(Topic ID: 196539)

Just came across this... (news about John Trudeau)

By bangerjay

6 years ago


Topic Heartbeat

Topic Stats

  • 1,376 posts
  • 361 Pinsiders participating
  • Latest reply 6 years ago by robin
  • Topic is favorited by 26 Pinsiders

You

Linked Games

No games have been linked to this topic.

    Topic Gallery

    View topic image gallery

    image (resized).jpeg
    John-Trudeau-signs-first-Ghostbusters-flyer (resized).jpg
    trudeaurighthanded (resized).jpg
    IMG_2410 (resized).JPG
    IMG_2408 (resized).JPG
    untitled1-300x232 (resized).jpg
    bettyboopangel (resized).png
    pasted_image (resized).png
    oj (resized).jpg
    pez SIJ (resized).jpg
    noting (resized).png
    i like to play a little game (resized).jpg
    dude (resized).jpg
    imagesASDNT90Q (resized).jpg
    more witches (resized).jpg
    Trudeau-court (resized).jpg

    You're currently viewing posts by Pinsider manimal.
    Click here to go back to viewing the entire thread.

    This topic is closed.

    67
    #258 6 years ago
    Quoted from OLDPINGUY:

    Im trying to read up in regard to Levis statement.
    When I find cases that say 22 counts or 108 counts, the articles say 22 images, and 108 images.
    So this means 2 images tagged, and say, possibly in cache from stopping at a site?
    Im not here to take any side. I dont judge.
    Ive just seen enough crap to come to respect,
    "Innocent until Proven Guilty"

    You don't necessarily get a charge per image. If you downloaded 30 images from one file server and another 20 from a different server, that could possibly be two counts, depending on the statute you are charged under. Usually the wire transfer is a higher crime than the possession. Maybe he traded two groups with another person.....there are a number of reasons for just two charges.

    I worked child crimes for over 2 years and those were some of the hardest and most heartbreaking cases I ever worked. If we were running a sting operation, we would often charge under the cases we were involved with because we could prove the facts. We would then take into account whatever we found in the subsequent search warrant and evaluate and add possibile additional charges later once we could prove those facts as well.

    Everyone is innocent until proven guilty, but traditionally cops don't serve warrants and immediately arrest 69 year old men unless they are pretty sure of what they are looking at. Cops and prosecutors are so gun-shy about getting sued these days, they pretty much don't act without a slam-dunk case. Hopefully he is innocent, but it doesn't look good. This will not be a case of just clicking on a wrong website somewhere.

    For those saying they won't buy a pin he designed...it is just a pinball machine, and his guilt or innocence doesn't change the game any. Playing one doesn't make anyone a child molester. Do you check the history of the guy that designed your new Ford? What about former owners? All this guy did was to decide where the ramps went and how wide the flipper gap needed to be. He may be scum, and if guilty he is and should be done in pinball, but that doesn't change anything so far as the games are concerned.

    #265 6 years ago
    Quoted from Aurich:

    Everyone is gonna have their own personal take here. I wouldn't judge anyone who plays his games still, that's for sure!
    But I do think Stern is probably rightly worried about what to do with his next unreleased game. Imagine there were some phone calls tonight ...

    Oh I am sure you are right, and if they know what is good for them they will kill the design or attribute it to someone else. Coming out with a Trudeau game at this point would be a really bad business decision.

    #424 6 years ago
    Quoted from MikeS:

    From those with experience in the court system and law enforcement, how long do these cases typically take to get resolved and a verdict reached. Is it usually weeks, months, or years?

    Depends on the jurisdiction (Federal or local) and the nature of the charges, and whether the accused puts up much of a fight. I will say the vast majority that are guilty will take plea agreements because they don't want the evidence in the case to be made public. Those cases usually go fast, but I have also seen simple cases take years to adjudicate, and very complex ones over in no time at all.

    #430 6 years ago
    Quoted from Rascal_H:

    Anyone expect Stern to make some form of official statement? Or is it unneeded?

    They don't even make statements on their own products, so why would they open themselves up to the liability of making any statement now? You may see something if he is convicted, but since he is presumed innocent until proven guilty, they will likely wait and see what happens.

