A Man Photographs Some Kids and Is Murdered for It

Readers knbetthdfy
— This tragedy happened over the summer, but recently resurfaced as an investigation opened. Briefly: A British man was taking photos of teens vandalizing his hanging  plants in order to give their pictures to the police. But he was mistaken for a “pedo” taking pictures of teens for kicks. When the police came to get him, the neighborhood screamed, “Pedo! Pedo!” as he was led away. Although the police quickly realized their error and understood the man was perfectly innocent, he was murdered two days later. Here’s the note I got about it:

Dear Free-Range Kids: Proud Free-Range mom here.  I just wanted to pass along a news article in case you hadn’t seen it; this is an *incredibly* tragic example of worst-first thinking gone wrong.

The “all men are pedophiles until proven otherwise” aspect of “worst-first” thinking is an issue that hits particularly close to home for me, as one of my dearest friends is currently in prison (wrongly, I have very good reasons to believe) for molesting his daughter.  The girl was a troubled child and a habitual liar, and he was engaged in a bitter custody dispute with her mother at the time.  He was also sharing a rental house with me and my family at the time, and his arrest turned all of our lives upside down.  I was questioned personally by CPS regarding my own parenting and my relationship with my son, and during the time leading up to my friend’s trial, the daughter changed and embellished her story so many times I became constantly afraid that one day they were going to come back and take my husband away as well, though thankfully that never happened.

The experience was eye-opening, and over the years I have become much more aware of the unique danger of being a man around children in today’s world.  I think back to teachers I had in junior high in the late 1980s who let me hug them on the last day of class, but only in the presence of other teachers and only with their hands firmly clasped behind their backs, not hugging back. I was bewildered at the time, but I understand all too well now.  And it breaks my heart that my son, now in high school himself, is growing up in a society that may view him as a potential pedophile for interacting with children.

I don’t know if this is one for the blog or anything, but I just wanted to send it along.  Keep up the good fight against “worst-first” thinking. Its consequences can be unspeakable. – Sad Mom 

The murdered man was trying to catch the kids vandalizing his plants.

The murdered man was trying to catch the kids vandalizing his plants.

, , , , ,

61 Responses to A Man Photographs Some Kids and Is Murdered for It

  1. Shelly Stow November 12, 2013 at 7:58 am #

    That is a wonderful testimony with a great deal of truth to it. I think back to my teaching days with grief for what is lost. I cannot tell you how many students–high school–both male and female–I hugged back when they hugged me or how many wept and cried on my shoulder, my arms around them, over a break-up or a cut from the team or some other life tragedy.

    Who is holding and comforting them now or rejoicing with them over some triumph? And at the lower grades, how very tragic that they get no physical comfort or touch from their teachers. I fear for what the world of tomorrow will be like.

  2. Ben November 12, 2013 at 9:08 am #

    Seriously, if taking pictures of fully-clothed teens is now considered a pedophile activity, I’m not sure how long the world can survive. Let’s stick to innocent until proven guilty and let’s make especially sure that if you consider someone guilty, you do IN FACT know the entire store before forming your judgement.

  3. Crystal November 12, 2013 at 9:19 am #

    Sickening on every level.

  4. Silver Fang November 12, 2013 at 9:25 am #

    It’s a sick society that sexualizes and criminalizes innocent activities such as photography.

  5. Really Bad Mum November 12, 2013 at 10:18 am #

    Hopefully things like this will stay the same as the ” stranger ” thing, rare and unlikely to actually happen to the majority of people.. We also need to be careful of not over reacting to horror stories of innocent people being jailed, bashed or murdered, as most issues although annoying are usually cleared up quickly.

  6. Ben November 12, 2013 at 10:55 am #

    Hi Really Bad Mum,

    Although innocent people being jailed might eventually sort itself, once you go in, the damage is already done. Some people will always consider you guilty, because unfortunately, the conviction often gets more press attention than the trial that clears someone’s name.

  7. Shana Rowan November 12, 2013 at 11:41 am #

    I wish that parents would realize that their children are far more likely to be accused and/or convicted of a crime that could land them on the sex offender registry than they are to be abused by someone on the registry.

    Minors account for over a third of all sex crimes against minors… and this includes consensual teen relationships, as well as younger children acting out abuse that is being perpetrated on them.

  8. Laura November 12, 2013 at 11:48 am #

    I dispair for the future.

