It means you can believe whatever you want to believe. Peoples actions are what people judge, not their beliefs. The guy driving could have had a medical emergency and passed out. Happens every day. It actually happened to me 12 years ago. People don't realize how refined our legal system is until you are standing in a court of law and are presented with things like "intent" and "motive". Most people you ask standing on the sidewalk will not know the difference between a 3rd degree and 4th degree felony, unless they have been charged with one or, they were hit by that vehicle.

That is funny. You must have been on the OJ jury.

right, because the judicial system is in a position of power over the individual, and therefore must have strong safeguards against abuse and corruption. the bar is intentionally set high for institutions that can punish, incarcerate or kill citizens. private individuals are free to form opinions much more pragmatically.

back up, who says i assume all accused persons are always guilty? that's a false binary there. i don't have to presume a person is innocent, but that certainly doesn't mean i think EVERY accused person is guilty. loads of people are wrongly accused for all kinds of things. personally, i think the odds of this particular accusation being a mistake are low. just my opinion.

Holy shit.......100% SPOT ON!

That right there is an honest statement that I would agree with and be fine with. My commentary was more about taking things to the next level and not only assuming guilt, but stating so as a fact and then defending the statement.

No, but I did watch the trial on TV...does that count?

Really....are we judging Adolf Hitler because he personally killed millions of Jews? Even if he order them to die, did he really order each and every one to be killed? Or did they die because of a belief?

OK,remember John Lennon's remark that caused a ton of bad PR??Please understand I'm not defending JT,but if you to throw out your JT pins in disgust,send them here to me!! I'll make sure they get whats coming to them those Dirty Pinball machines!!

Those killed were a product of his ACTIONS, along with many others. If someone orders to kill someone else, they would be charged with a lesser offense. They are still guilty. Has nothing to do with "beliefs". Those that killed are guilty. Those that ordered deaths are guilty as well.

When we dropped the bomb on innocent people in WWII, was Truman guilty of genocide for that action? I would argue yes but was it the only way to end the war? Maybe so.

Seeing all the bickering reminds me of a scene in Terminator 2

"Its in your nature to destroy yourselves"

imagesASDNT90Q (resized).jpg

he was having a medical emergency alright! Either that or he really doesn't like Swatch.

dude (resized).jpg

It sure is hard to tell he was a U.S. Navy veteran from that photo. Maybe we should take better care of our vets and listen to them when they say they need help.

Never let facts get in the way of a good news story.

why does rarehero work with tosh.0? If that's the case, I guess he's not one of the writers for the show.

Good point. Is JT a vet?

There is exactly where the Pinsider problem is, everyone expresses anger differently. Just because I get pissed and rattle off colorful metaphors doesn't mean my way is the right way. It's just my way.

I am pretty sure John is guilty, but I certainly hope he is not. I'm not hanging the guy out to dry until facts are presented. That 100% does NOT minimize the fact that kiddie porn is absolutely disgusting and people need to be held accountable by all means necessary to enforce the laws pertaining this shit.

I am the 1st one that will admit, I check out online porn. Is it a habit, no. Have I seen some questionable things? Yep, I sure have and it's delete, delete, delete. I don't download anything, I watch what's there. I am also willing to bet that 75%(or more) of everyone on this sight has checked out some form of online "adult entertainment". We are humans, we are curious, it's ok. Sex is all around us these days. But when it comes to kids? Under 18? There is just NO PLACE for it. Those people perpetrating kids to be filmed, photographed, and abused for sexual gratification all need to burn in hell. If you are purposely seeking it out, you are just as guilty as those who produce it.

I don't think he even likes animals!

Wow 23 pages of posts? Talk of WWII & Hitler. This is bizarre indeed. I'm only still reading because I can't believe people are still posting (which is stupid I know). How about close the thread and go to another topic related to PINBALL!!!!

This is not as complicated as everyone is making it out to be.

Everyone knows there are 2 different court systems in the US. The actual justice system and the court of public opinion. Both can ruin the lives of innocent or guilty people. Neither are perfect and when you are dealing with child sex crimes neither are in the least bit forgiving. If he's guilty he will face a certain amount of jail time. Either way at 69 his life as he knows it is done and even if proven innocent (which is not likely but certainly possible) he will never be able to get away from this and people that know him will never look at him the same.

There are crappy people around you. Some that you know instantly and others that you would never expect. You have likely met a rapist, murder, or worse in your life any never knew it. Protect your children and teach them to make good decisions.

I only read Penthouse for the political commentary.

It 100% should NOT be closed. This is directly related to pinball and to bury our heads in the sand isn't going to make it pass or get better.

At least you are not "using" your Penthouse magazine.... or are you?

bada boom!!!

I'm not saying bury your heads in the sand but 23 pages of pure speculation is a bit much. What else is there to talk about?

