Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

CHILD PORNOGRAPHY RING ARRESTED
Associated Press .. breaking on the wire | August 9, 2002 | Connie Cass (AP)

Posted on 08/09/2002 8:59:43 AM PDT by NYer

WASHINGTON (AP) _ Ten Americans and six foreigners were charged Friday with taking sexually explicit photographs of their own children or children in their care and sending them over the Internet to an international child pornography ring, the U.S. Customs Service said.

Forty-five children, including 37 in the United States, were victims and have been removed from the care of those indicted, Customs officials said. Most of them are in the custody of another parent or relative.

The defendants include nine people from seven states who were indicted in Fresno, Calif., along with six residents of Denmark, Switzerland and the Netherlands. The indictment alleges that members of the ring, referring to themselves as ``the club,'' traded messages across the Internet requesting photographs of specific sexual poses. One man asked for an audiotape so he could hear a child crying while being spanked, the indictment said, and another posed naked with an underage girl.

The Customs Service coordinated the U.S. investigation that began last November with a request for help from the Danish National Police, who were acting on a tip about an international child pornography ring. ``I congratulate the investigators whose ingenuity and perseverance brought these people to justice,'' Customs Commissioner Robert C. Bonner said in a statement.

The Americans charged include: Lloyd Alan Emmerson of Fresno County, Calif.; Paul Whitmore and Brooke Rowland, San Diego County, Calif.; Tracy Reynolds, Texas; Leslie Peter Bowcut, Idaho; Michael David Harland, Florida; Harry Eldon Tschernetzki, Washington state; John Zill, South Carolina; Craig Davidson, Kansas. The identity of the tenth American was not immediately available.

The foreigners were identified as Eggert Jensen and Bente Jensen of Denmark; Jean-Michael Frances Cattin, Marcel Egli and Peter Althaus of Switzerland; and Dirk-Jan Prins of the Netherlands.

On the Net: Customs Service: http://www.customs.ustreas.gov

AP-ES-08-09-02 1114EDT


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Foreign Affairs; Front Page News; Government; News/Current Events; US: California; US: Idaho; US: Kansas; US: South Carolina; US: Texas; US: Washington
KEYWORDS: childabuse; eurotrash; interpol; pornography; uscustoms
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 261 next last
To: Frapster
There is no legal consent with children. They cannot make that decision. It's like taking money from a retarded person and swearing he gave you permission. It doesn't fly.
41 posted on 08/09/2002 10:20:03 AM PDT by AppyPappy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Frapster
16 = age of consent. If that age is correct then it shouldn't matter what they consent to.
42 posted on 08/09/2002 10:21:37 AM PDT by VRWC_minion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Spunky
The identity of the tenth American was not immediately available.

What if Westerfield is 10th ?

43 posted on 08/09/2002 10:22:53 AM PDT by VRWC_minion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Dimensio
Explain exactly why two people of the same gender engaging in sexual activity of any kind is "wrong" no matter the circumstances.

Because it defies the natural order. That is why we find so many homosexuals having sex in public areas. That is why AIDS killed so many so fast. That is why the rate of domestic abuse is so much higher in homosexuals. That is why homosexuals are more likely to be pedophiles than heterosexuals. It's a perversion. The more it is accepted; the worse it gets.

44 posted on 08/09/2002 10:25:02 AM PDT by AppyPappy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Frapster
Q:If someone consents to sex, is it OK to give them AIDS?
45 posted on 08/09/2002 10:26:27 AM PDT by AppyPappy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: stalin
I'd be willing to bet that the Euros get very light sentances or get off completely. They don't take this sort of thing very seriously over there. They probably only investigated at all because of US pressure.

Pink Ballets and Protected Pornographers ... a Global(ists) Problem

46 posted on 08/09/2002 10:29:50 AM PDT by Askel5
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Frapster
Explain exactly why two people of any age or gender engaging in sexual activity of any kind is "wrong" no matter the circumstances?

I can't, because I cannot make a blanket statement that two people of any age engaging in sexual activity is "wrong" because it's far too broad and non-specific. The "any age" might be objectionable, but as it is totally non-sepcific and could apply to two thrity year olds, I cannot create a specific objection to it. In that sense, I cannot say that it's always "not wrong", but I also cannot say that it's "wrong" (just like I cannot define simply "killing a person" as either "wrong" or "not wrong" because I see a difference between breaking into your neighbour's home and killing them and shooting someone who has broken into your home and threatend your life).
47 posted on 08/09/2002 10:31:58 AM PDT by Dimensio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Frapster
Taken to its logical conclusion, indeed child porn and sexual activity with "consenting" children is acceptable.

See, the Interlock's criminal, pedophile pornographer Kinsey and the Supreme Court (who's okayed "faked" cyber child porn -- as if there's some substantive difference in the real ejaculations intended) for more.

