The Ledge

Go Back   The Ledge > Main Forums > Stevie Nicks
User Name
Password
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read


Make the Ads Go Away! Click here.
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #16  
Old 11-15-2017, 06:54 AM
SisterNightroad's Avatar
SisterNightroad SisterNightroad is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Italy
Posts: 4,768
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bombaysaffires View Post
the fact that whatever images there were got discovered when he took his computer in for repairs may have been enough of a loophole where he could say, it wasn't mine, it wasn't on there when I took it in, and how do you prove he's right or he's making it up? The possibility that someone else used the computer since it was out of his possession could be enough to cast 'reasonable doubt'.
It's possible to trace the date an image has been first downloaded or uploaded on a PC, so it's not possible to unload the blame on the technician that discovered the material, and while Waddy could have said that someone else at another time could have uploaded the images on his computer without him knowing, the excuse wouldn't stand since then it would pose the question of why he didn't delete after finding them out (unless that is what truly has happened).
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 11-15-2017, 07:31 AM
jenniferuk jenniferuk is online now
Addicted Ledgie
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: London transplant in Ohio
Posts: 560
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bombaysaffires View Post
the fact that whatever images there were got discovered when he took his computer in for repairs may have been enough of a loophole where he could say, it wasn't mine, it wasn't on there when I took it in, and how do you prove he's right or he's making it up? The possibility that someone else used the computer since it was out of his possession could be enough to cast 'reasonable doubt'.
IIRC, the issue at the time was that printed images were also found. I'm sure there are other articles from the time.

Here's one link:

http://www.mtv.com/news/400485/guita...d-pornography/
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 11-15-2017, 02:45 PM
FuzzyPlum FuzzyPlum is offline
Addicted Ledgie
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 2,205
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SisterNightroad View Post
1) medical material that include images of undressed minors
2) artistic depictions of underage figures
3) fetishist pornographic material with young actors posing as minors e.g. "schoolgirl" or "milf with teenager" videos; (particularly debated because in the pornographic world often are illicitly employed real underage actors)
4) animated pornography depicting young-looking people aka the famous "lolita" trope (one of the most disputed because it doesn't involve real minors)
5) receiving sexual messages or videos by someone who is under the age of 18

I wouldn't feel comfortable associating with anyone that fell into any of these categories. They might be borderlines but thy surely reflect an individual's mindset.
Not saying any of these were the case in point.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 11-15-2017, 04:10 PM
SisterNightroad's Avatar
SisterNightroad SisterNightroad is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Italy
Posts: 4,768
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by FuzzyPlum View Post
I wouldn't feel comfortable associating with anyone that fell into any of these categories. They might be borderlines but they surely reflect an individual's mindset.
Not saying any of these were the case in point.
I understand but it's a stretch suggesting a link between sexual fantasies about having sex with late adolescents and pedophilia or child abuse.
You might be surprised then that I feel entirely uncomfortable with only two of those instances and the others are all things I entered in contact with somehow at some point in my life, even if in tame examples.
The point is that these are all cases that seem macabre written on paper, and many times when translated in real life examples they indeed are, but there are also many times in which the facts must be interpreted.
I remember the case of one of my favourite comics author that risked banning due to the aforementioned laws because some scenes in their work depicted minors having a bath.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 11-15-2017, 04:33 PM
Jondalar's Avatar
Jondalar Jondalar is offline
Addicted Ledgie
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 5,698
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jenniferuk View Post
IIRC, the issue at the time was that printed images were also found. I'm sure there are other articles from the time.

Here's one link:

http://www.mtv.com/news/400485/guita...d-pornography/
Here is what I gather. They raided his home for drugs and seized his computer. The computer crap doesnít worry me because he could of clicked on a bad link or something. However, they also found printed materials. That worries me. If he has printed materials doesnít seem like that is a mistake.
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 11-16-2017, 06:06 AM
Macfan4life's Avatar
Macfan4life Macfan4life is online now
Addicted Ledgie
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Somewhere out in the back of your mind
Posts: 1,908
Default

