Slashdot Mirror

At 30 frames per second, 1 million images is about 10 hours of video.

Don't believe the hype.

Come to think of it, I don't believe your hype - especially after reading about cops eating donuts and joking about the child pornography they were viewing as part of their "job".

The Trojan Horse of Child Protection

I would like to send you some links to publications about my criminal case. I was forced to confess to the possession of internet digital pictures of porn in deleted clusters of my computer hard drive. My browser was hijacked while I was browsing the web. I was redirected to illegal sites against my will. Some illegal pictures were found on my hard drive, recovering in unallocated clusters, without dates of file creation/download. I do not know how courts can widely press these charges on people to convict them, while the whole Internet is a mess. This is my story in inquisition21.com. There is all information about case written by Irish writer Brian Rothery. You can see a lot of violations of law by police http://www.inquisition21.com/article~view~7~page_n um~3.html This is publication in Wired news http://www.wired.com/news/infostructure/0,1377,633 91,00.html This is publication in Theregester http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/05/13/browser_hi jacking_risks/ Article in Globe and Mail newspaper http://ctv.globetechnology.com/servlet/story/RTGAM .20040617.gttwhijac17/tech/Technology/techBN/ctv-t echnology Article in ZDnet http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1105_2-5344831.html This is article in Washington Times, May 22, 2004 There is information about my case. http://www.cato.org/cgi-bin/scripts/printtech.cgi/ dailys/05-30-04.html Article in Crime research center: http://www.crime-research.org/news/07.22.2004/506/ Article in Dallas, TX Newspaper http://www.crime-research.org/news/24.12.2004/862/ Child porn law was declared unconstitutional in Hennepin County, Minnesota, USA' http://xbiz.com/news_piece.php?id=11750 "I came here to the US as political refugee from the former Soviet Union, and, now like many other people in the US, I feel shame that all of this can happen in the US - supposed to be the greatest democracy in the world."

As another poster has already pointed out, this is just another example of thought crime and those who wish to use it as a bid to take more control over the lives of others.

--I*Love*Green*Olives

Here's more background on these cases. A load of wrongly convicted have banded together regarding calims of Operation Ore http://www.inquisition21.com/ and more importantly this http://www.computer-investigations.com/index3.html I hope the victims win and the police are "spanked"

That's nice rhetoric and a few years ago I would have believed this too.

However, having lived in the United Kingdom and having been involved in a prosecution of an offender, I can say that this could not be further from the truth.

The truth is that it is very, very hard to prosecute somebody for child porn possession if they're will to fight it. The "It was a virus defence" almost always gets the case chucked before it even reaches a jury. There's this thing called "continuity of evidence" and it's a hard hurdle to jump over (and rightly so).

And that's why the police have been running a smear campaign rather than a proper investigation. What does it matter if a thousand innocents suffer as long as one paedofile suffers as well.

http://www.inquisition21.com/

It appears that the name of one of the senior Canadian investigators was on the list of names.
http://www.inquisition21.com/index.php?module=anno unce&ANN_user_op=view&ANN_id=286

One person who faced no charges - but lost his job and is now losing his home because he shopped at tesco.
http://www.inquisition21.com/index.php?module=anno unce&ANN_user_op=view&ANN_id=284

"Later in September 2004, I received a letter from the Hampshire police stating that as there was no evidence of any wrongdoing found on any of my computers or on any of the hundreds of flash drives, CD disks or floppy disks they had seized during their two searches they were not taking any further action in my case. They told me to come and collect my property or they would dispose of it."

Google doesn't list inquisition21 but won't say why. (Inquisition21 say it's at the behest of US and UK police requests)
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/09/21/google_del ists_inq21/

Tim.

That's nice rhetoric and a few years ago I would have believed this too.

However, having lived in the United Kingdom and having been involved in a prosecution of an offender, I can say that this could not be further from the truth.

The truth is that it is very, very hard to prosecute somebody for child porn possession if they're will to fight it. The "It was a virus defence" almost always gets the case chucked before it even reaches a jury. There's this thing called "continuity of evidence" and it's a hard hurdle to jump over (and rightly so).

And that's why the police have been running a smear campaign rather than a proper investigation. What does it matter if a thousand innocents suffer as long as one paedofile suffers as well.

http://www.inquisition21.com/

It appears that the name of one of the senior Canadian investigators was on the list of names.
http://www.inquisition21.com/index.php?module=anno unce&ANN_user_op=view&ANN_id=286

One person who faced no charges - but lost his job and is now losing his home because he shopped at tesco.
http://www.inquisition21.com/index.php?module=anno unce&ANN_user_op=view&ANN_id=284

"Later in September 2004, I received a letter from the Hampshire police stating that as there was no evidence of any wrongdoing found on any of my computers or on any of the hundreds of flash drives, CD disks or floppy disks they had seized during their two searches they were not taking any further action in my case. They told me to come and collect my property or they would dispose of it."

Google doesn't list inquisition21 but won't say why. (Inquisition21 say it's at the behest of US and UK police requests)
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/09/21/google_del ists_inq21/

Tim.

That's nice rhetoric and a few years ago I would have believed this too.

However, having lived in the United Kingdom and having been involved in a prosecution of an offender, I can say that this could not be further from the truth.

The truth is that it is very, very hard to prosecute somebody for child porn possession if they're will to fight it. The "It was a virus defence" almost always gets the case chucked before it even reaches a jury. There's this thing called "continuity of evidence" and it's a hard hurdle to jump over (and rightly so).

And that's why the police have been running a smear campaign rather than a proper investigation. What does it matter if a thousand innocents suffer as long as one paedofile suffers as well.

http://www.inquisition21.com/

It appears that the name of one of the senior Canadian investigators was on the list of names.
http://www.inquisition21.com/index.php?module=anno unce&ANN_user_op=view&ANN_id=286

One person who faced no charges - but lost his job and is now losing his home because he shopped at tesco.
http://www.inquisition21.com/index.php?module=anno unce&ANN_user_op=view&ANN_id=284

"Later in September 2004, I received a letter from the Hampshire police stating that as there was no evidence of any wrongdoing found on any of my computers or on any of the hundreds of flash drives, CD disks or floppy disks they had seized during their two searches they were not taking any further action in my case. They told me to come and collect my property or they would dispose of it."

Google doesn't list inquisition21 but won't say why. (Inquisition21 say it's at the behest of US and UK police requests)
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/09/21/google_del ists_inq21/

Tim.

More links to check out:
http://pedologues.libsyn.com/
http://www.annabelleigh.net/
http://www.boyloverlinks.net/
http://theboyloveblog.blogspot.com/
http://www.cblf.org/
http://www.logicalreality.com/
http://www.inquisition21.com/
http://www.ipce.org/

What Brian Rothery actually said. I dunno why the article spun what he said so differently.

I'm 95% sure the guy is innocent of the child porn thing.

I wouldn't send anyone to jail with crappy evidence like this. Browsers and PCs can be hijacked and hijacking is widespread. The scum who do the hijacking are the ones who should be sent to jail - they throw kids into jail for writing worms/viruses, well they should throw the hijacking scumbags in first.

I use IE but have scripting etc off (it's even off for my Local computer zone - so many of the zone crossing exploits won't work on me), so I have no such probs, but think of your nonsavvy friends and relatives.