Seems several on here run on this program.

i like to play a little game (resized).jpg

Seems several others run on this one...

noting (resized).png

That is why you will always only be a pez-punk, rather than a real punk who stands for something.

pez SIJ (resized).jpg

We saw how well that worked out for him.......lol

yep that's me, superficial and unprincipled.

Spoiler alert god damnit.

Really? Didn't like history much in high school I take it?

Except INS codes, IRS codes, and DUI.

Our legal system has changed.

LTG : )

LOL, you better get your ass moving and catch up or stay off the internet. it's almost impossible to avoid spoilers for that show.

Edit: I am going to stop arguing while I am ahead.....lol

Now they call him Big Finger.

Bahahahahahahahahahahahaha

Hey O.J. will be out on a golf course soon looking for that real killer!

oj (resized).jpg

Sure, you are always free to make up your own mind. But words have consequences and if you don't presume the person is not guilty and you call an innocent man a bunch of names and convict him publically with your words before he has his day in court...and if he wins...you better hope the person you prejudged and committed defamation per se against doesn't decide to go after all the nameless people on the internet that accused him of a crime.

I've seen several cases over the last five years or so where dozens of people were sued for bandwagon jumping and accusing an innocent person of a crime based off the arrest. These people were on Facebook or responding in the comments section of a news article reporting the arrest. Many of them now face wage garnishment orders or have their tax refunds seized. Many husbands are shocked that they get hit with tens of thousands of dollars in damages for some eight word comment their wife made on her Facebook account responding to something that was shared by 50 people, but that is life.

You may think you're annonimous and can accuse people of rape, murder or child porn possession and have it not matter if they are guilty or not...but youre not annomimous. Websites have to respond to civil suit subpoenas and provide all the data they have that is responsive to the subpoena.

Accusing someone of a crime when you don't know the particulars and are not involved in some way is flat out a bad idea (that you are free to make). Civil liability for this type of thing is real.

Obviously, I know nothing about the JT case. Just warning people not to call him names or state you know he's guilty (no one here knows anything about his guilt or innosence). People think "he's not going to sue me for making a statement online!"...you don't know that, if he is found innocent and his career is over anyway he may have nothing else to do but pursue his defamation per se claim and carve out a meager way of life on the proceeds from the civil litigation (if he is found innocent of if what he is convicted of is less than what people are accusing him for online - note the people in this thread that inferred or stated he was doing more than just possessing downloaded under age pics...those people are potentially in danger if he sues them even if he is convicted of possession...though reduced danger).

Mic Drop!

yes, very true. but i think there's an important distinction. it's not libel to be like "in my opinion, i think the odds of this being a mistake are low" (which is what i said). It might be libel to say "he did it!" (note: i am not nor was i ever saying that)

Yo no one took me up on my offer, I heard a lot of chicken-littles talking about dumping JT titles and yet not a single item in my inbox other than a moderation notice because I CURSED A PEDOPHILE!

Now you are just trying to start shit. The thread has officially been derailed pages ago. No need for this.

The most important thing that I learned in history class was that the authors that wrote the books explaining the war were given a stamp of approval by most all the countries on the "winning" sides.

can you link to these chicken little posts you're referring to where people offered to sell games at half price or lower? i missed them.

Agreed. Phrases like "in my opinion" or "I believe" do provide some measure of insulation on the civil liability front. However, such insulation does not rise to one of immunity.

I personally don't mind calling Kevin Kulek a thief. He stole from me personally. I know what Kevin did to me. That's a case of personal knowledge. In the JT matter, I only have what the media has generated. I'm not a sheep to be led by the media and will wait (likely a long time, more than a year most probably) for more information before forming an opinion.

You have a selective view of freedom. To quote you, "feel free to say whatever the heck you want. It's a free country."

So I did.

Yes, I criticized 4th wave feminism. I did not attack you and you seem to acknowledge this. To you it was out of nowhere as you heard with only your ears what you were saying. I understand why you responded the way you did. But you were never the point.

And... that's when the thread goes quiet.

Oddly enough, this exact scenario is one of the first things that came to mind, but some posts on here by people that were friends with JT before, essentially claiming they saw clues of some truth in this, makes it harder to lean that direction, but it would make for an interesting twist in all of this. The wording in the post from 2013 is very odd (and clearly the reason for so many to believe it was faked).

the above statement makes zero sense unless you perceive my criticism of your post as an infringement on your freedom of speech -- which of course it is not. c'mon, you've got to be able to grasp this.

Who has said they saw clues?

I caught you trying to enforce limits upon me when it has been you in this thread who has defied others' attempts to force limits upon you.

Go ahead, deny that.

you caught me disagreeing with your opinion! the first amendment does not guarantee you freedom from criticism! disagreeing with you is not "enforcing limits" on you!

(i also want to point out i never said this -- please do not make up quotes and attribute them to me)

Maybe you guys can take this to PM?