  9. J November 12, 2013 at 12:34 pm #

    This is not the worst case I like I have heard come out of the UK. A few years ago a pediatrician was attacked by a mob because someone confused the word pediatrician with pedophile. Not kidding.


  10. Kay November 12, 2013 at 1:41 pm #

    I can’t believe how far we’ve sunk as a society. Considering all the stories coming out of Great Britain, they are just as bad, if not worse than the U.S. RIP

  11. John November 12, 2013 at 1:44 pm #

    Not too long ago in Colorado, a man who was mistakened for a person who was supposedly molesting children in the neighborhood, was beaten unconscious by vigilantee neighbors. No, they didn’t call the police, they BEAT him themselves and he wasn’t even the guilty person!

    When it comes to children, supposedly civil countries like the USA and Britain become uncivil. We’re all for the humane treatment of terrorists who murder innocent people INCLUDING children because, as many Americans say, “we are not like them”. But anytime a child is molested OR rumored to be molested OR if a person is RUMORED to molest a child, Americans and now British people turn into poor and uneducated Pakistanis who just had a copy of their holy book burned! But yet, “we’re not like them”. Yea sure.

    I always tell foreigners that in America the way our justice system is set up, a person is innocent until proven guilty EXCEPT when it comes to children. In that case, the person is guilty until proven innocent!

  12. Papilio November 12, 2013 at 2:03 pm #

    ‘Murdered’ seems a bit of an understatement in this case 🙁

    Angry & dumb = dangerous

  13. Papilio November 12, 2013 at 2:16 pm #

    “I always tell foreigners that in America the way our justice system is set up, a person is innocent until proven guilty EXCEPT when it comes to children. In that case, the person is guilty until proven innocent!”

    You don’t tell them to hide their accent? After all they would be judged by twelve average, not necessarily well-informed Americans who have been taught all their lives by xenophobic Hollywood that person with accent = bad guy

  14. Beth November 12, 2013 at 4:13 pm #

    I don’t understand why actual pedophiles have to take pictures of children themselves; aren’t there basically an unlimited number of photos on the internet? It just doesn’t make sense to me for that reason why any male taking a photo is judged a pedophile until proven otherwise (and then no one really believes the “proven otherwise” part), based only on that one activity.

  15. Rebecca November 12, 2013 at 5:09 pm #

    Tagging along with what Ben and Beth said, taking pictures of fully clothed kids is perverted? So no more clothing ads with kids in them- just pictures of the clothes. Also, as Beth says- why wouldn’t they just go on line and collect up pictures of kids- MANY posted by the KIDS THEMSELVES! I wonder of those teens who screamed “pedo, pedo” , how many had posted pictures of themselves in scanty clothes in suggestive poses!!

  16. Christina November 12, 2013 at 6:08 pm #

    Ugh. This is sickening. So basically, kids old enough to know better cried “wolf” to avoid getting in trouble for vandalizing, and it cost this guy his life. And just for the record, a “pedo” is attracted to children without adult sexual characteristics (i.e., prepubescent). So unless these teenagers were all experiencing delayed puberty, “pedo” isn’t even the right word. Furthermore, the photos were taken in public, where, presumably, these miscreants were fully clothed…

  17. Really Bad Mum November 12, 2013 at 6:23 pm #

    G’day Ben… I agree with the prison part but most ” reports ” are sorted before it gets that far. A phone call or home visit usually finds accusations unfounded. This has happened to me. But DOCS was only doing their job and I ended up chatting with the lady for about 20 mins coz she was so nice. The reason you always hear the bad is because the good is so boring eg: daughter and other girl argue, crazy lady with 5 yr old still on the tit and children with bizarre names acts crazy calls DOCS lies, DOCS rings me because of protocol ( on my birthday ) asks if anything has happened, laughs about crazy lady and says if we need anything call her… Same as kid walks to corner shop on own says hello to passer by and comes home safe… Boring!!! lol

  18. Bob Davis November 12, 2013 at 6:32 pm #

    Over in the land of railway enthusiasts a common complaint is being harassed by security personnel when taking photos of commuter trains or transit systems for purely avocational purposes. At least (as far as I know) nobody has been shot or beaten to death while photographing railway operations. The incident reported above is a sickening example of “protecting our children” leading to a lynching. There’s plenty of blame to go around, starting with the punks who vandalized the victim’s garden. There was also a link to other cases of disabled people being murdered over unfounded rumors of molestations. In this particular case, the victim’s foreign background and Muslim (or at least Muslim-sounding) name was one more “reason” for suspicion. The report doesn’t go into detail about the neighborhood, but one would suspect that there are many people who are not happy with their lot in life, and have a lot of resentment just waiting for something to focus it on.

