FTA: Walsh also found several files with titles indicative of child pornography and one image of child pornography that was still active on his computer

I don't want to defend this dickbag if he in fact was indulging in kiddie porn...However "titles indicative of child pornography" are on every porn site on the internet. "Mom does son while sister watches" = an older woman nails a twenty something in front of another twenty something. And one image of perceived child porn isn't necessarily a damnation either as it could simply be a girl that looks like she might qualify as under 18.

If the story wasn't so hyperbolically overblown to begin I probably would say the guy is guilty, but in this case the police seem to be on a mission.

This would be newsworthy, especially the pedo pr0n part if the news story wasn't in...Pennsylvania.

It's been a bad month in Pedsolvania, folks.

link it didn't happen.

Jimmy Boarfett: This would be newsworthy, especially the pedo pr0n part if the news story wasn't in...Pennsylvania.

It's been a bad month in Pedsolvania, folks.

Welcome to Rapesylvania. Home of Ben Rapelisberger and Jerry Rapedusky.

Huh...guy sounds like a major douche. Still trying to figure out what position she held that would result in a firing for something like this. She didn't post it online, I'd say she's probably got a good 'suit on her hands, though she did make an error in resigning...make 'em fire ya toots.

Is this the thread where 20 somethings come to whine about their inability to grasp how electronic files work? I love those threads.

/links?!

She was guilty of poor judgement - really, people, don't record yourself doing anything you wouldn't want posted on the Internet - but he is a grade-A shiat.

Nevertheless, I think justice has been served. It's nice to see someone get what's coming to him.

I wouldn't fire someone for that.

ihatedumbpeople: Still trying to figure out what position she held that would result in a firing for something like this.

It was girl on girl, so scissoring or 69 I'm guessing.

Christopher Thomas Scott, of the 200 block of Aronimink Drive in Newtown Square, was arrested Monday. He is charged with selling, designing and producing obscene materials under the obscene and other sexual materials and performance section of the Pennsylvania Crime Code, as well as harassment, possession of a small amount of marijuana and possession of drug paraphernalia - all misdemeanors.

See, that's where he went wrong. To really do the whole fapping/obsessed with the old girlfriend thing right you need a substantial supply of weed.

TFA: Christopher Scott then manipulated her into making a video while they were having sex... and made her do it again.

Then charge him with rape. If he manipulated her, and then ultimately forced her to perform sex acts, then he is guilty of rape. Put him up on charges, or shut the hell up.

ihatedumbpeople: Huh...guy sounds like a major douche. Still trying to figure out what position she held that would result in a firing for something like this. She didn't post it online, I'd say she's probably got a good 'suit on her hands, though she did make an error in resigning...make 'em fire ya toots.

I'm guessing doggie position.

InOmnibusCaritas: Pollexabator: Is this the thread where 20 somethings come to whine about their inability to grasp how electronic files work? I love those threads.

/links?!

No it's the thread where 50 something pederasts come in and ask if there are links to the vid.

An Internet crimes investigation began on Oct. 3, 2011, after the now 24-year-old woman met with county Detective Lt. David Peifer.

....


Soon after the video was made, the woman said she broke up with Scott, in February or March 2010.

Do you fail at reading or maths?

So we're all looking for a dorm-room sex vid featuring an 18 yo male and a 22 yo female and she doesn't seem to be enjoying it...

That describes perfectly almost 95% of all dorm-room sex tapes.

This search could take a long time. A long, long, hard time.

That article reads like one of those True Detective magazines they had when I was a kid. Sexy lady on the front with her skirt torn patially open, blouse torn asunder as heaving bosoms peek throughwhile the sexual deviant criminal leers at her from a rear naked choke-hold. The articles were generally entitled something like "Secretary Sex Slave: How could she ever escape from the beast?" They eradication on any level that this girl may willingly enjoy sex or get turned on by having it filmed is hilarious.

I love how she was manipulated and coerced in many ways to make the first pron, then the second, then took months for her to dump him. In this day and age they can pretty that article up, or have her lawyer describe it as some depraved act by the guy, but everyone knows she's a cock-holster that liked it just as much as the dude. The 50's are gone. Women like sex and can be as aggressive, or even more so, as men regarding sex. And that is an awesome thing. This article and her angle of playing it are not.

Skank let an asshole film her more than once. Asshole does what assholes do, and should suffer for it, but let's not have it spun that she was some kind of unwitting naif who hadn't been plowed through like a Russian potato field before. The real thing shouldn't have to be about how she was manipulated or coerced into sex like an unwitting victim to play on the moral side, the thing sshould be about where does personal privacy stand, regardless of how much one likes to fark or not.

