thetammyjo
Posts: 6322
Joined: 9/8/2005 Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: DestinyCommander quote:
ORIGINAL: thetammyjo Secondly, the issue of child pornography really makes this more intense. When someone sees this, regardless of the other stuff, they've basically decided against him. I tend to discount reports of child porn. I do believe it exists, and I think it is a disgusting thing. But it is also one of those things that becomes a "guilty until proven innocent". So much so, that I think law enforcement sometimes makes it up to make someone look worse. The contract in and of itself isn't really a bad thing. It isn't illegal, because it wasn't signed. And it's entirely circumstantial, unless they've got his fingerprints on it. So this woman's case comes down to he-said vs. she-said. Then what's a prosecutor to do? Make up a child porn charge. Then in the public's mind, the guy is automatically guilty of anything else they choose to throw at him. I honestly don't know how child porn is brought in as evidence in a trial, but I highly doubt they print the photos and show it to the jury. If they did, the proscecutor would be guiltly of disseminating it. If the police are motivated in putting the guy away because they didn't like the contract, they might well be willing to stretch the truth a little on the stand when in comes to what they found on his computer. (That's not to say the police are "lying", just that since they are convinced he's guilty of something, they are subconsciously motivated to make others believe it.) Even if they never persue the child porn charges officially in court, public opinion (e.g., the jury's opinion) is stacked against him, and the guy never gets a chance at a fair trial. Now that's not to say it wasn't true... but I certainly don't believe everything I read. You basically explained what I was trying to say which is that the child porn charge really will outweight the other stuff in the public's mind and the legal system both. It is the one area where in the USA the Supreme has routinely agreed it is perfectly all right to limit free speech. (I taught a history of erotic literature class last semester and we spent some time on these issues) There's also a third possibility in that the spouse might be the one collecting said porn or may have placed it there to help her case. Again, I don't think its wise to pass judgement or claim this as attacks on BDSM in general when crap like this shows up in child custody, domestic abuse and divorce cases all the time. Sometimes what is said is true, sometimes its an attack.
_____________________________
Love, Peace, Hugs, Kisses, Whips & Chains, TammyJo Check out my website at http://www.thetammyjo.com Or www.tammyjoeckhart.com And my LJ where I post fiction in progress if you "friend" me at http://thetammyjo.livejournal.com/
|