  19. steve November 12, 2013 at 8:32 pm #

    We’ve all heard the saying: “That’s too good to be true.”

    But we never hear anyone say, “That’s too BAD to be true.”


    Because a SICK SOCIETY prefers to fear everything and assume the worst-first.

  20. Asya November 12, 2013 at 8:37 pm #

    This is terrible. I hate myself for it, but I felt awkward taking photos of my younger brother when he was around other kids in a museum for his birthday, and I could tell all of the other women felt a little awkward doing the same, and I am a young woman, not even a middle-aged man. One time my husband literally saved a little one’s fingers from the escalator while the mother struggled with the stroller and her other baby, and he did not even get a thank you, but a dirty look. We have recently been making random comments to kids (not their certified adult chaperone) like, “nice hat!” and “you are so cute in that dress!” to fight the insanity that kids are little glass balls and every stranger wants absolutely anything to do with them. We don’t care THAT much about your precious little snowflakes.

  21. elizabeth November 12, 2013 at 8:54 pm #

    Further — as this article asks, why is there a trend of disabled men being falsely accused of sexual abuse? Many disturbing levels to this story.


  22. JP November 12, 2013 at 9:48 pm #

    Dear Sad Mom,

    You’re right to feel concerned about what kind of world your son will grow up and inherit. If men in general were encouraged to care more about kids, interact with kids, respect kids and have direct experience with, and of kids – perhaps they’d be less inclined to do the things that men often do (state sanctioned) to kids, and women, supposedly justified as collateral damage due to acts of war.
    I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, one more time. If society thinks they can “protect” kids by alienating men, society becomes a basket case, whistling past the graveyard and “pretending” that men have no power to do damage anyhow, as long as they’re sanctioned appropriately.
    That works about as well as throwing kerosene to douse a fire.
    And along the way it reduces the male half of the population to something less than human. I’d say what the world needs more than ever these days is just a little bit more humanity in its men? Might not be a bad idea.

  23. Mike November 12, 2013 at 10:32 pm #

    This is a horrifying case. However, I suspect that the pedophile accusation is just a part of what went on here. Most likely, some racism and simple thuggery played a role too.

  24. Really Bad Mum November 13, 2013 at 8:10 am #

    @ Mike i bet anything your right. They most probably couldn’t give a rats about the safety of kids or their neighbourhood, but we don’t know the full story so it is all speculation. But I would say they were idiotic thugs who only care for themselves

  25. Andrew November 13, 2013 at 9:03 am #

    I think racism and xenophobia played a large part in this case. However saying “I don’t like this person because he’s black,Muslim,disabled,ect…”, isn’t accepted.However calling someone a pedophile and very few will speak up. After all who
    would speak up for someone accused of being a pedophile except another pedophile,or someone who doesn’t care about kids.It’s kinda like calling someone you don’t like a witch in the 1600s, or a communist in the mid 20th century.
    I honestly believe that accusing some one of pedophilia or child abuse is becoming the weapon of choice for people involved in legal cases like law suits and divorces. It’s a devastating tool to use and even if the person making the accusation if found to be lying, there’s very little chance that that person will be prosecuted.After all,that might send the wrong message and we have to keep our glass children safe even if they aren’t in danger.
    I remember reading about a case in Mexico, where a gang found out about federal under cover agents in the area, and accused them of being pedos.A mob took care of the agents and the gang didn’t have to lift a finger.

  26. Donna November 13, 2013 at 9:32 am #

    Wow … just, wow. But I agree with Mike that racism and thuggery also played a large part in this case.

  27. JaneW November 13, 2013 at 11:50 am #

    Wow. I’d hate to see what these folks would think about the motion-sensitive security camera we put up outside our house (after someone damaged our house with their car and then drove off.)

  28. marie November 13, 2013 at 12:03 pm #

    We have a registry for sex offenders, a registry with the stated purpose of being a tool to protect us and our children from people on the registry. When we add people to that registry even though they are not dangerous to anyone, we are encouraging the general public to believe that these people are dangerous.

    Not only are these people on a list, registrants often have restrictions on where they can live and who they can associate with.

