Gaming World Forums

General Category => General Talk => Topic started by: cowardknower on December 22, 2007, 02:42:35 am

Title: principal turns student into porn-- but should he be charged for it?
Post by: cowardknower on December 22, 2007, 02:42:35 am
http://www.wftv.com/news/14906663/detail.html


Ok so he took pictures of the kid in normal settings and computerpasted the kids face onto some porn.
thats definitely weird and freakish etc, psychologically alarming
but is it criminal?  i would think the whole ISSUE with child pornography is that you are harming a child by getting them naked/taking pictures of them without them being old enough to understand what it actually means.

what he was doing has a negative impact on HIM at this point and nothing else
or rather implies problems with HIM

but hasnt really harmed the kid, you know?
Title: principal turns student into porn-- but should he be charged for it?
Post by: Vellfire on December 22, 2007, 02:52:35 am
It's criminal simply because child pornography is.  Yeah, the point is to not harm children, but I could see how knowing your principal is photoshopping you onto some porn (I guess providing you know what all that means which knowing todays kids probably) would be harmful too.  Also, it matters whether or not he shared these images or if he kept them for himself.  It's DEFINITELY criminal if he was posting them online.  But I would definitely call this criminal.

isn't this what pepoke did
Title: principal turns student into porn-- but should he be charged for it?
Post by: Sludgelord on December 22, 2007, 02:57:30 am
ahahahah this is pepoke's dad
Title: principal turns student into porn-- but should he be charged for it?
Post by: Sarah on December 22, 2007, 02:57:34 am
As terrible as this is I can't help but laugh at how pathetic and weird it is.

Instead being like a NORMAL paedophile and just abducting the kids he took the time to put their faces onto nude bodies.

baby you gonna look good when you get some titties
Title: principal turns student into porn-- but should he be charged for it?
Post by: Jester on December 22, 2007, 02:58:53 am
They don't actually say what the nude images were, do they? Were they other kiddie porn pics or adult porn?
Title: principal turns student into porn-- but should he be charged for it?
Post by: crone_lover720 on December 22, 2007, 03:03:45 am
yeah apparently they found child pornography too? it's hard to tell.

that's really weird though.
Title: principal turns student into porn-- but should he be charged for it?
Post by: Auxia Lacroix on December 22, 2007, 03:21:27 am
Quote from: Couch on December 22, 2007, 02:42:35 am
Ok so he took pictures of the kid in normal settings and computerpasted the kids face onto some porn.
thats definitely weird and freakish etc, psychologically alarming
but is it criminal?  i would think the whole ISSUE with child pornography is that you are harming a child by getting them naked/taking pictures of them without them being old enough to understand what it actually means.

what he was doing has a negative impact on HIM at this point and nothing else
or rather implies problems with HIM

but hasnt really harmed the kid, you know?

I completely agree.

It isn't child pornography, it's just straight trifling.
Title: principal turns student into porn-- but should he be charged for it?
Post by: Pepoke on December 22, 2007, 03:42:53 am
Quote from: Velfarre on December 22, 2007, 02:52:35 am
isn't this what pepoke did

Except I didnt get caught
Title: principal turns student into porn-- but should he be charged for it?
Post by: Mama Luigi on December 22, 2007, 04:11:58 am
I guess it's for the safety of the children... I can see them being at a risk if their principal is superimposing students faces on lewd images. While technically he hasn't harmed the children yet, our country doesn't wait for shit to go down before they do something (see Iraq).
Title: principal turns student into porn-- but should he be charged for it?
Post by: Moriason on December 22, 2007, 04:48:41 am
I wouldn't be crazy about my kid's face on porn on her PRINCIPAL's computer so at the very least he should be fired, maybe not charged I suppose there's no inherent crime.
Title: principal turns student into porn-- but should he be charged for it?
Post by: dada on December 22, 2007, 11:33:39 am
Quote from: Couch on December 22, 2007, 02:42:35 am
what he was doing has a negative impact on HIM at this point and nothing else
or rather implies problems with HIM

but hasnt really harmed the kid, you know?
How come you don't think it has any impact for people besides him? There's no telling whether he keeps those images to himself alone. Any kind of distribution has the potential of being harmful to the girl. Then there's the issue of the girl whose face he used who is now probably not feeling very well over the fact that her photos were used for that purpose.