    #496 6 years ago
    Quoted from Wolfmarsh:

    This wasn't a matter of him dating a girl 2 years younger and getting in trouble for it.
    Since I don't see it posted elsewhere here, the charges are listed as: "CHILD PORNOGRAPHY - POSSESS VISUAL REPRODUCTION ON COMPUTER - VIDEO"
    The law in Illinois states that it is the onus of the viewer to make a reasonable effort to determine if the actors/actresses in the video are legally allowed to be in the video.

    And this is almost certainly part of some bigger investigation. Maybe they are after some person that is producing these videos, and they traced a couple of downloads. At any rate, this is not going to be some video that was sent to him by someone else where a 16 year old that looks 18 is engaged in some act. No prosecutor is going to take a case like that to trial. This has to be something that an ordinary person would see and come to the conclusion it was child pornography. I am sure they will do a forensic on the computer they seized, and a telling factor will be if more charges are added or not. If they stick with 2 charges, it could very well have been a one-time thing. If you see more added, it will mean he was involved for some time. As I said before....there is absolutely no defense for child porn if the charges are proven to be true, but we need to all keep in mind that he is innocent until proven guilty. If it were any one of us, we would be begging for the same consideration. If I can say this after working a ton of these kinds of cases, then you all can take a breather as well and let the case play out.

    #521 6 years ago
    Quoted from OLDPINGUY:

    We had a few law enforcement people comment here....If I may ask, how aggressive is the effort to shut down these sites, period?

    Very aggressive, but when you shut one door, 2 more open. Most are offshore, and many part of the dark Web, which makes enforcement all but impossible. These guys go to great lengths to hide what they do.

    13
    #568 6 years ago
    Quoted from practicalsteve:

    I get why a lot of people on here are hoping for the best and using a lot of wishful thinking but you need to stop using the traci lords argument. That was thirty years ago, technology and the ability to track it has gotten much more sophisticated. Men weren't arrested for having the magazines and videos she made before she was eighteen, that's not an equivocal argument. This sounds like a sophisticated operation involving more than just him. While he is innocent until proven guilty I wouldn't hold my breath.

    Ok, for all of you black and while folks, I will give you one to ponder where technology was at the base of what happened, and the "victim" was a willing participant.

    A few years ago, an Asst. State Attorney and deputy Director of the state Bureau of Investigation was convicted of exploitation of a child. This is a guy I had worked withy several times, and one that helped to lock away many bad guys including child pornographers, rapists, pedophiles, etc. He was well known in the cop world for being very aggressive against the bad guys, and was very well respected in the law enforcement community for many years. Then one day he decides to send out an email that cost him his career, marriage, kids, and just about everything else important to him. I don't know the reason he sent it, there is some speculation that he was having an affair, or wanted to have an affair with a bureau secretary, but his claim is that it was all a twisted joke to a friend. I will add to this that those of us in the law enforcement community are known for our twisted or "gallows" humor, it is how a lot of folks deal with the things they see every day. However, I will add that ANY humor incorporating child pornography is well over the line of decency, so I am NOT defending his actions here. At any rate, he went to a VERY public site and copied a picture of a naked girl....he attached some wording to that picture, and sent it to that secretary. I don't know what the wording was, but I was told the picture of the girl was considered to be "art" on the website it was taken from. The problem? The girl was under the age of 18....I believe she turned out to be 16 at the time the picture was taken, with what I was told was her full consent. You can guess the rest of the story, the secretary objected to the picture and notified her administrator, and all hell broke loose. I wasn't involved in investigating the case, but was told the picture sent was the only one found on any of his computers or in his house that would be considered to be illegal. Long story short, he is charged and eventually pleads guilty to sexual exploitation of a child. And before anyone says there is more to this story, there probably is....which is most likely a political one. He had made some powerful enemies along the way, and he paid the price. That email was undoubtedly one of the dumbest things I have ever seen anyone in the law enforcement community do. It destroyed his life at the push of a button......yes, he knew exactly what he was doing, and he knew he should not have done it, and he has no one to blame but himself. He also tried to delete the evidence when he found out he had been turned in, which netted more charges that we dismissed as part of his deal to plead guilty. But with all of that said......does that warrant being convicted of sexual exploitation of a child, and having to register as a sex offender for the rest of his life? I really don't know. Do we lump him in as the same as any other sexual predator if that is all he is guilty of? Admittedly, there could be some details of the story I don't know, but this was all that came out in court. The prosecutor argued that the "artistic" image became pornographic when he added the wording and sent it to a female co-worker with the intent to arouse....etc. Again, I am not defending him...just saying I don't know how I would vote on this one. Not everything is black and white, and we should not jump to conclusions based on a charge and a mugshot. I will be the first to say it doesn't look good, and if he is truly guilty he deserves everything he gets. But if he is somehow found not-guilty, will we REALLY accept him back with open arms? Or is he already tried and convicted in our eyes? I spent a lifetime enforcing the laws, which was hard when you knew a guy was guilty and he used the system to walk free. But just the same I learned to respect and love the system that we have, and it just made me be a better cop in the long run.