48 posted on 08/09/2002 10:32:15 AM PDT by Askel5
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Frapster
You are venturing into something I have often pondered. We base our views on how evil it is for an adult to sexualize a child, but that view stems from our Judeo-Christian background. What if we were to come upon a culture who saw nothing wrong with adult-child sex, as has been documented in ancient Greek and Chinese cultures. If God must be taken out of the equation (according to many Libertarians and most all Liberals) how then does natural law prove the same?

This is no longer a hypothetical. There are actual psychologist and doctors that are stating that some forms of adult-child sex result not only in no harm for the child, but perhaps as a benefit. So if religion cannot be brought into the discussion how are we to combat this?

As far as why parents would do this, I don't know what is the issue in these cases but many people are afflicted with pedophile thoughts that they cannot control. Usually brought on through their upbringing. Now if their mind is feeling that sex with a child is truly a way of portraying love for that child, what do we tell them to prove to them that they are wrong? This is the same with homosexuals. They think that since they FEEL a certain way, it excuses them to act a certain way. And without using God, how do you oppose their views?

This is why a Godless law system can never work.

49 posted on 08/09/2002 10:32:21 AM PDT by Texaggie79
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: r9etb
Perhaps a better question might be: "is there any action that is intrinsically wrong?

Good question. Males and females are intrinsically structured such that the males sex organs fit the female sex organs. The sex organs are apparently for procreation.

Pre-pubescent children do not have the capability to have children. So some of this depends on what a "child" is. It's not uncommon to call a 14 year-old a child but physically two 14 year-olds to could make babies. But so could a 14 year-old and a 25 year-old.

I would start from a design perspective and look at how our bodies are designed. Then we factor in other conserations, like societal concerns and come up with an age everyone can agree is a good age for people to start making desicions about sex. We legislate morality by concensus by saying that adults cannot have sex with minors.

Both homosexuality and pedophilia are perversions and immoral based on a religious basis. We don't have to be ashamed of that. For if the homosexual activists wish to assert some sort of absolute claim to morality, that homosexuality is moral, they must borrow from some objective moral law giver. Of course, that a whole 'nuther topic.

50 posted on 08/09/2002 10:33:00 AM PDT by Undivided Heart
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: OWK; MindPrism
Any thoughts?
51 posted on 08/09/2002 10:34:00 AM PDT by Texaggie79
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: AppyPappy
It's like taking money from a retarded person

Why? I personally don't see the connection.

52 posted on 08/09/2002 10:36:30 AM PDT by Frapster
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Frapster
Having sex with children is like taking money from retarded people. Neither can give consent
53 posted on 08/09/2002 10:37:05 AM PDT by AppyPappy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: Spunky
Well, well, well...what have we here?

Wonder if the parents who did this vile thing to their children had decadent moral values..such as swinging?

sw

54 posted on 08/09/2002 10:37:27 AM PDT by spectre
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Dimensio
appealing to some alleged "wrongness" of homosexuality

Homosexuality is a disordered desire. Period.

There are all manner of strata within the homosexual "lifestyle" that vary in their destruction of the person, the relative scale of perversion of the practices or the objectification of his sexual targets.

The penis is not ordered to the anus. Homosexual penetration may well fulfill a person's physical desire for penetration by and/or domination of a same-sex gratification but it has absolutely nothing to do with human sexuality which has as its defining characteristics the procreative and unitive -- male and female -- aspects.

55 posted on 08/09/2002 10:37:52 AM PDT by Askel5
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Dimensio
Without using religious morals, there is no answer to either.
56 posted on 08/09/2002 10:37:57 AM PDT by Texaggie79
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Frapster
Although you keep on claiming that you are against child pornography - your arguments are sure promoting it. Why play devil's advocate? What do you gain by that?

Child pornography is child abuse period. A child is trained by an adult. To use a child for sex ruins the sexual life of that child in the future. It is an abuse and no amount of rationalization changes that.

Just why are people needing to seek deviant forms of sex? Why are they no longer turned on by the normal heterosexual experiences and want to move to something different?

Whether they want to justify it or not, they need to look at what has happened to their own sex drive that makes them want deviant activities? While they are working on this area - I claim that they need to leave the children of this society alone as children are not sex toys.

57 posted on 08/09/2002 10:38:22 AM PDT by ClancyJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Dimensio
I know your leading up to the requirement that an absolute from the bible si needed to determine right from wrong but that isn't all there is. God also gave us a natural attraction to things like beauty and a natural repulsion to other things.

Adult child sex is repulsive just like maggot infested meat. In fact homosexual behavior is naturally repulsive.

So, God has wired us to abhor certain things and at the same time he has wired us to appreciate other things like beauty and sun rise.

58 posted on 08/09/2002 10:38:36 AM PDT by VRWC_minion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Texaggie79
Without using religious morals, there is no answer to either.

Why not? And are you speaking of any specific religion or just one in particular?
59 posted on 08/09/2002 10:39:45 AM PDT by Dimensio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: AppyPappy
But retarded people are allowed to purchase things. The clerks take their money as a valid exchange. Not a good analogy.
60 posted on 08/09/2002 10:40:29 AM PDT by Texaggie79
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 261 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson