Slashdot Mirror
Jack Thompson Includes Gay Porn With Court Filing
An anonymous reader writes "Jack Thompson has done it again, now by making available gay porn for unlimited viewing on public records. Judge Jordan wrote on an issued order: 'The attached exhibit, which includes several graphic images of oral and genital sex between adult males, was filed electronically in the docket in this case, without prior permission from the court... To the extent that the other attorney's alleged conduct is in any way relevant... there was no need for Mr. Thompson to file these graphic images in the public record. A simple reference to the website and its alleged links would have sufficed...'" I'm usually not a fan of giving Thompson continued free publicity, but some of the things he does are just too outlandish not to share.
Were they from your private stash?
How can I believe you when you tell me what I don't want to hear?
It's filling my mind with disgusting images!
s/filling/filing
My blog
This man is a nuisance to the public!
I suffer from attention surplus disorder.
So you made it a story on /.?
Here's to you, Mister Hide It in Plain View Guy!
You keep thinking he couldn't get any wackier and do anything more outlandish than subpoena the President, and then he goes and does this.
How will you top this, Mr. Thompson? Are you gonna shoot the Pope?
Next, he'll link to here, to prove that gamers and people in the IT world are HOMOPHOBIC and must be stopped. It's all part of his larger plan. Seriously.
SQL programmer goes to a bar. Walks up to two tables and says 'Excuse me, may I join you?'.
The sad part really is... when doing this he honestly believes that he is discrediting Norm Kent rather then himself.
He is over estimating how 'horrified' people are by homosexuality, believing that by bringing these images to the courts attention that he is somehow unmasking the horrors of Mr Kent's orientation.
I don't want to know... I don't want to know...
Throw him in the slammer. That'll learn him gay porn first hand!
Just be grateful he's spending long hours, night after night protecting us from the gays. Maybe he should move to Iran I hear they don't have gay people there.
Sumbit it? He should pose for it.
"History doesn't repeat itself, but it does rhyme." Mark Twain
Thompson becomes a little more like Ann Coulter every day. So sad and crazy that you feel pity, but then they open their yap and you remember why you despise them more than pity them.
...I know that you're desperate, but bribing the judge with your home videos will almost certainly NOT work.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
More Twoson than Cupertino
Seriously! Besides being a nuisance to the entire game industry including the gamers themselves, he goes and he does stuff like this. Wasn't he on trial just a few months ago for being in contempt of court? He's a nuisance to the entire legal system of the United States; all he does is create more troubles and headaches for everyone, and makes himself look like a complete asshole in the process. Worse, he gives people who don't want to blame thinks such as poverty or psychological issues a way to use the legal system to blame other, mostly unrelated activities, such as gaming. They really need to disbar Thompson. This has gotten rather ludicrous.
"The guy is mentally ill, is not in any way a policymaker and the only reason why he keeps getting attention here and from the gam3r media is that they think it's amusing to kick around a mentally incompetent person."
No, the reason he gets attention is because he's trying to infringe on our rights and has enough power to be dangerous.
If he was some nut screaming on a street corner, we'd ignore him, but he shows up on MSNBC, so he needs to be rebutted.
I only go to buffets for the unlimited soft serve.
He is obsessed with gay sex.
Against it or for it - you know that when he's obsessed - he's a Homo.
"Flyin' in just a sweet place,
Never been known to fail..."
It has nothing to do with him being mentally incompetent. We didn't just go out and pick someone who is mentally ill to kick around. This guy came after us. He made threats, he lied about us as gamers, he's trying to infringe on other people's free speech.
He gets attention from us because the media takes the man seriously. At least, they did before this -- I'm not sure how many interviews he'll get after this.
He is ridiculous, no one will argue that point (except perhaps Jack Thompson), but he is still a threat because he believes he is right and has not yet been discredited in the media.
Actually, I'm surprised the nut isn't cohosting a show with Nancy Grace yet, now that I think about it.
Jack Thompson's "moral crusade" against video games, obscenity, rap and well anything morally devient is due wholely to his own immoral desires. Jack cannot control his porn cravings and his lust for violence. So he goes on a holy crusade to eliminate the corruption of the world as a cover. In reality he is fighting his own internal demons.
Jack Thompson feels that by cleaning the world, his internal struggle will diminish and he will become a normal and productive human in the near future. The fool crusade he runs is selfish and in no way there to benefit humanity as a whole.
There is possibly quite a bit more 100 million video game systems out there. Yet if video games turned people violent, then there's be at least 1-20 million murders a year related to video games, providing that is 1-20% conversion rate. yet the fact is that quite possibly 0.00004% video gamers turn criminally violent.
There are over 17,000,000 registered gun users in the USA alone, yet we dont have murder numbers that even come close to that. 99.99901% of gun crime is done by Illegaly obtained fire arms. I've known many gamers who play violent games and own real guns. Yet somehow they have failed to kill anyone.
Jack plays a numbers game formatted to his own crusade. He wants to win for once, since pretty much every other crusade he has taken up failed in some way.
Jack needs a psychiatrist to help him, not an end to the worlds deviance. Any lawyer who sends his photo ID with batman pasted over it, has some sort of mental ailment that needs professional help.
To JAck, I hope you get well. Just dont bring down the rest of the world because of your war with your inner demons. Just fight youw own internal battle and let us govern ourselves.
He's like the Andy Kaufman of the US legal system.