    #822 6 years ago
    Quoted from cdnpinballer:

    The Jared Subway dude was also charged under 2 counts... Earliest release date is July 2029, this was after a plea deal otherwise he could have gotten 50 years according to his Wikipedia page.

    Yes, but there is a big difference in the circumstances (as we know them today). He was party to hidden cameras placed in a residence, where very young children that were known to the perp were filmed which likely moved it into an "aggravated" category.

    We don't have any of the details in JT's case, but I would assume this wasn't the case or the charges would have been much different, and the investigation would have been much more intense. If it is simple possession, it won't be considered aggravated, and he will very likely never do any jail time. But keep in mind the PC is likely being sent to the lab for forensic examination, so there could be additional charges if they find additional material.

    #858 6 years ago
    Quoted from cdnpinballer:

    manimal - How would have the charges been different? JT has been charged with 2 counts of CP... Jared was also charged with 2 counts - the first for distribution and possession and the second for travelling to solicit minors for sex. JT has been charged with 2 counts as well. If it was just distribution/possession of CP that would be one count but there is a second charge laid so there must be more to the story than just distribution/possession such as in the Jared case.

    They are immensely different. Offenses such as distribution, soliciting, travelling, wire transmission, etc all carry a lot heavier penalties because they further the criminal enterprise and have physical victims. In Jared's case, the actual charges may have been reduced to only 2 as part of his plea, but I guarantee the judge was aware of that and sentenced according to the crime and not necessarily just the charges. In JT's case, he is at this point only charged with 2 counts of possession, which is the lowest category. Maybe the victim was 17 instead of 2 and sent him the pictures herself? I am not saying that makes it right, but all of it does come into consideration as to how he will be prosecuted and ultimately sentenced if convicted.

    One thing folks need to keep in mind is that it was not all that many years ago when a 18 year old girl was considered a spinster. Marriages at a very young age were common, and that is still a practice in many parts of the world. Again, I am not defending anything or anyone, I am just saying we don't know what he was actually in possession of, and morality does seem to change over time with the social norms.

    34
    #862 6 years ago
    Quoted from Darscot:

    Sorry but the whole she was 17 and looked older thing is as plausible as the tainted supplements defense in athletes getting caught for steroids.

    Read one of my earlier posts and then come back with the same opinion. I was a cop for a long time and worked child crimes for over 2 years. I have seen a lot of things that make you question everything about people and common decency that you thought you knew, and I would love nothing better to go back to my rookie days when I had the luxury of seeing things in black and white. It would make life so much easier. But instead I have learned that very few situations are actually that cut and dried, and most things are not what they seem.

    What would you do if a 17 year old person who admired you from afar, sent you nude or semi-nude pictures of themselves and maybe even propositioned you? What if they were all dolled up and looked much older than what they were? Would you be flattered and keep the photos? Would you show them to your buddies? At what point would you know they were technically child pornography? I am not talking of a 6 year old here, and don't get me wrong, this is all disgusting....I am just asking how you would know and how you would react. What if the police showed up on your door before you even had a chance to delete them? You are in possession, but are you guilty?What if you accidentally clicked on an illegal site? Do you clear your cache and format your hard drive? If not, then those pictures are probably still on your hard drive. Are you a child pornographer? What if you copied a picture of a nude girl from a website that was considered perfectly legal art, and you found out later she was under 18? If you had any thoughts other than disgust, does that make you a pervert? What if you show that "artful" image to a friend and lake a lewd comment...does that now take you from appreciating art to being a child predator?

