Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Code Project
  1. Home
  2. Other Discussions
  3. The Soapbox
  4. Judge Gives Pedo 5 Days

Judge Gives Pedo 5 Days

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved The Soapbox
rubycomhelpquestionannouncement
15 Posts 12 Posters 0 Views 1 Watching
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • K Offline
    K Offline
    Kevin Marois
    wrote on last edited by
    #1

    Unbelievable[^] "Brooklyn man who faced 10 years for downloading child pornography was sentenced to five days by a federal judge..." U.S. District Judge Jack Weinstein wrote a 98-page decision 98 PAGES!!??? Removing R.V. from his family will not further the interests of justice," Weinstein wrote, using the defendant's initials... It will cause serious harm to his young children by depriving them of a loving father and role model and will strip R.V. of the opportunity to heal through continued sustained treatment and the support of his close family LOVING FATHER AND ROLE MODE???????? WOW. Just wow.

    If it's not broken, fix it until it is

    L J M F OriginalGriffO 7 Replies Last reply
    0
    • K Kevin Marois

      Unbelievable[^] "Brooklyn man who faced 10 years for downloading child pornography was sentenced to five days by a federal judge..." U.S. District Judge Jack Weinstein wrote a 98-page decision 98 PAGES!!??? Removing R.V. from his family will not further the interests of justice," Weinstein wrote, using the defendant's initials... It will cause serious harm to his young children by depriving them of a loving father and role model and will strip R.V. of the opportunity to heal through continued sustained treatment and the support of his close family LOVING FATHER AND ROLE MODE???????? WOW. Just wow.

      If it's not broken, fix it until it is

      L Offline
      L Offline
      Lost User
      wrote on last edited by
      #2

      Looks like he wanted to make a point.

      1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • K Kevin Marois

        Unbelievable[^] "Brooklyn man who faced 10 years for downloading child pornography was sentenced to five days by a federal judge..." U.S. District Judge Jack Weinstein wrote a 98-page decision 98 PAGES!!??? Removing R.V. from his family will not further the interests of justice," Weinstein wrote, using the defendant's initials... It will cause serious harm to his young children by depriving them of a loving father and role model and will strip R.V. of the opportunity to heal through continued sustained treatment and the support of his close family LOVING FATHER AND ROLE MODE???????? WOW. Just wow.

        If it's not broken, fix it until it is

        J Offline
        J Offline
        jeron1
        wrote on last edited by
        #3

        From the link:

        I feel very remorseful. It's something that will never happen again.

        Well gee he said it, therefore it must be true. :mad:

        "the debugger doesn't tell me anything because this code compiles just fine" - random QA comment "Facebook is where you tell lies to your friends. Twitter is where you tell the truth to strangers." - chriselst "I don't drink any more... then again, I don't drink any less." - Mike Mullikins uncle

        1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • K Kevin Marois

          Unbelievable[^] "Brooklyn man who faced 10 years for downloading child pornography was sentenced to five days by a federal judge..." U.S. District Judge Jack Weinstein wrote a 98-page decision 98 PAGES!!??? Removing R.V. from his family will not further the interests of justice," Weinstein wrote, using the defendant's initials... It will cause serious harm to his young children by depriving them of a loving father and role model and will strip R.V. of the opportunity to heal through continued sustained treatment and the support of his close family LOVING FATHER AND ROLE MODE???????? WOW. Just wow.

          If it's not broken, fix it until it is

          M Offline
          M Offline
          Munchies_Matt
          wrote on last edited by
          #4

          "The man also had "sexual" chats with underage girls online" Which would have led to actual child abuse. OK, give him 5 days, but cut his bollocks off. And his dick. Then he wont be able to fantasise about anything.

          C 1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • K Kevin Marois

            Unbelievable[^] "Brooklyn man who faced 10 years for downloading child pornography was sentenced to five days by a federal judge..." U.S. District Judge Jack Weinstein wrote a 98-page decision 98 PAGES!!??? Removing R.V. from his family will not further the interests of justice," Weinstein wrote, using the defendant's initials... It will cause serious harm to his young children by depriving them of a loving father and role model and will strip R.V. of the opportunity to heal through continued sustained treatment and the support of his close family LOVING FATHER AND ROLE MODE???????? WOW. Just wow.

            If it's not broken, fix it until it is

            F Offline
            F Offline
            F ES Sitecore
            wrote on last edited by
            #5

            The man ... told NBC News he stumbled on child pornography while consuming legal, adult pornography online. "I just got caught up in it," he said. "It's not like I woke up and said, 'Listen, let me look at this stuff.' It kept popping up every time I was downloading."