    All of this encourages the fear of sex offenders and it encourages people to think of them with the blanket identifier of “sex offender,” instead of looking at the offense itself. Marginalizing a huge group of people (750,000 in the US), treating them as if they are incredibly dangerous…all of this encourages vigilantism. It is a natural outcome of a public registry. We cannot label people, pretend as if they are dangerous, segregate them, and then expect anything other than vigilantism.

    I wrote about another horrifying case on my blog.

  29. marie November 13, 2013 at 12:08 pm #

    Correction: I wrote about the same case Lenore talks about. That’s what I get for having a queasy stomach for these stories and skimming over the details.

    My husband will be on the registry when he is released from prison. Your stomach would be queasy, too, at the thought of my children’s address and my own on the registry.

  30. Really Bad Mum November 13, 2013 at 3:45 pm #

    @ Marie, I am reading through your posts on your blog and although what happened to you and your kids was bad your husband knowingly broke the law, from your first post ( only quarter through) you make it seem as if he opened a link by mistake once, but the legal system can tell if a one off accidental opening has happened, to be arrested he would have had to keep going back. That is not an accident, or a moment of curiosity, it is not an illness or an addiction ( adults excuse for doing the wrong thing ‘ I have an addiction’ . I am so heart broken for you. And your kids but your husband needs to be punished as he knew it was wrong, the police didn’t know if you had weapons or if he had a child locked up somewhere! Part of being free range is knowing the consequences and risks of your actions and then taking responsibility for them. I hope you and your kids can get past all this crap.

  31. marie November 13, 2013 at 6:13 pm #

    ReallyBadMum, yep. My husband broke the law; he did something bad. He IS being punished for it. When he comes home, though, none of us should be punished (or punished further) for it. That’s what the registry does. Many people agree that the registry is abused or completely unnecessary.

    Many people also disagree with me that his sentence is too long. I understand that disagreement. Surely you understand, though, that I and family members of other sex offenders or other felons have every right to fight for changes to sentencing laws.

    As for the federal agents? When they put their own safety ahead of that of my family, they are wrong. They get paid to protect US. They get to wear kevlar vests to protect themselves; my family needed protection from them that morning. Every day, cops working alone approach cars in traffic stops and they do it even though they don’t know if the driver has a gun or a child bound and gagged in the back.

    Radley Balko’s book, Rise of the Warrior Cop is enlightening.

    Thank you for wishing my family well.

  32. Jennifer Gross November 13, 2013 at 6:51 pm #

    Yes this happens when any man is accused of a sex crime they are now considered guilty before innocent they are hauled into a courtroom and based just off pending charges retraining orders put in place if they work anywhere near children they loose their jobs based only on this allegation. Now military has even gone as far as denying young men entry into the military based only if they were charged with a sex crime never mind if the case is dropped, dismissed or happened when they were in elementary school. People are so closed minded when it comes to this subject and yes they all become monsters and must be kept at bay by murdering them or placing them on lists that they and future families are punished. People need to know the facts long before any judgement should take place. Open their eyes and pull the blanket off!!

  33. Really Bad Mum November 13, 2013 at 9:41 pm #

    @Marie, I hope you are right about your husband. Although personally don’t think so. As for the federal police they did not know what or who was in the house we aren’t talking someone selling a bit of pot here, or your friendly neighbourhood crim doing a B&E, these are soulless scary motherfr’s, I doubt your husband mentally challenged, he knew full well what he was doing and what the consequences where if caught. He may not have touch a child but in some ways he did something worse by “just watching” he encouraged and funded a child being harmed, so no I don’t think his sentence was too long, and no I don’t think the cops went too far.

  34. marie November 13, 2013 at 10:25 pm #

    My husband is no more soulless scary motherfr than you are. He did something wrong and he’s paying for it. People like to think that guys like him know what the consequences will be if they get caught but no, they don’t. I haven’t talked to anyone yet (other than other people who have a loved one with a longer sentence for the same crime) who says, “Gee, I thought he’d get MORE time.” To a person, they have been surprised at the four years and I don’t remember any who understood how mandatory minimums affect sentencing. So, no. People don’t understand what will happen. If he had been charged at the state level, he would have gotten a much lighter sentence for the exact same crime.

    If the feds did the tiniest bit of investigation, they DID know what they would find in our home. As I said before, cops all over the world approach possibly-dicey situations without having to bring along seven or eight of their closest friends. The same kind of searches–or worse–are done for those people in trouble for “selling a bit of pot here”, too.