    All I am trying to say here is if he is guilty, he deserves the book thrown at him. But our system is based on the premise that a person is innocent until PROVEN guilty. It is why the country is so great. Yes, there are all kinds of injustices that we can bring up, but the basic rule of justice usually prevails in the end. We all here know NOTHING of this case other than that fact he was arrested and charged. We don't know the evidence, we don't know the circumstances, and there isn't a one of us here that wouldn't be screaming from the top of our lungs for people to stop jumping to conclusions if the tables were turned. He needs to have his day in court before we all sentence him to the gallows. I will agree none of this looks good for him, but we are now over 800 posts of pure speculation.

    #864 6 years ago
    Quoted from Darscot:

    How much time do you think they waste on the 17 year old girl cases when they are swamped with far more serious crimes against children. I find it hard to believe 17 year old girl are send JT nudies, he is not Beiber.

    Hahahaha....That is for sure. But I wasn't saying that is what happened. You were commenting how you don't but the whole "she is 17 but looked 18 thing". I am just saying things are just not that black and white in the real world. I was commenting on your statement, not what happened to JT.

    I have seen guys who I felt were innocent, convicted because of really shoddy evidence and a mob mentality. I always ask myself how I would react if I were them. We are all 1 accusation away from being in the same shoes he is. And to that you say, "well if I am innocent, I have nothing to be afraid of"........but we have no idea if JT is guilty of anything, and he has 800 posts of something to be afraid of.

    12
    #881 6 years ago
    Quoted from DeathHimself:

    Like you retired police officer and I agree with you, but as statics do show us these sick bastards are not looking at girls who are 17 even maybe 16 that play them self's off for 20+ year old for the simple reason that hey look too much like adult women and they won't be stimulating for them to satisfy their disgusting habits. In addition now that we know that the comment from 2013 blog was indeed real, that troubles me even more so as an investigator.

    I agree with what you say, but the comment about the 17 year old was just to make a point. How many times did you work a case where you were immediately convinced a guy was guilty, but then the case ended up taking a 180 degree turn and you find out it was someone else? All I am saying is he deserves his day in court and people should stop making assumptions and hear the facts first. Experience would tell me there is a lot more going on here than meets the eye, especially given that previous post. But the truth of the matter is that none of us know anything other than the fact he was arrested and charged.

    #894 6 years ago
    Quoted from Skypilot:

    Taste like chicken.

    Taste like fish..........

    #934 6 years ago
    Quoted from cdnpinballer:

    @ manimal, I hear what you're saying. Maybe I misunderstand the 2 count charges thing. How can someone be charged with 2 counts of CP for only possession? Like did he have 2 hard drives with CP on it or do the cops lay 2 charges of CP where one is for possession and the other is for some other CP related offense like solicitation, distribution etc...
    Note - somehow my electronic device won't let me quote so I do the @ thing... sorry

    He was charged with 2 counts of "possession of child pornography in video form"....which I would take to mean they found at least 2 videos on his computer. More serious charges would be if you were trafficking, or producing it. Child porn is not an offense you charge, it is an object. What you do with it is the chargeable offense. In Jared's case, he was a party to the production of the video and he knowingly received and possessed it. He also traveled to actually meet underage folks.