Besides, he fabricated porn using the faces of children that from his school. Take a moment to realize what that means. Do you honestly think someone like that should be a principal? Or that he's only harming himself? What about his school, or everybody associated with him in some way?
Quote from: Auxia Lacroix on December 22, 2007, 03:21:27 am
It isn't child pornography, it's just straight trifling.
I don't know whether these pictures constitute child pornography, but I feel they have a very realistic case here. I did some searching and found that there's a law in the United Kingdom which states that "pseudo-photographs" that depict children have the same legal status as actual photos (Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994, part VII (http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts1994/ukpga_19940033_en_11#pt7-pb1-l1g84)). I'm not sure whether something similar exists in the United States, but I wouldn't be surprised.
Title: principal turns student into porn-- but should he be charged for it?
Post by: dom on December 22, 2007, 12:11:11 pm
Quote from: Pepoke on December 22, 2007, 03:42:53 am
Except I didnt get caught
yeah it doesn't work if you actually admit to it dude
Title: principal turns student into porn-- but should he be charged for it?
Post by: Jester on December 22, 2007, 12:18:06 pm
Quote from: Dada on December 22, 2007, 11:33:39 am
Besides, he fabricated porn using the faces of children that from his school. Take a moment to realize what that means. Do you honestly think someone like that should be a principal?
oh no, im not sure if couch was saying he shouldnt get any punishment at ALL, but jail time and face on internet is pretty crazy. he'll probably get killed in jail over this.

he certainly shouldn't be a principal, though. and should probably get put on the offenders list for good measure.

and yeah, it isn't cool to dicuss this article. they leave out a lot of key points that people are going to argue over. if they were adult images and he kept them to himself, it's a lot different from if they were child images and he distributed them over the web.
Title: principal turns student into porn-- but should he be charged for it?
Post by: cowardknower on December 22, 2007, 03:51:54 pm
yeah thats a good point jester.  this article really isnt the most thorough and leaves out shit important to our decision making process.

has anyone else seen any info on this case?
Title: principal turns student into porn-- but should he be charged for it?
Post by: XxSylverxX on December 22, 2007, 05:19:09 pm
thats pretty fucked up, and yeah i think he should be jailed for it. being that it's an obvious symptom of what's to come for that guy.
Title: principal turns student into porn-- but should he be charged for it?
Post by: Parker on December 22, 2007, 06:23:01 pm
Quote from: Couch on December 22, 2007, 02:42:35 am
i would think the whole ISSUE with child pornography is that you are harming a child by getting them naked/taking pictures of them without them being old enough to understand what it actually means.
Not really, man. In America, at least, 17 year-olds photographed constitutes child pornography, and I'm sure that most 'victims' over 10 are completely aware of what they are being asked to do. :\
Title: principal turns student into porn-- but should he be charged for it?
Post by: XxSylverxX on December 22, 2007, 06:58:15 pm
If you're tryin to justify this, you're a fucking sick bastard and part of the problem. You really think someone as young as eleven should be engaging in sexual acts with an adult? Im not much for morals but if you can't tell theres something wrong with that situation then you should seriously think some things over.
Title: principal turns student into porn-- but should he be charged for it?
Post by: Pepoke on December 22, 2007, 09:41:31 pm
Quote from: JOJOFACE on December 22, 2007, 06:23:01 pm
Not really, man. In America, at least, 17 year-olds photographed constitutes child pornography, and I'm sure that most 'victims' over 10 are completely aware of what they are being asked to do. :\
Are you serious? Seriously?  Do you think an 11 year old actually knows the series of serious consequences of what he/she is doing? And if there is a person who is under the legal age being photographed in a pornographic manner, I seriously doubt the kiddie had been informed of exactly what it is/the consequences of what theyre doing.
Title: principal turns student into porn-- but should he be charged for it?
Post by: dueledge on December 22, 2007, 11:01:52 pm
This is a blatant abuse of trust and just plain creepy. I think it could hurt the kid psychologically if they know about it and are not counseled about it, so it is in no way a victimless crime. The principle should obviously be stopped from working with children, and probably punished, but at the same time I do not think that this is anywhere near as bad as actual child pornography were there is actual physical abuse. It seems to be a bit of a tricky subject really since it is sort of a legal grey area, and the subject is such an emotional one.
Title: principal turns student into porn-- but should he be charged for it?
Post by: cowardknower on December 22, 2007, 11:59:08 pm
Quote from: JOJOFACE on December 22, 2007, 06:23:01 pm
Not really, man. In America, at least, 17 year-olds photographed constitutes child pornography, and I'm sure that most 'victims' over 10 are completely aware of what they are being asked to do. :\

