Gore Site Operator Arrested For Posting Video of Murder

theshowmecanuck writes "According to the Montreal Gazette, 'The owner and operator of a well-known 'real gore' website is charged with corrupting morals for posting a video allegedly depicting the murder of student Jun Lin by Luka Magnotta. Magnotta, 30, is currently in custody charged with first-degree murder in the death of the 33-year-old Chinese international student, who was killed in Montreal in May 2012. The victim's severed limbs were then mailed to political parties and elementary schools, and his torso found inside a discarded suitcase.' A news interview with the detective in charge of the case, airing on CTV as I type this, says he believes the web site hosts a lot of racist content and unimaginable violence. You should note that Canada has less free speech than in America (we have 'hate crime laws'), but there will likely be some arguments in this vein. The charge against the operator is quite rare and no-one so far remembers it ever being used before."

Comments

Re:Mob rule

[gandhi_2]

Politicians leading mobs

Eric Holder didn't get that memo.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2013/07/17/justice-dept-seeks-public-feedback-on-zimmerman-case/?tid=pm_politics_pop

Re:And the torment of her family and loved ones?

[Motard]

It's interesting that the first three replies to this post zoomed in on a one word factual error that isn't really of any consequence with regard to the rest of the three paragraph comment. It's like they think they're going for the win.

Showing the video is a crime because it is theft

[Comrade Ogilvy]

Here is a case where property rights gives us a reasonable answer. The victim never gave consent to be filmed during his murder, the film was made under duress. Those choosing to propagate the film can be presumed to recognize that. Yet they chose to attempt to profit by selling manifestly stolen property. Throw them in jail.

Would this be covered under obscenity laws?

[sirwired]

If this were to occur in the US, would a prosecution under obscenity laws be legal?

The bar is high, but compared with other things subject to the law, (i.e. the "Miller" test applied to pornography) this would seem to cross it.

Re:And the torment of her family and loved ones?

[c0lo]

The burden of proof required on your typical internet message board, much less Slashdot, is pretty low.

You seem to assume a lot. It is up to the readers (including myself) to establish their own threshold for the level of proof.

Or, he could be a sick fuck in it for the lulz.

I dunno.

Even assuming the above is correct:
* did this sick fuck commit murders to fuel his site?
* does anyone have the right to condemn a person on the "potential misuse of the information"?
* even accepting morals into equation (who's morals?)... anyway: should a person be condemned because the society is "too weak in the moral sense"? I mean, what's the conceptual difference between this and prosecuting Galileo because he kept on publicly saying the Earth is moving and endangering the "good faith" of the society of his time?

Not so fast

[davidwr]

there IS a direct correlation between child pornography and child abuse (the first CANNOT exist without the other)

Generally true but not always.

The newly-married under-18 teenagers filming their honeymoon "in detail" are creating child pornography if they do it in America.

Ditto the 13 year old guy playing with himself in front of a mirror with a camera, purely for his own amusement.

Granted, these examples should never justify "making child porn legal" but they do justify creating the "it was my own body, I have a right to record it" absolute defense and an "it was my boy/girlfriend and he/she said yes" mitigation-defense for people close in age that would turn the charge into a non-sex-crime misdemeanor.