What’s up with this women who got busted for downloading child porn and only received a two week sentence that she can serve on weekends? What the fuck is up with that? They said she wasn’t the kind of lady who would do that and she was supposedly downloading it for her husband. Again What the fuck! Lets see if that works for the next man who gets busted huh ? that is bullshit if your downloading child porn then you are disgusting weather or not its for you or your husband, seriously who would want to be with a man who likes to see kids doing sexual things anyway. I am pissed about this fuck her, I am sure she knew it was wrong and GROSS so why should she get off easy ? because she is a women ? Fuck that! Should have gave her the same punishment that any man would have got.I bet she doesn’t even end up on the list for these sorts of people.Equal rights yeah right….
—Bullshit …
This article appears in Jul 30 – Aug 5, 2009.
Courts are bias towards women that’s nothing new. They just piss more and more people off. If the courts don’t treat women as equal why should the population?
I heard this on the radio this morning and had the same reaction OP. They implied they let her off easy because “she was doing it for her boyfriend”.
Makes me want to go out and steal a car and claim I was doing it for someone else! Because I really don’t see a difference.
Like the moving guy who tried to get it on with his daughters friend. He only got 30 days to be served on weekends so that he could still travel with his moving company to do moves.
She was downloading CHILD PORN for her pervert husband and she gets two fucking weeks? Any man accused of the same crime would be in the clink for at least a year. My worst thought was, can you imagine this bitch spawing children to offer to her sickass husband??
Right the men got double the time for the attempt, which I understand the young lady stop him right away and that was the end. Mean while this women has 29 files of child porn. Which is worst and does the punishment reflect that?
It’s because she doesn’t have something dangling between her legs.
Oh, and because she was a victim of an evil man.
It doesn’t even qualify as a ‘slap on the wrist’. My kid got worse punishments for failing to his chores. Such bullshit comes out of NS justice system. They’re due to release yet another dangerous offender in error any day now.
so yeah she did it as she thought it would please her man!!! I know what she should do to make the rest of us happy!
There was a similar case in Britain but the woman got two and a half years in jail. As the judge in that case noted: “You may not have done it but for him, but he could not have done it but for you.”
I don’t get it. Why is this excuse even valid? If a women is about to leave a men over money can a man rob a bank and then tell the judge he wasn’t responsible? How the hell is she the victim here? I would think the 29 children she exploited would be. Lawyers are the scum of the Earth.
from what i understand,she only downloaded to keep her creep b.f. happy.way to go you fucken loser,fuck your woman up big time.i hope they manage to throw that sick fuck in the hoosegow for a long time,and he gets exactly what he deserves in there.a good fuck up the ass.the woman should have her head checked as wel.for being so dependant on a creep like that.you folks be the jury here.does she deserve real jail time,or a head check.i await your input,let’s get this out in the open for opinions.
Lets wait and see how that Dartmouth guy/girl S&M Murder couple fares. Any bets the female accomplice is a ‘victim’.
Life sucks, that’s right she didn’t have a choice. Bullshit, she could have said NO and reported the sick fuck to the police.
She deserves real jail time and a head check. I’m pissed that the boyfriend or ‘former boyfriend’ is getting away with it too. But then again, maybe she wasn’t downloading it for him but for herself and she’s lying. Who knows what goes thru peoples heads??
Maybe I missed something else when it comes to case details but nothing I’ve heard, read or seen about this case mentions the boyfriend had prior knowledge that she was doing this for him. She has been quoted saying that she “believed” it would improve their relationship. That was a judgement call on her part, nothing says the boyfriend is into kiddie porn.
She took it upon herself thinking it would spice things up, for all we know he might have been sickened by the idea.
It doesn’t matter if the woman was downloading it for herself or for her husband. When you download child pornography FOR ANY REASON you are creating a market for this type of porn to be produced. The more child porn downloaded, the more child porn is made, the more innocent children are being sexually abused. I don’t give a shit if you download it for someone else, out of curiosity, as a sick joke, or because it turns you on; when you click ‘download’ you personally are abusing children as far as I’m concerned. You are no better than a sopping-bag-of-rancid-shit child molester and you deserve to get hard time.
If my bf was into kiddie porn he’d be on his way the fuck out the door.
The thing *is* 16 year olds in porn classifies as “child porn” and since these girls in these videos/pictures are seen by some sickos as “old enough” and not “children” they can rationalize this sort of thing away and not believe they’re sick fucks.
I’ll bet you anything the files were of mid-older teenagers and that had something to do with the sentencing. And if it was that’s just SICK because a 16 year old is just as much of a child as a 10 year old, legally and maturity wise. Neither are ready for the real world and in my opinion, neither are ready for sexual relationships, let alone sexual exploitation in pornography.
I’m truly appalled this whore got only two weeks….news didn’t mention if she’s going to be on the sex offender registry, but I doubt she will be. The only justice in this case is that they put her picture up on the news (and I’m assuming it’s in print media too), so we all k now who she is.
She’s just as sick as her pervy bf. Both should have their genitals kicked in.
Everyone knows feminism means women getting all the good things about being male and none of the bad things.
Pretty Kitty, a 16 year old is just as much a child as a 10 year old? Then why can’t 10 year old drive cars? I’m not exactly disagreeing with you here, just that comment is a bit of generalization. Don’t group all teenagers as idiotic children, not all of them are.
She was talking about the legalities involved, not comparing them or putting them in the same category. The key word is “minor”.
“Chid Porn” involves any minor, and in our Canadian laws, that constitutes any person under the age of 18.
I can see a guy drooling over some 16-17 year old but anything below 12 merits a tattoo of ‘pervert’ on the forehead.