The answers to our questions are in the MTV link someone posted. Waddy was arrested for kiddie porn materials/images printed out. He was charged with a misdemeanor which carries a maximum of one year in jail. I have never heard of a misdemeanor charge of child pornography. It could be something to do with the images themselves which is something we will never know. I do know child porn charges get enhanced if any images portray children under 12 years old and I think may get enhanced again for images portraying children under 6. The first few articles posted were very murky with stating he was charged with "suspicion of child pornography." You cant get convicted of suspicion. There must be evidence of a crime. For example, suspicion of bank robbery? Either you robbed the bank and there is evidence of that or not. No one gets arrested or charged with suspicion.
Things have changed some since 1998. Today the federal government is more involved charging people with child porn than the states did back then. In addition the sentences are more harsh. I did look up California statute and it said a felony conviction of child pornography can get 8 years maximum. A misdemeanor charge carries a maximum of 1 year in jail. In Miami last year there was a fireman in the city who was discovered to have child porn on his laptop. He was sentenced to 20 years in prison. He was prosecuted in federal court. I believe the CA statute requires any sex offender conviction to register as a sex offender for life. This means anywhere Waddy would move, he must check in and register with that state or local law enforcement office. In addition each country would have similar regulations and that is how this Australia thing made the news. Either Waddy and his wife dodged a bullet or the images were borderline child porn and thus the misdemeanor charge.
__________________

Still I believe.....LOVE will show us how

Last edited by Macfan4life : 11-16-2017 at 06:10 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 11-17-2017, 09:40 AM
Josh2003's Avatar
Josh2003 Josh2003 is offline
Addicted Ledgie
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Columbus, OH
Posts: 1,439
Default

Prosecutors/law enforcement take crimes against children, and in particular sex crimes (including child pornography) VERY seriously. I find it highly, highly doubtful they would have dismissed charges or even let him plead to a misdemeanor if there was any indication he was doing something, or in possession of items, that would warrant a more severe sanction.
__________________


http://www.twitter.com/jtwill84
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 11-17-2017, 02:00 PM
FuzzyPlum FuzzyPlum is offline
Addicted Ledgie
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 2,205
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Josh2003 View Post
Prosecutors/law enforcement take crimes against children, and in particular sex crimes (including child pornography) VERY seriously. I find it highly, highly doubtful they would have dismissed charges or even let him plead to a misdemeanor if there was any indication he was doing something, or in possession of items, that would warrant a more severe sanction.

That's the case now. I think the world was a slightly different place regarding this sort of thing even as recently as 20 or so years ago. Cant speak for the rest of the world but certainly here in the UK there was a lot that was brushed off and ignored back in the 70's, 80's and even 90's that would never be ignored or disregarded now.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old Yesterday, 06:36 AM
Macfan4life's Avatar
Macfan4life Macfan4life is online now
Addicted Ledgie
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Somewhere out in the back of your mind
Posts: 1,908
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by FuzzyPlum View Post
That's the case now. I think the world was a slightly different place regarding this sort of thing even as recently as 20 or so years ago. Cant speak for the rest of the world but certainly here in the UK there was a lot that was brushed off and ignored back in the 70's, 80's and even 90's that would never be ignored or disregarded now.
Didn't Pete Townshend get off in England when child porn was found on his computer by alleging he was "researching" child porn vicitms?
__________________

Still I believe.....LOVE will show us how
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old Yesterday, 06:37 PM
sue sue is offline
Addicted Ledgie
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: berkshire
Posts: 554
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Macfan4life View Post
Didn't Pete Townshend get off in England when child porn was found on his computer by alleging he was "researching" child porn vicitms?
Yes he was either doing some kind of research as he had been abused as a boy or trying to prove Credit card companies made money from this....
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old Today, 08:25 AM
FuzzyPlum FuzzyPlum is offline
Addicted Ledgie
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 2,205
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sue View Post
Yes he was either doing some kind of research as he had been abused as a boy or trying to prove Credit card companies made money from this....

So his story goes
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old Today, 08:55 AM
TheWildHeart67's Avatar
TheWildHeart67 TheWildHeart67 is offline
Addicted Ledgie
 
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 338
Default

[quote]Yes he was either doing some kind of research as he had been abused as a boy or trying to prove Credit card companies made money from this/QUOTE]
Prove credit card companies make money from this?? Huh
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Forum Jump

1997 Pretty Blond Singer Bekka Bramlett With Billy Burnette Press Photo
$20.0
1997 Pretty Blond Singer Bekka Bramlett With Billy Burnette Press Photo pictureSam Moore/Bekka Bramlett Signed/Autographed CD Sleeve/Obtained In Person
$12.95
Sam Moore/Bekka Bramlett Signed/Autographed CD Sleeve/Obtained In Person picture



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:50 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 1995-2003 Martin and Lisa Adelson, All Rights Reserved