With every t'ween/teen girl in the U.S. now having unsupervised web access, webcams, camera-phones, flip-cams, etc, there's a good likelihood than anyone who has EVER browsed pron online could potentially be charged with CP possession if some prosecutor was hell bent enough on doing so.

Hell, they don't even have to be nude for charges to be filed.

There's even been guys arrested/charged/brought to trial for possessing "CP" that turned out, in fact, to be professionally made domestic porn featuring of-age professional performers who only looked like they were 13, etc.

Add, then, to that, the fact that so many 14/15/16 year olds could easily pass for 21 with they way they look, dress, etc, and there's almost nothing protecting any casual porn surfer from potentially facing such bogus charges.

InOmnibusCaritas: Pollexabator: Is this the thread where 20 somethings come to whine about their inability to grasp how electronic files work? I love those threads.

/links?!

No it's the thread where 50 something pederasts come in and ask if there are links to the vid.

Whaar linx

So I'm curious why no one is asking the person who asked her to resign how he/she became aware of the video in the first place?

Come on farkers, get to work! I know probably a few of you already have a copy.

FTFA: "She recalled him using the webcam on his Mac laptop to capture their intimate encounter in his dorm room, but told her he didn't like it "because it looked as if she wasn't enjoying herself and made her do it again."


Given a choice, I'll take a copy of the first tape, please.

That story was filled with all kinds of fail.

He wasn't under arrest AT FIRST, so he admitted to the 'crime' AND volunteered his stash and used pipes? WTF was he thinking?!

However, I will reserve judgement until I review the evidence. Links please.

jst3p: Do you fail at reading or maths?

Hey, we could also be pederasts!

some.old.lady.: The Onion is prophetic: 4 misdemeanor charges, $25k bail. You can't explain that.

Uh, yes, yes you can.
Drugs + child porn + admitting to the ex's charges + whatever else may be in his record = sizeable bail

Think the new gf and her parents are pleased?

I know we are going all wonky with this stuff but I don' think 22 and 18 constitute child porn.

Barricaded Gunman: FTFA: "She recalled him using the webcam on his Mac laptop to capture their intimate encounter in his dorm room, but told her he didn't like it "because it looked as if she wasn't enjoying herself and made her do it again."


Given a choice, I'll take a copy of the first tape, please.

DoBeDoBeDo: some.old.lady.: The Onion is prophetic: 4 misdemeanor charges, $25k bail. You can't explain that.

Uh, yes, yes you can.
Drugs + child porn + admitting to the ex's charges + whatever else may be in his record = sizeable bail

Think the new gf and her parents are pleased?

I know we are going all wonky with this stuff but I don' think 22 and 18 constitute child porn.

They found 4chan in his browser history.

Farking magnets ^ should be in arsenal of any disgruntled ex

Barricaded Gunman: FTFA: "She recalled him using the webcam on his Mac laptop to capture their intimate encounter in his dorm room, but told her he didn't like it "because it looked as if she wasn't enjoying herself and made her do it again."


Given a choice, I'll take a copy of the first tape, please.

Wow, well done.

InOmnibusCaritas: jst3p: Do you fail at reading or maths?

reading... how does it work? My bad... for some reason I thought it said she was now 18...

So we can ask for links, right?

Mac, Mac, MacBook Pro, MacBook Pro, MacBook - for those of you who weren't paying attention.

TrancePI: This thread sucks without

1) Name of the girlfriend
2) Name of the sites it was posted on
3) Derogatory title used


I couldn't resist reading it like this:

I tell my kids to assume that every text and every picture they send will be read by everyone.

some.old.lady.: Drugs + child porn + admitting to the ex's charges + whatever else may be in his record = sizeable bail

My sense is this child porn charge is pretty B.S. I mean, there's a significant difference between a person who actively seeks out underage porn and someone who has underage porn on their computer. There is overlap to be sure but still a significant difference remains.

With porn, you're either fapping or you're downloading. If you're downloading, odds are you're on some bittorrent site loading up dozens of torrents to download and peruse later. Sometimes you're downloading enormous packs containing hundreds or more pictures.

So it's perfectly reasonable to think a college age kid on his University fiberoptic connection just downloaded a whole fark ton of porn, hasn't been through it all and is also thoroughly disgusted by child porn. Another possibility is he thought they were of age and it turned out he was wrong. Some Traci Lords movies are child porn.

So maybe he's a pedo maybe not. But an 18 year old pot smoking guy filming himself farking his girlfriend isn't exactly the pedo M.O.