    I apologize, Lenore. Did not mean to hijack the thread….but “soulless scary motherfr” was too much. That is the perception encouraged by the sex offender registry. Those guys in the UK may have thought their victim was a soulless scary motherfr, too.

  35. Donna November 13, 2013 at 11:35 pm #

    Marie – Give me a break. Unless he is mentally challenged, your husband understood completely that child porn = prison and sex offender registry for life before he ever downloaded the first image. The amount of time is irrelevant unless you are really going to try to argue that your husband consciously thought “I am willing to put my family through the hell of 2 years of prison and lifetime on the registry but not 4 years in prison and a lifetime on the registry” BEFORE he began looking at the child porn.

    I am very opposed to the sex offender registry but I don’t think you are doing the cause any favors. It is clear from your blog that you don’t really believe your husband did anything particularly wrong, believe that he has no sexual desire for children despite having enough child porn in his possession for federal charges, and blame your circumstances on everybody you can think of except the one person on whose shoulders 100% of the blame should fall – your husband. While I sympathize with anyone who has to live on the sex offender registry, including your family, I really don’t think you get it and I hope your husband comes out of prison with better insight and a better understanding that he, and he alone, is responsible for his situation than you exhibit or he is not going to be able to right his course.

  36. parallel November 13, 2013 at 11:45 pm #

    Not to mention the actual consequences being what happened to the child in the images being viewed, and other children like them, not the punishment experienced by the offender. If you honestly think only full knowledge of the punishment would have stopped your husband, that’s still a major, major issue. I don’t even believe in the registry as it stands, but my sympathy for him is vastly limited.

  37. marie November 14, 2013 at 1:11 am #

    Donna, do you think every man who looks at gay porn has sexual desire for other men? Or every person who looks at bestiality really wants to have his way with your golden retriever?

    As for him having “enough” child porn for federal charges, I know someone doing federal time for having three (3!) images. There is no magic number that turns a child porn case into a federal case. If the state patrol had caught my husband, it would have been a state case…unless the state turned the case over to the feds. There is absolutely no difference between a crime prosecuted by the feds and a crime that is prosecuted locally.

    I get it. You think my husband is a perv and you think I am nearly as bad as he is, since I don’t think he did anything wrong. Here’s the thing, Donna: I DO think he did something wrong. I also think the laws are out of whack. Disagree with me about the law if you like, but don’t tell me you know more about my husband than I do.

  38. Really Bad Mum November 14, 2013 at 1:19 am #

    @ Marie I didn’t call him that, I called the people who produce these videos that. Sorry if I didn’t articulate myself properly. But the fact is your husband sat and watched a child being sexually abused and he did it for his own pleasure. Of course he knew what the consequences would be, he didn’t do it by mistake, he wasn’t forced, he decided to watch, and then keep watching. Anyone who can watch a child being raped and abused is not a “good guy” I felt sorry for you and your kids but you don’t seem to get reality here, and understand he is not a victim on any way, shape or form.

  39. marie November 14, 2013 at 6:55 am #

    Thank you for recognizing the difference between guys like my husband and the people who produce the vile child porn, ReallyBadMum. Another difference is that CP viewers often receive longer sentences than the producers and another reality is that not all child porn is of children being raped and abused. The videos found on my husband’s computer were not. People do go to prison for much more innocuous material than you are imagining and people who have watched child porn (of whatever degree of atrociousness) can change their ways and be better people.

  40. Really Bad Mum November 14, 2013 at 8:27 am #

    Marie, I am trying to understand why you are trivializing this. Child porn is child porn irregardless of the acts/abuse done to the child. Your husband found sexual gratification watching children being abused. There is not what’s, ifs or but. I also find your lack of concern for the children he paid people to abuse, that’s what he did, I think you have been suckered by him, open your eyes and step back. Ever heard the saying ‘don’t sh*t where you eat’ ? How fortunate your children where never abused, what better defence against accusations then his own kids. I wish you well, but as I believe he is a wolf in sheeps clothing he wouldn’t be welcome around us. One day you may see what we do.

  41. WinchesterMoon November 14, 2013 at 9:12 am #

    @ marie
    So producing child porn is vile but looking at it isn’t?

    You’re sick. Your children need to be removed from your care because there is seriously something wrong with you.

    How DARE you trivialize someones children being abused because YOU don’t want to be alone and are f***ing selfish.