    If I had to guess....and this is ONLY a guess.....I would say someone tipped off the cops to something JT was doing or had said, or possibly they were investigating someone that made or distributed the porn and found some link to JT on that person's computer. Remember, the press release said this discovery was part of an ongoing investigation. So with law enforcement being tipped off, they either went looking for the videos he may have downloaded from this other party, or more likely they set up a sting operation to try and get him to bite and download videos from them as they were posing as a bad guy. Once he does, they get a warrant to go and look for those 2 specific videos on his PC, and once they find them, they can seize the computer and easily lay charges. This process saves a lot of time because you go right to the home as soon as he does the download, so there is no time to hide the files or remove a hard drive, hide a laptop in the attic, etc. The cops know what to look for and exactly where to look to get them the arrest, and then they get another warrant for the computer hard drive and see what else they can find later. If they find another 100 photos, the prosecutor can file those charges, OR more likely he goes to the perp and tells him if he pleads guilty to the 2 already filed charges and takes his punishment, he will not file the additional charges. Most sentencing runs concurrent, so stacking the charges won't give him much more time anyway, IF all he did was to possess. So end result, the perp pleads guilty and gets probation and counseling for a 1st offense, and the prosecutor gets a conviction and the county does not have to foot the bill for a trial. Unless this thing turns into something much bigger, it is very possible he will see very little if any jail time. Even if they sentence him to 5 years, he would serve less than 1.

    #955 6 years ago
    Quoted from TheLaw:

    I always guess that these people are connected on the internet and swapping videos. I feel like I hear "sharing" or "trading" files when I see this in the news. One person gets caught and they follow the trail to everyone else.

    One would think, but the casual trading days are pretty much gone because it is too easy to do just exactly as you described. Believe it or not, this stuff is big business and it is more often than not purchased from a distributor. Even those that do file share, use very sophisticated methods to mask their identity and location. Those trails are often very very hard to follow.....not impossible, but very hard, and even then it usually leads back to some internet café or Starbucks where anyone can log on.

    #960 6 years ago
    Quoted from vid1900:

    No, but I've removed organs from donors who did not meet my moral standards....

    Vid, my opinion of you just climbed a bit today.....................lol

    47
    #1077 6 years ago

    I have to say, watching this thread has been fascinating to me. A few weeks ago JT was a pinball celebrity. An article appeared indicating an arrest for child pornography, and without conviction or any evidence of any kind other than an obscure web posting from 4 years ago, he is guilty scum that should die a horrible death.

    It is amazing to me how much stock people put into what they read on the internet, and the conclusions they draw from just bits of supposedly accurate information. As a cop I could arrest anyone for anything I wanted...making the charges stick was another story. Yes, you can be sued for false arrest, but if I really wanted to destroy someone in this pinball court of justice, all I would need to do is file charges on someone and make that public.

    Someone in a post above said they didn't have to presume anyone innocent...that is only what a jury has to do. Do you realize the true ramifications of that statement? Why do we even have courts? We put our faith in a system of justice that presumes everyone to be innocent until they are proven to be guilty to a defined standard by a group of peers. We as a society entrust those "peers" to make the right decision based on the evidence as presented. There are millions of dead people who died at the hands of someone that made up their own mind without knowing any facts, which is why we have the system we do. Just an amazing social commentary here.

    If anyone should be saying he is guilty as hell it should be me.....but I have also seen first hand what being falsely accused can do to a person. Even if the department announced it was all a mistake, he would never shake that stigma and he will forever be a child pornographer.

    He is probably guilty of something, and I am guessing we will never know to what extent, as he will likely plead guilty to get this over with and out of the public eye. But until he does make that plea, or fights the charges and is found guilty, he should be presumed innocent, as disgusting as all of it might seem. It goes to the base of what this great country was founded on. If he is guilty, he will get his punishment, which is also thankfully not up to us.

    #1084 6 years ago
    Quoted from Spankey:

    While I totally agree that everyone should be presumed innocent when going to trial I do think it is entirely reasonable for someone to draw some conclusions from the facts. We do have an old post alleging some past indiscretion. The police did not randomly knock on his door. There had to be evidence to secure a warrant which most likely included monitoring by authorities. To the extent of what was on the computers will most likely be known if this comes to trial. I'm going to assume a level of "not quite innocence" here.

    I would agree if what you are saying are known facts. This is what I was referring to in my comment....we have no idea of where the prior post came from or if it is legit in any way. It could have been some idiot on a weekend bender that had never met the guy. Internet comments....especially ones under anonymity should never be assumed to be a fact.

