at Subway.
I know I shouldn't go over there, but they are like a terrible car wreck right outside your house. It's impossible not to look.
So are all the victims lying in this case as well? Just wondering.
What did Indiana university know and when?
How do you know that there are "plenty" of foot longs in prison? What's your experience?