    I speak from experience so don’t try to pander and wheedle and whine to me. You’re just as sick as your husband and I hope someone gets rid of him before he harms your children, if he hasn’t already.

  42. WinchesterMoon November 14, 2013 at 9:17 am #

    Also to address this story I feel sorry that so many men are viewed as monsters. I haven’t let my childrens and my experiences with abusers colour my thinking about every single man on the planet. I know there are good men out there everywhere. This is deplorable and it has to stop somewhere, unfortunately I don’t think it will. 🙁

  43. Dirge November 14, 2013 at 9:19 am #

    The new law of the land is innocent until rumored guilty.

  44. Really Bad Mum November 14, 2013 at 11:47 am #

    @ WinchesterMoon, I understand your frustration but Imagine your life changing like Marie’s did. I think she is in denial because her husband never showed his true colours to her, this is the man she loved and the father of her children. By trivializing it she can hold on to what she had. Just as he would have been hoping for. She says yes he broke the law but he’s not as bad as … And stuff like that. And he would have played the poor victim who couldn’t help it and suddenly feels so bad about it he wants to kill himself. It breaks my heart to see her being played and to know she does it all because she loves the ” nice bloke” and to know one day reality is going to gatecrash the party.
    @Marie you need to go and talk to victims of child porn, no one will be able to change your mind about your husband until you face the reaults of his ‘just watching’ go talk to a widow of a cop who has been killed by thy nice man next door. Then you will understand why the search warrent was executed on the way it was.

  45. Donna November 14, 2013 at 12:39 pm #

    Marie – I don’t think your husband is a perv. I don’t use the term perv at all in my life.

    I absolutely do think your husband is sexually attracted to children and that you are hiding your head in the sand because you don’t want to acknowledge that. People who seek out child porn and bestiality images more than once to kill a curiosity absolutely have some level of arousal for what they are seeking. I have viewed a good bit of child porn and bestiality (for work) and there is no way that you would seek those images out if they disgust you, as they should. I don’t care whether it is relatively innocent pictures of naked kids or baby-rape videos. You absolutely do not SEEK OUT those things unless you are getting something from seeing them. (I also think that people who seek out gay porn do so because they are aroused by it on some level but there is nothing that should disgust you about 2 consenting adults choosing to engage in sex so I didn’t include that).

    Whether he will ever do anything about it in the real world or not is unknown. Humans are not bonobos. They can corral their sexual desires if they choose to do so. I don’t think viewing child porn means that you will molest a child, but it does make you a more likely candidate than someone who doesn’t.

    However, your repeated references to your husband as a “victim” in all this and comparing him viewing child porn to others viewing news photos of the Holocaust and Rwanda indicate that you absolutely don’t think he did anything really wrong. A little wrong but more in the “it is illegal so it is wrong” way and less in the “it is morally wrong” way. Your husband is not a victim of anything but his own stupidity. Your family is not a victim of anything other than your husband’s stupidity. And pictures of news items are not equal to pictures of children as they are undergoing abuse.

    Your statements and your implied lack of willingness on your husband’s part to own up to his desires gives me very little confidence that this situation will not be repeated, and possibly even surpassed. People can indeed overcome all kinds of pasts to live positive lives but only if they are willing to face the things that brought them there head-on and deal with them. You’ve shown no indication for you or your husband to do that. You’d rather blame everyone else and play the victim.

  46. marie November 14, 2013 at 6:29 pm #

    “Innocent until rumored guilty” is about right. Sex offenders have a very low recidivism rate–around 5%–so assuming my husband will NOT offend again is the safer bet. The sex offender registry has increased the fear of sex offenders and has encouraged all kinds of wild imaginings about what people on the list are going to do. Which is how, in the story Lenore wrote about, a man was murdered. People had no interest in facts; they jumped to conclusions and then to violence.

  47. WinchesterMoon November 14, 2013 at 7:53 pm #

    I don’t have to imagine my life changing like Maries because mine did when I found out my husband had molested four of our six children. I had to flee to a shelter with my children and now we live in hiding. I’ve been through this now for over two years. He went to jail and waited for his trial and when he was finally sentenced he got 60 days. No that’s not a typo. Sixty days. He’ll be out next week and we’ll likely have to move again as he’s trying to get visitation rights. Don’t assume I don’t know what I’m talking about thank you. As I said, I speak from experience.