what im saying is that im pretty sure the ILLEGAL part of it comes from the fact that the kid is involved in it and they are being taken advantage of though, not cause the government thinks its gross and doesnt want him doing it.  It's illegal because it harms another human being.

Quote from: dueledge on December 22, 2007, 11:01:52 pm
I think it could hurt the kid psychologically if they know about it and are not counseled about it, so it is in no way a victimless crime.

yeah, the kids didnt know about it until the cops brought it out though.  if it had stayed outside their knowledge AND all he had done was photoshop kids heads onto nakedgirls or whatever, they wouldnt have been effected by it at all.

Quote from: XxSylverxX on December 22, 2007, 06:58:15 pm
If you're tryin to justify this, you're a fucking sick bastard and part of the problem. You really think someone as young as eleven should be engaging in sexual acts with an adult? Im not much for morals but if you can't tell theres something wrong with that situation then you should seriously think some things over.

read thread please

also to clarify i am not saying that this is OK BEHAVIOR, i am just unsure about it constituting an actual child pornography charge.  at this point, if he hasnt actually done any child pornographying, he is just a creep.
Title: principal turns student into porn-- but should he be charged for it?
Post by: Jester on December 23, 2007, 12:00:15 am
Quote from: dueledge on December 22, 2007, 11:01:52 pm
This is a blatant abuse of trust and just plain creepy. I think it could hurt the kid psychologically if they know about it and are not counseled about it, so it is in no way a victimless crime.
well it isnt victimless NOW, of course. if he was just keeping the pics to himself, then it really, really was.

again not sticking up for him just pointing out obvious things people seem to have forgotten!

edit: hi couch isnt it fun to be on the defending pedos side :(
Title: principal turns student into porn-- but should he be charged for it?
Post by: cowardknower on December 23, 2007, 12:00:47 am
lol i got som sweet pix wanna see em later?
 :naughty:
Title: principal turns student into porn-- but should he be charged for it?
Post by: Parker on December 23, 2007, 04:15:53 am
Quote from: Pepoke on December 22, 2007, 09:41:31 pm
Are you serious? Seriously?  Do you think an 11 year old actually knows the series of serious consequences of what he/she is doing? And if there is a person who is under the legal age being photographed in a pornographic manner, I seriously doubt the kiddie had been informed of exactly what it is/the consequences of what theyre doing.
When was the last time you were around an 11 year old kid? They know way more than you think they know.

Also, Couch, I see what you're saying. I don't think it should be a 'child pr0n' charge. SOME kind of charge, imo, but that's not even logical.

Quote from: 'couch
what im saying is that im pretty sure the ILLEGAL part of it comes from the fact that the kid is involved in it and they are being taken advantage of though' date=' not cause the government thinks its gross and doesnt want him doing it.  It's illegal because it harms another human being.[/quote']
I gotcha. I'd subscribe to that.