Downloading a copy of "The Misty Series" is a felony. (good to know, right?)
The girl whose sexual abuse began at age 4, and was documented in horrific detail in that child porn video series, is now 19. The pedophile uncle who raped her at age 8 and filmed the abuse is in jail. But that's not enough. Now, the victim and her lawyer are now seeking monetary damages from every person who "downloaded and sought pleasure" from the internet videos that for her "represent an inextinguishable, constantly circulating echo of the abuse".
The victim demands that each person convicted of possessing even one "Misty" image pay her damages until her total claim of $3.4 million is met - apparently the exact amount to dispel the ill effects of child abuse. Y'know, I felt bad for you until it turned into a money grab. Furthermore, it's a horribly slippery slope rooted in the most fallacious logic.
When the first judge arranged payment to "Amy" stemming from a case in Connecticut, Jonathan Turley, a law professor at George Washington University, called the decision "highly questionable", and said it "stretches personal accountability to the breaking point." The judge in the case acknowledged, "We're dealing with a frontier here." And the proceeded to head into uncharted, unreasonable territory.
Observers state the issue is part of a larger debate over fairness in sentencing sex offenders. For years, lawmakers (and some voters) have reasoned that virtually no punishment was too severe for such criminals; even statutory limits on sentencing were often exceeded. Now some courts have begun to push back, saying these heavy sentences are improper, and a new emphasis has arisen on making sex offenders pay monetary damages for their crimes. If such damages become widespread, experts say, it may make it easier to reach a consensus on measured sentencing.
But the more despicable part is the transitive application and concept of compensatory responsibility. Let's say for example I get on a P2P site and download a song that I didn't pay for, and it has litigious content. Like what? Some shitty rap song that has an illegally utilized and uncleared sample. And say that artist knowingly used the sample without compensating the original creator. With that wacky thinking, now I'm also liable and need to pay the originator as well. Bullshit.
Sorry that some child got diddled by their scumbag uncle who filmed it, but turning healing and surviving a trauma into a chance to never have to work is just as discomforting as the crime.
The girl whose sexual abuse began at age 4, and was documented in horrific detail in that child porn video series, is now 19. The pedophile uncle who raped her at age 8 and filmed the abuse is in jail. But that's not enough. Now, the victim and her lawyer are now seeking monetary damages from every person who "downloaded and sought pleasure" from the internet videos that for her "represent an inextinguishable, constantly circulating echo of the abuse".The victim demands that each person convicted of possessing even one "Misty" image pay her damages until her total claim of $3.4 million is met - apparently the exact amount to dispel the ill effects of child abuse. Y'know, I felt bad for you until it turned into a money grab. Furthermore, it's a horribly slippery slope rooted in the most fallacious logic.
When the first judge arranged payment to "Amy" stemming from a case in Connecticut, Jonathan Turley, a law professor at George Washington University, called the decision "highly questionable", and said it "stretches personal accountability to the breaking point." The judge in the case acknowledged, "We're dealing with a frontier here." And the proceeded to head into uncharted, unreasonable territory.
Observers state the issue is part of a larger debate over fairness in sentencing sex offenders. For years, lawmakers (and some voters) have reasoned that virtually no punishment was too severe for such criminals; even statutory limits on sentencing were often exceeded. Now some courts have begun to push back, saying these heavy sentences are improper, and a new emphasis has arisen on making sex offenders pay monetary damages for their crimes. If such damages become widespread, experts say, it may make it easier to reach a consensus on measured sentencing.
But the more despicable part is the transitive application and concept of compensatory responsibility. Let's say for example I get on a P2P site and download a song that I didn't pay for, and it has litigious content. Like what? Some shitty rap song that has an illegally utilized and uncleared sample. And say that artist knowingly used the sample without compensating the original creator. With that wacky thinking, now I'm also liable and need to pay the originator as well. Bullshit.
Sorry that some child got diddled by their scumbag uncle who filmed it, but turning healing and surviving a trauma into a chance to never have to work is just as discomforting as the crime.
No comments:
Post a Comment