            I've been known to look at pornography very occasionally (very occasionally, I'm not one of those pervs who look at it all the time :sigh: ) and I can honestly say none of the sites I have used (the fairly well known ones) advertise or carry anything like child porn. If he has been visiting sites that are a gateway to this stuff I dare say the sites he is using are probably quite questionable already, with questionable content. Now if you don't mind I have to run....there is a sexy single 3.1 miles from my current location who is DTF...

            J 1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • K Kevin Marois

              Unbelievable[^] "Brooklyn man who faced 10 years for downloading child pornography was sentenced to five days by a federal judge..." U.S. District Judge Jack Weinstein wrote a 98-page decision 98 PAGES!!??? Removing R.V. from his family will not further the interests of justice," Weinstein wrote, using the defendant's initials... It will cause serious harm to his young children by depriving them of a loving father and role model and will strip R.V. of the opportunity to heal through continued sustained treatment and the support of his close family LOVING FATHER AND ROLE MODE???????? WOW. Just wow.

              If it's not broken, fix it until it is

              OriginalGriffO Offline
              OriginalGriffO Offline
              OriginalGriff
              wrote on last edited by
              #6

              I think it's time the feds had a good hard look at the judges PC... :~

              Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...

              "I have no idea what I did, but I'm taking full credit for it." - ThisOldTony
              "Common sense is so rare these days, it should be classified as a super power" - Random T-shirt

              1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • M Munchies_Matt

                "The man also had "sexual" chats with underage girls online" Which would have led to actual child abuse. OK, give him 5 days, but cut his bollocks off. And his dick. Then he wont be able to fantasise about anything.

                C Offline
                C Offline
                Corporal Agarn
                wrote on last edited by
                #7

                Munchies_Matt wrote:

                chats with underage girls online"

                Probably fat old guys (or cops) pretending to be young girls.

                Mongo: Mongo only pawn... in game of life.

                1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • F F ES Sitecore

                  The man ... told NBC News he stumbled on child pornography while consuming legal, adult pornography online. "I just got caught up in it," he said. "It's not like I woke up and said, 'Listen, let me look at this stuff.' It kept popping up every time I was downloading."

                  I've been known to look at pornography very occasionally (very occasionally, I'm not one of those pervs who look at it all the time :sigh: ) and I can honestly say none of the sites I have used (the fairly well known ones) advertise or carry anything like child porn. If he has been visiting sites that are a gateway to this stuff I dare say the sites he is using are probably quite questionable already, with questionable content. Now if you don't mind I have to run....there is a sexy single 3.1 miles from my current location who is DTF...

                  J Offline
                  J Offline
                  Jeremy Falcon
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #8

                  F-ES Sitecore wrote:

                  Now if you don't mind I have to run....there is a sexy single 3.1 miles from my current location who is DTF...

                  :laugh:

                  Jeremy Falcon

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • K Kevin Marois

                    Unbelievable[^] "Brooklyn man who faced 10 years for downloading child pornography was sentenced to five days by a federal judge..." U.S. District Judge Jack Weinstein wrote a 98-page decision 98 PAGES!!??? Removing R.V. from his family will not further the interests of justice," Weinstein wrote, using the defendant's initials... It will cause serious harm to his young children by depriving them of a loving father and role model and will strip R.V. of the opportunity to heal through continued sustained treatment and the support of his close family LOVING FATHER AND ROLE MODE???????? WOW. Just wow.

                    If it's not broken, fix it until it is

                    Z Offline
                    Z Offline
                    ZurdoDev
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #9

                    Kevin Marois wrote:

                    LOVING FATHER

                    Are you judging him and claiming he is not a loving father? :-\ So, now fathers cannot love their children if they make mistakes? Geez, Kevin, you're so judgemental. You don't even know why he did it. ;P

                    There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.

                    enhzflepE 1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • K Kevin Marois

                      Unbelievable[^] "Brooklyn man who faced 10 years for downloading child pornography was sentenced to five days by a federal judge..." U.S. District Judge Jack Weinstein wrote a 98-page decision 98 PAGES!!??? Removing R.V. from his family will not further the interests of justice," Weinstein wrote, using the defendant's initials... It will cause serious harm to his young children by depriving them of a loving father and role model and will strip R.V. of the opportunity to heal through continued sustained treatment and the support of his close family LOVING FATHER AND ROLE MODE???????? WOW. Just wow.