  48. Really Bad Mum November 14, 2013 at 9:02 pm #

    @WinchesterMoon, that sentence is a joke. I’m not assuming anything. Marie’s husband set her up so se could easily live in denial, and I understand why she would, we all would sometimes. Remember when you found out, imagine if you where giving hope that it was all a misunderstanding ( plus he never touched your kids) would you hold on to that? One day she will be where you are and not only will she have to deal with his betray and the hurt. To have people say I told you so is a bitter pill to swallow.
    I hope you and your kids can get some good luck and be able to move on.

  49. parallel November 15, 2013 at 12:29 am #

    It’s positively fascinating in a strange way that someone could actually believe that a man who produces child porn and one who consumes it are so very far apart in terms of their morals.

    And before you start saying people look at pictures of murder, yet we don’t treat them like murderers (as you repeatedly say on your blog)..the two situations are completely different. It comes down to motive. When people look at pictures of violent crime, it isn’t because they want to commit violent acts. It’s a mix of curiosity and the strange thrill of seeing death up close. The motives of a person who produces child porn and one who consumes it ARE THE SAME. BOTH are being sexually aroused by the mistreatment of child. If there is a difference between them, it is only to a matter of degree. Both are morally deviant.

  50. Donna November 15, 2013 at 10:22 am #

    marie – I am not remotely afraid of sex offenders and have never even glanced at a sex offender registry unless needed for work. I understand completely that sex offenders have a very low rate of recidivism. In fact, I think only murderers have a lower rate.

    I am not basing my comments on your husband’s status as a sex offender at all. If you told me he was in prison for any crime whatsoever and followed it up with the same comments I would doubt his success. It is super easy to guess which of my clients will be successful and which won’t. Those with high levels of minimization and playing victim – both from themselves and their family – are rarely successful. They never truly believe that they did anything wrong and highly resent having to follow rules of probation.

    Of course, I only know your thoughts and not your husband’s so it could be that HE isn’t minimizing anything or playing the victim card and it is all you.

  51. Really Bad Mum November 15, 2013 at 10:39 am #

    @ Donna, do the ones that try and play the woe with me card usually have a more narcissistic personality? Or is it a defence tactic?

  52. Donna November 15, 2013 at 11:07 am #

    “The motives of a person who produces child porn and one who consumes it ARE THE SAME. BOTH are being sexually aroused by the mistreatment of child.”

    That’s not completely true. Many people who produce child porn are motivated by money and not sexual arousal. And many people who watch child porn don’t believe that it is mistreatment of a child (read anything by NAMBLA).

    Personally, I do think there is something off about someone who seeks out pictures of murder victims for fun and it is a person who is interested in violence on a whole different level than the general population. However, most of us don’t seek out pictures of dead bodies for fun. We are not looking at pictures of Rwanda because we enjoy seeing dead bodies but because we want to fully understand the tragedy.

    People look at child porn because they are aroused by children. Nobody is viewing it incidental to informing themselves about current or historical events.

    Further, except the very rare snuff film (for which I do think you could possibly be charged as accessory for just possessing), murder victims are not killed for other people’s entertainment anymore. Some sick people may be entertained, aroused even, by murder pictures that they find floating around the internet after the fact, but the crime itself is completely separate and not dependent on a desire for people to see after-death photos. Arresting people who enjoy pictures of dead people doesn’t stop people from killing as entertaining others is never the motivation to start with.

    Child porn is often the abuse of a child specifically for the entertainment of others. Since without consumers child porn is not disseminated, criminalizing watching cuts back on what is created (in theory). Obviously eradicating child porn doesn’t stop children from being abused in its entirety, but it does stop those that are abused SOLELY for profit and it stops others from being further victimized by the dissemination of their original abuse for others enjoyment.

  53. WinchesterMoon November 15, 2013 at 12:09 pm #


    I hope you understand I’m not trying to be awful. Just explaining from a sort of sane P.O.V. haha.

    The medicine will be bitter no matter when she has to swallow it. This will affect her children for years. Even if he never laid a hand on them. People will know what her husband has done and they (the children) will be tortured with this knowledge. Is it right? Obviously not. It does happen though. Then she’ll be left swallowing a thousand bitter pills instead of just the one. This is the reality.