Someday REM will sing a song about him.
Innovation makes enemies of all those who prospered under the old regime... -- Machiavelli
Maybe he needs to rename his porn stash to something other than "importantevidence001289.JPG".
I'd be the last to defend this wacko in general, and I can't read his pea brain to fathom his motives, but when dealing with images from websites that are to be used as some sort of evidence in a lawsuit or other court filing, it may be that simply providing a URL to the images has its potential pitfalls. Websites and links, especially for pr0n, come and go, and it would be pretty frustrating to provide the URLs, then to find that by the time someone gets around to viewing them, there's nothing but a 404 or some abandoned domain holding page there. Sure, maybe there's a cache of it on Google or Wayback or somewhere, but maybe there isn't. Then you have to try to see if there is a cache of the page sitting on some other server somewhere, and it gets more complicated.
Personally, if I had a legal case that depended on some image or text on a website, I'd rely not on an image, transcript, or URL reference, but would want to take a screenshot of a browser displaying the page in question, as well as the date and time stamp. That would seem to be of far more evidentiary value in the event that the site gets nuked in an attempt to cover someone's ass.
(And yes, I realize that last sentence left y'all wide open to make some humorous gay pr0n reference....have at it.)
"Every great cause begins as a movement, becomes a business, and eventually degenerates into a racket." -- Eric Hoffer
Thompson could never hope to half the man Ann Coulter is.
Its probably just photos of him and his friends from his private collection
Had he presented this in a court-room, it likely would have been a different story.
Magic doesn't work in my presence. My power of disbelief is too strong.
You give Thompson a lot of credit... Ann Coulter is a very smart woman. She's made a career from shock politics - talking about her like she's insane or something only plays into the image that she's selling. It keeps her in the limelight, sells books, and gets her column space. Don't play her game by buying it.
I applaud your attempted misreading of your quoted citation:
...
:0)>
Quoting "Is Homophobia Associated With Homosexual Arousal?" (Adams, et al.):
"Whereas difficulties of objectively evaluating
psychoanalytic hypotheses are well-documented, these ap-
proaches would predict that sexual arousal is an intrinsic re-
sponse to homosexual stimuli, whereas Barlow's (1986) theory
would predict that sexual arousal to homosexual stimuli by ho-
mophobic individuals is a function of anxiety. These competing
notions can and should be evaluated by future research."
Basically the summary (which this is not) makes it clear that the study is inconclusive for several reasons.
Incidentally (and I'm guessing this is where you're coming from) being a "homosexual offender" (1 Corinthians 6:9) means doing something sexual to someone of the same sex. If you refuse to follow the stimulus then no "sin" is committed (YMMV). Just as if you're tempted to steal but don't you are not a thief, etc..
The you-hate-it-means-you-are-one argument is quite an intriguing one (I hate bananas!). It's logically flawed, of course, but is a "stronger" argument for those lacking any factual basis than a simple ad-hominem attack as it's hard to refute against a weak minded opposition.
Of course the reason you hate theists is because you realise the truth about your relationship with god but don't want to admit it.
And I applaud your ability to spin even the most minor quibble by the authors into a denial of the finding.
The section I quoted was from the précis of the full article. A summary if the findings, in other words. That summary states clearly that homophobic men were observed to respond to gay sex where non-homophobic men did not.
It is an observation, where Barlow's paper suggests that anxiety causes the response is a hypothesis.
If you choose to believe a large collection of random homophobes simultaneously produced boners at a gay stag movie because they were scared, when an equal number of non-homophobes did not, then I'll not argue, but that still lives us with an obvious conclusion.
Homophobes are either queer or wimps.
"I've got more toys than Teruhisa Kitahara."
> Incidentally (and I'm guessing this is where you're coming from) being a "homosexual
...
:0)>
> offender" (1 Corinthians 6:9) means doing something sexual to someone of the same sex. If
> you refuse to follow the stimulus then no "sin" is committed (YMMV). Just as if you're
> tempted to steal but don't you are not a thief, etc..
It is not really relevant, as the accusation of being homosexual in this context refers to being attracted to your own gender.
> The you-hate-it-means-you-are-one argument is quite an intriguing one (I hate bananas!).
If you really emotionally hate bananas, rather than just disliking the taste of them, I'd believe some interesting psychological artifact must lie behind. Could it be that they a vaguely phallic, and thus remind you of sides of your own sexuality that makes you uncomfortable?
> It's logically flawed, of course, but is a "stronger" argument for those lacking any
> factual basis than a simple ad-hominem attack as it's hard to refute against a weak
> minded opposition.
In general yes, like many generalizations, but for a specific case, no.
I came independently to the conclusion in my youth because a (at the time) common "rational" argument for suppressing homosexual practice was that if everyone were allowed to practice homosexual sex, there would be no children, and the human race would go extinct. That argument makes only sense for someone who is attracted to his or her own gender.
> Of course the reason you hate theists is because you realise the truth about your
> relationship with god but don't want to admit it.
I believe people who hate theist have some deep emotional problems, typically dating back to their childhood, growing up in a suppressive theist environment. Atheism is, by nature, not something the "believers" tend to feel strong about. There really isn't anything there to feel strong about. All the fanatical atheists I have meet have been reformed theists. Their hate is part of their liberation process. Similar to how the most fanatical anti-smokers and anti-drinking people are former addicts.