    And yes, one would think it takes a lot of "evidence" to get a warrant....but the truth is if I would have been a dishonest person, I could have gotten a warrant any time I wanted, for about anything I wanted. All a warrant does is give you the chance to invade their privacy and look for something illegal you think might be there. It in and of itself is not evidence. For instance, I could see a guy pick up his grandkids in his mini van and if I go to court and testify we have a missing child and I have personally seen this guy hang around the school when the kids are getting out and try to lure them into his van and maybe I have a picture or two of this happening....maybe I get a warrant. The proof needed to get a warrant is a whole lot less than needed for a conviction.

    So my point is if I were a bad cop out to get this guy, then I could make about anything happen. This is why the courts and our panel of "peers" is so important. So if we were to take everything you say as a fact, I agree with you 100%.....I just can't do that because I have been involved in too many cases where assumptions of fact would have convicted the wrong person.

    #1090 6 years ago
    Quoted from CrazyLevi:

    You can keep saying this but it doesn't make it true. Nobody in this thread is required to presume anything, and in fact is constitutionally guaranteed the right to presume anything they want.
    America: TASTE THE FREEDOM!!!
    (sorry rest of the world who may be posting here, can't speak for you guys)

    Levi...I like your passion and I even enjoy some of your posts in a wonky kind of way. I feel responsible for steering the conversation to "presumed innocent", but that wasn't the real reason I posted. My comment was more about how fascinating this all is to me as an observer. I was't trying to discuss guilt or innocence

    #1093 6 years ago
    Quoted from paulywalnuts23:

    However when you went to that persons house to serve the warrant you wouldn't find anything of importance. Sure the Anonymous Post is one thing but evidence when serving the warrant is another. I am not saying he is guilty but what you are saying and what has happened is slightly different.

    And if I were a bad cop, planting the evidence would be a breeze, or so the TV says..........

    #1100 6 years ago
    Quoted from paulywalnuts23:

    If you were a bad cop you wouldn't have the slightest idea of how to alter the digital files in order to make them look as though they didn't come from the thumb drive you carried into the person home when serving the warrant, because if you did know how to do that you wouldn't be a cop.

    Wanna bet. My 1st degree was in Computer Science. I worked banking, computer, and all kinds of system fraud for years...which is why I now run a systems data center. Trust me, I could put down enough convincing evidence to get the pope arrested. Maybe it would stand a forensic exam, and maybe not, but we haven't even come to that part of the case yet and he is already a gonner.

    #1105 6 years ago
    Quoted from pezpunk:

    i think the odds of this particular accusation being a mistake are low. just my opinion.

    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.

    #1106 6 years ago
    Quoted from paulywalnuts23:

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

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

    #1107 6 years ago
    Quoted from snyper2099:

    It means you can believe whatever you want to believe. Peoples actions are what people judge, not their beliefs.

    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?

    #1130 6 years ago
    Quoted from snyper2099:

    Has nothing to do with "beliefs".

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

    #1133 6 years ago

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

    #1168 6 years ago
    Quoted from snyper2099:

    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.

    Wasn't trying to start shit at all.

    #1206 6 years ago
    Quoted from hAbO:

    It always amazes me with how sentencing for child pornography works. Most I've seen are very short (less than several years). I guess it depends on a lot of factors like judge, previous offences, type of offence charged with etc. I'm assuming possession of pics/vids is a degree less than being a pedophile in the eyes of the law - for instance Jerad from Subway.

    I agree, but it because it is considered a "Non-Person" crime, meaning the person simply in possession did not victimize anyone and is just looking at pictures. I don't agree with that one bit, but it is the way our system treats it.

    You're currently viewing posts by Pinsider manimal.
    Click here to go back to viewing the entire thread.

    This topic is closed.

    Reply

    Wanna join the discussion? Please sign in to reply to this topic.

    Hey there! Welcome to Pinside!

    Donate to Pinside

    Great to see you're enjoying Pinside! Did you know Pinside is able to run without any 3rd-party banners or ads, thanks to the support from our visitors? Please consider a donation to Pinside and get anext to your username to show for it! Or better yet, subscribe to Pinside+!


    This page was printed from https://pinside.com/pinball/forum/topic/just-came-across-this?tu=manimal and we tried optimising it for printing. Some page elements may have been deliberately hidden.

    Scan the QR code on the left to jump to the URL this document was printed from.