    It’s not like consensual sex between teen lovers. It’s not being caught peeing in a park etc. *falls off soapbox* 😛

  54. Donna November 15, 2013 at 12:15 pm #

    RBM – The three groups of normal functioning people (as opposed to mentally challenged or ill) that we can count on to reoffend the most routinely are the woe-is-me group, the rules-don’t-apply-to-me-because-I’m-special group and the just-don’t-give-a-shit group, and the three groups are not mutually exclusive. They all seem to have a healthy dose of narcissism and do make up the majority of the criminals I deal with (outside of those who are mentally challenged or ill), but committing crimes itself requires a certain level of narcissism so I am not sure that is saying much.

    The woe-is-me group does seem to come by it naturally. I certainly don’t talk to all my client’s family (try to avoid it as much as possible actually), but when I do talk to the woe-is-me group’s family (especially mom, wife or girlfriend), it is rare that I don’t hear a million excuses, justifications, and minimizations for their loved ones, usually repeated many times, bad behavior. I guess that is what set me off about marie’s blog.

  55. Really Bad Mum November 15, 2013 at 2:34 pm #

    @ Donna, thanks for sharing, i started to read her blog but I couldn’t get over her lack of empathy. All I could think was of how bad for the kids in the kiddie porn to know that people had watched, that would be horrible thinking who saw that video of me, I couldn’t do ur job, i would be fired the first day ( I have a severe lack of tact when talking, I can’t re read and change my speech so if my head thinks it 90% of the time it’s gonna be said out loud ).
    @WinchesterMoon, lol soap box 🙂

  56. marie November 15, 2013 at 2:45 pm #

    Donna, quote me where I say it is acceptable for anyone, including and especially my husband, to look at child porn for sexual gratification. My quarrel is with the laws, mandatory minimum sentencing, and the public shaming that comes with the registry. I have made that very clear in my blog.

  57. Donna November 15, 2013 at 3:34 pm #

    marie – You call your husband a VICTIM and equate watching child porn to looking at pictures of the Holocaust.

  58. Donna November 15, 2013 at 3:44 pm #

    RBM – The great part about being a public defender is that I didn’t have to have tact. I wasn’t looking to kiss butt in order to drum up more clients. I tried tact first but I’ve been known to tell it like is when that didn’t work. It’s why I was often brought in for client control. I miss it now that I am a private attorney. Although I still do largely appointed work, I do have to consider client referrals and the like now if I want clients outside my appointed ones.

  59. marie November 15, 2013 at 4:28 pm #

    What do I say he’s a victim of, Donna? The legal system? Well, yes, he is. I am far from the only one who says the sentences for child porn possession/receipt (or for other sex offenses) are too onerous. Many judges agree with me on that.

    As for the Holocaust photos, I do not “equate watching child porn to looking at pictures of the Holocaust.” To make my point that looking at photos of horrific acts is not the same as committing the act itself, I use the Holocaust as an example because they are ALSO photos of horrific acts. I could as easily have used photos from the rape of Nanking. CP possession defendants are treated and sentenced AS IF they have molested children and/or AS IF they took the photos themselves. Looking at photos from Nanking is not the SAME AS committing the rape, even if the viewer were “off” enough to be turned on by them and no one has been imprisoned for looking at those photos. I use the example to make people think about what the act of looking at a photo does and does not do.

    Seriously, it isn’t hard to understand. It IS, however, an easy bit to drag out to prove what a nutcase I am. That’s okay…I am kind of used to it by now.

  60. Really Bad Mum November 15, 2013 at 10:22 pm #

    @Marie, mandatory sentencing is the fairest and most sensible sort. You do x, then you get x. You said before that the type of child porn your husband had on his computer wasn’t rape or abuse, all child porn is abusive. Someone is suffering or going to suffer for another’s pleasure. The fact your husband kept it all a secret proves he knew what he was doing was wrong morally and legally, people who do not know this don’t try to hide it. The laws concerning ANY child porn are actually not harsh enough, your husbands sentence is a joke. He deserves a lot more, and he does deserve to be registered as a sex offender for life, he is an adult, he used images of children for sexual gratification. How long before the pictures wheren’t enough to get him off? What then? Whether or not you think this is a illness, mental problem, choice or whatever he is on the registry and being on there decreases the chance of him taking it further, and before you start saying he wouldn’t, think about when you thought he wouldn’t look at the pictures, we may be free range parents, but your husband didn’t pee in an alley neither is he a 15 year old sexting his 15 yr old girlfriend. They are the ones that cause concern about the registry, I sure many of us have no problem with a grown man who looks at child porn being on there.

  61. Beth November 16, 2013 at 11:20 am #

    Ummmm, can we go back to discussing the guy who was murdered and was NOT a pedophile?