Yeah, I see your point BF. My take on the situation is, 16 is considered a minor for a reason. Sure there are mature 16 year olds out there, but they’re still children. THEY might not think so, but I really don’t think a 16 year old knows what they’re getting themselves into most of the time. A major rewiring of the human nervous system occurs around age 16 too, which makes some “experts” question whether or not 16 year olds SHOULD be driving. Apparently 16 year olds have been shown to have major coordination problems.
Off topic, but I really think 16 is still a “child.”
Have you seen some of these 16 year olds? Holy fuck, some of them are more jaded than moi and that’s saying sumthing.
PK unfortunately in Canada, 16 is the age of consent for sex (thankfully raised from 14 by the Conservatives, which the Liberals lowered it to). The way I see it, the age of consent should be 18, the same age to consent to be able to appear in pornagraphic magazines or whatever. Having two different ages of consent sends conflicting messages, ie a 16 year old can consent to having sex with an 80 year old (as long as that person isn’t a person in authority), yet the older person can’t take pictures for personal reasons. The government should just simplify it. One age of consent for everything (driving, vioting, drinking, sex, etc).
Speaking of conflicting messages… one can be old enough to vote, old enough to operate a deadly weapon in public (a car), old enough to sacrifice their lives in our military and old enough to get married or look purchase porn but these same people aren’t old enough to drink alcohol or smoke cigarettes in some provinces. Who knows best? And who came up with these numbers anyway?
It may also be worth noting the human female is physically aching and ideal to produce healthy babies around 16 years old. Mentally we’re still children at 16 but, long ago, life expectancy was about 35 years old. At 16 your life was half over and you were running out of time to raise kids. Interesting “food” for thought, huh?
Also, a lot of young men and women didn’t need to finish high school to toil on their farms or whatnot. A lot of people would be living independently by the time they were 18-19 years old and maybe looking to marry their 15 year old sweetheart. But, since their lives didn’t change much over the years (same job, same town, same friends) they probably didn’t have a lot more “maturing” to do anyway.
These days, a lot of us are extending our adolescence in one way by delaying marriage for careers and careers for education. On the other hand, our young teens are in a hurry to grow up and have sex and do drugs and go to clubs, etc. We’ve taken what used to happen in that 16-19 year range and stretched it out between 13 and 28.
I think people mature when they encounter experience that force them to grow up…like moving out of your parent’s house or working a manual labour joe job. Some people are kept sheltered far too long, in my opinion. Some kids are forced to grow up way too fast.
Also, a kid can be mature enough to drive a car, but not mature enough to drink. A kid can be mature enough to fight a war, but not mature enough to have sex. It’s impossible to pick one age at which any one person is going to be mature enough to handle ALL of these things (sex, alcohol, driving, military service) and it would be difficult to pick an age where MOST of the people will be mature enough to handle any ONE of those things.
I argue if you’re ‘mature’ enough to make a decision that could get you killed, like joining the military, you’re ‘mature’ enough to do anything else you fancy.
In that case, perhaps. Military service is a very serious undertaking and if it isn’t taken seriously and with maturity, the consequences on a young mind can be disastrous. The army likes them young and impressionable (read immature?) anyway, that way they can mold them into soldiers. And, in this case, I agree Kay, if a country wants to send a kid out to get shot at, that kid should be able to smoke and drink and fuck all he wants.
But I think a 16 year old can be mature enough to drive a car, but not mature enough to drink alcohol. An 18 year old might be mature enough to vote, but not mature enough to have a healthy sexual relationship. There is no magic age…so we pick the age we think will cover the greatest number of people.
I agree, Miles. These days, kids seem to have the run of the families, instead of the parents. This was not so in the ‘old days’ of being independent by the time you were 20 (at the latest!). A lot of parents spoil their kids to the point where the kids expect it and continue to expect it into their twenties. They are being coddled instead of being independent.
I agree shoe! I didn’t raise my daughter to be that way at all but now that she’s started school she’s picking up some of that from the other kids! Its shocking how some of these kids behave and I just want to shake the parents. Do they not relise what they’re doing/teaching their kids?? Some of the kids have underlying issues and I know what that’s like, but a lot is just the parenting.
The parents probably think they are helping. Like saying “no” or “bad” is somehow going to mentally cripple their kid. A successful life is full of discipline and failure…ask any famous actor how many time they have been rejected, ask a successful businessperson how many times they have made expensive bad decisions. The only way to really mature and be independent and even have self-confidence is to try and fail and then try again, only better.
Whatever the age of the children, how was she found to be low to no risk, of offending against children? She was 28 , She had downloaded 29 videos. Are the lawyers saying that if you only watch child porn that is unrelated to how and why these films get made or you don’t offend children if you only watch? She downloaded the films from her computer, at her apartment which the boyfriend didn’t live. Makes me think they were for herself. As well the lawyer states “two weeks in jail, for a dumb mistake that she made in terms of her choice of boyfriend” Must be nice for women to not be accountable for there own actions. For the first case in Canada the lawyers set a good example, it wasn’t her fault. You wouldn’t hear that if it were a man.
NO person that commits any offense towards a child deserves to live. Whether it be kiddy porn, molestation, or abuse of ANY kind. When you take away a child’s rights, you lose yours.
Ummm, have any of you bemoaning the “easy ride” this woman is getting apparently due to her sex actually looked at the sentencing guidelines and recnt history of child porn access cases in NS?
A 28 year old Halifax man was given the exact same sentence for the same crime just last year. Also last year when a convicted child rapist was found to have accessed child porn upon his release, he was simply sent for a re-assesment to see if he posed a continuing danger.
THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE SEX OF THE OFFENDER!! Laws to protect children from sexual exploitation are just not tough or serious enough-maybe if some of the people so concerned with the apparent gender equality issues here directed some of their rightious indignation towards the weak laws that allow for these soft sentences, this could change.