                      If it's not broken, fix it until it is

                      J Offline
                      J Offline
                      jschell
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #10

                      Kevin Marois wrote:

                      "Brooklyn man who faced 10 years for downloading child pornography was sentenced to five days by a federal judge..."

                      Errr....and "seven years of court supervision and a fine"

                      Kevin Marois wrote:

                      U.S. District Judge Jack Weinstein wrote a 98-page decision

                      To explain why it wasn't more severe. Would one paragraph had been better?

                      Kevin Marois wrote:

                      WOW. Just wow.

                      However the converse argument is neither just nor fair. "Those who favor tougher sentences point out that while many consumers of child pornography may not never lay a hand on a child, some do." Same argument for that would be that if you steal a stick of gum when 17 you might rob a bank when you are 25 so you should be put in jail for 20 years. Real statistics reflect that the vast majority of sex offenders of any sort never re-offend. The recidivism rate is far lower than other sorts of crimes.

                      Richard DeemingR 1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • J jschell

                        Kevin Marois wrote:

                        "Brooklyn man who faced 10 years for downloading child pornography was sentenced to five days by a federal judge..."

                        Errr....and "seven years of court supervision and a fine"

                        Kevin Marois wrote:

                        U.S. District Judge Jack Weinstein wrote a 98-page decision

                        To explain why it wasn't more severe. Would one paragraph had been better?

                        Kevin Marois wrote:

                        WOW. Just wow.

                        However the converse argument is neither just nor fair. "Those who favor tougher sentences point out that while many consumers of child pornography may not never lay a hand on a child, some do." Same argument for that would be that if you steal a stick of gum when 17 you might rob a bank when you are 25 so you should be put in jail for 20 years. Real statistics reflect that the vast majority of sex offenders of any sort never re-offend. The recidivism rate is far lower than other sorts of crimes.

                        Richard DeemingR Online
                        Richard DeemingR Online
                        Richard Deeming
                        wrote on last edited by
                        #11

                        jschell wrote:

                        may not never lay a hand

                        I think you meant either "not ever" or "never". The double-negative totally changes the meaning of that sentence. :)


                        "These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined." - Homer

                        "These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined" - Homer

                        J 1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • Z ZurdoDev

                          Kevin Marois wrote:

                          LOVING FATHER

                          Are you judging him and claiming he is not a loving father? :-\ So, now fathers cannot love their children if they make mistakes? Geez, Kevin, you're so judgemental. You don't even know why he did it. ;P

                          There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.

                          enhzflepE Offline
                          enhzflepE Offline
                          enhzflep
                          wrote on last edited by
                          #12

                          My sentiments exactly. Bravo for sense and reason in what is undeniably a tough topic. :thumbsup:

                          Z 1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          • enhzflepE enhzflep

                            My sentiments exactly. Bravo for sense and reason in what is undeniably a tough topic. :thumbsup:

                            Z Offline
                            Z Offline
                            ZurdoDev
                            wrote on last edited by
                            #13

                            enhzflep wrote:

                            Bravo for sense and reason in what is undeniably a tough topic.

                            True. But it was actually an inside jab at Kevin for a discussion elsewhere. :-O

                            There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.

                            enhzflepE 1 Reply Last reply
                            0
                            • Z ZurdoDev

                              enhzflep wrote:

                              Bravo for sense and reason in what is undeniably a tough topic.

                              True. But it was actually an inside jab at Kevin for a discussion elsewhere. :-O

                              There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.

                              enhzflepE Offline
                              enhzflepE Offline
                              enhzflep
                              wrote on last edited by
                              #14

                              :grins: I couldn't possibly imagine why one would want to do such a thing. :-\

                              1 Reply Last reply
                              0
                              • Richard DeemingR Richard Deeming

                                jschell wrote:

                                may not never lay a hand

                                I think you meant either "not ever" or "never". The double-negative totally changes the meaning of that sentence. :)


                                "These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined." - Homer

                                J Offline
                                J Offline
                                jschell
                                wrote on last edited by
                                #15

                                Richard Deeming wrote:

                                I think you meant either "not ever" or "never". The double-negative totally changes the meaning of that sentence

                                My presumption is the same as yours based on the person that said it - which was not me. Thus why it is quoted and in italics.

                                1 Reply Last reply
                                0
                                Reply
                                • Reply as topic
                                Log in to reply
                                • Oldest to Newest
                                • Newest to Oldest
                                • Most Votes


                                • Login

                                • Don't have an account? Register

                                • Login or register to search.
                                • First post
                                  Last post
                                0
                                • Categories
                                • Recent
                                • Tags
                                • Popular
                                • World
                                • Users
                                • Groups