not that I mean to be harsh, but this is extremely easy to shoot down.

The person entered a chat room. The started a conversation with a person. Nothing wrong so far.

Then the conversation turns racy and the chatter is identified by age as 14. Ok... now at this point the person has done nothing wrong because unknown to them, this person is 14. maybe they are into sex chat... who knows.

critical point here. if you leave right now, you are still good.

But upon identifing the age of your chatter and THEN you continue to chat and make sexual comments or discuss sexual topic, to include cyber-sex... then you HAVE done something. You made a choice and ACTED on it. And it is a crime.

So, because you have committed the offense, you can be convicted of it.

I did Froz. But now I don't.
Was I being snotty?

No. I am done.

Bye

I really don't know what your problem with me is...sure wish I did. I could probably benefit from some of the wisdom of your experience. However, anytime some conversation between you and I could actually become productive, you throw a grenade at me then run off.

That sure is a shame. My life pretty much sucks and I sure could have used some help.

God I hope so, especially because what is the alternative? Wait until this person has molested the 14yo girl that wasn't an adult police officer and put her and her family through hell and then arrest him....... Or even better yet, wait until he abducts the young lady, uses her to fill his sick fantasy, and then dump the body before we make an arrest. Well that's what is all too often happening. Our children are being raped and killed by this "intent"....

My apologies. All that comes from the various accusations from others. Seems to have subsided for the moment.

Now, finally someone who might be interested in my point instead of seeing me as the enemy of children and enabler of child rapists everywhere...

how refreshing.

you have been respectful and I appreciate it. I have no if on reporting. It is when. and I think that the husband gets a chance to tell his story. Call it a process. He gets to say his peace. She turns him in. whatever. But the Husband gets to tell his side. I have gone on for hours on this.

not sure what else there is. Maybe a question I could answer?

The case I saw in our state envolved a man making arrangements to meet the 14 year old, but he never showed up. Still he was arrested for his intent to meet the 14 year old. So are those thoughts or actions? He never met the 14 year old....in fact how could he, there wasn't one because he was talking to an adult. And the adult could have been role playing? How do we know they weren't doing that?

I'm just making a point things are never 100% clear and it seems intuition plays a part of judgement.

I'm not as versed or poetic as some of these posters. I also do not pretend to know more than I do by using big ole fat words. However, I am a mother and I do know right from wrong.

Patriot,

You say you have not seen "proof of child molestation". What the heck do you call what is on that disc?! He may not be the perp in those pictures, but he is ENDORSING it, PAYING for it, getting his jollies off of it. If it weren't for crazies like him, less children would be hurt.

So we have to wait for him to actually molest a child, ruin that child for life, before he is convicted??!!

Does the wife wait to confront him while children are being plucked off the street and thrown into a hellish world of child porn?

What can we do to save these children?

Saving a marriage is not the issue. Saving innocent children is.

I have 3 children. No "stalling" is worth it. God put me on earth to protect them. I will do all that it takes to make them safe...including calling authorities on my spouse.

To Committed and Melody,
I apologize for how this was percieved. After I reread it later, boy, it sounded like I was for this ****. I AM NOT!

It was just worded wrong and out of context.

I was simply refering to the bdsm thing NOT the Child porn.

This guy should be held accountable for this, I never meant otherwise. I simply think that the police should not be the FIRST course of action. The husband should be confronted.

I am against any form of abuse, mental, physical, sexual, and any other type, Child porn is disgusting, wrong on all levels and IMO immoral! But, I am also against ruining a mans life without him having a chance to answer to what he did. Yes, I think he has problems.
I do not know the whole story, only what Chaster has written. So I do not have enough of the info to make a logical decision.

It seems there are two distinct sides on this. I just choose the side of confronting first.

Good, neither do I.


OK, we agree on this other than under what venue he gets to tell his story.


OK, so this is our point of contention. This is where I believe the risks are too great and too many loopholes are left open. If she does exactly that and the exact results were are all striving for are acheived, then all will be well. But, IMHO, I see a lot of risk in this. I see the possibility of physical violence. I see the possibility of him using the weasel factor on what by my limited knowledge of the person that I view as a submissive scared young woman. I, personally, see many ways in which he can avoid getting caught and subsequently the help he needs and frankly the societal punishment he deserves if he is guilty of possessing these materials.


Not really... The only thing that I ask you to consider is putting yourself in the situation of this young woman with the realization that she is not us. She does not have the benifit of our vantage point from the outside with the wisdom we've gained through our experiences. If for a moment she chooses denial, like many women in an abusive situation choose, then who is at risk? Our children.

making the arrangements to meet was an action. It was predatory behavior. He should be prosecuted for it. not making the meeting does not absolve him from the making of the arrangement. He set up a meeting. That is intent. That can be prosecuted.

Now, if this person you are speaking of had gotten on the internet and attempted to set-up a meeting for sex with an adult and upon finding a willing participant during the conversation found out the person was minor, this is where the critical point happens.

You run away now, you are innocent of crimes against a child.

If you continue to push it and set the meeting, then you are guilty of intent to engage in sexual relations of some kind with a minor.


hurtnheart: Have I once ever said I was for child porn? Did I make it sound like I was trying to make a case for this guy other than he gets to tell his side? If so... all misunderstanding. He gets to tell his side, I say.

Possession of child porn is a crime and disgusting. I never said hide it from the police. Regardless of probability, she is either turning it in with him(they go as a team) of she is turning it in without him(he is the bad guy). those are the only 2 options I have ever be after. And the only way to affect that is to get his side prior to police intervention.

Nowhere have I said don't protect children. And yes, child pornography implies molestation by who every took the pictures and was in them, but if you see those pictures, it does not make you immediately guilty of molestation.

While those are great options in an idealistic society, those are not all the venue's on the table. There is the real concern that this will go unreported. Patriot, I know you say that you aren't implying that with your arguement, but by failing to acknowledge it, IMHO, you are walking through the situation with blinders on. Again, IMHO, this is actually one of the more likely outcomes. He begs, pleads, justifies, rationalizes, and promises then turns his attention to doing his deeds in better guarded secrecy. This is real, I have seem this in cases such as this, in addiction, and in affairs....

Yes, we probably are saying ultimately the same but you appear to be trying to err on the side of prudence which doesn't translate real well when discussing a man who has child porn on DISKS. The only way to see if there has been a next step at all is to proceed with an investigation but it IS a proper assumption that there be something to be investigated given the subject matter on the disks. KB

OK. Help me here. I'm really dumb! This is from Court TV:


CAMDEN, N.J. — A man who confessed to killing the wife of a prominent New Jersey rabbi testified Thursday that the religious leader offered him $30,000 to carry out the killing.

"It was the darkest day of my life," said Leonard Jenoff, 56, who pleaded guilty to beating Carol Neulander over the head with a metal rod until she lay choking to death on the floor of her Cherry Hill, N.J., living room.


Fred Neulander, 60, who founded and ran one of the most successful synagogues in New Jersey, is charged with capital murder for ordering the Nov. 1, 1994, slaying. Assistant First Prosecutor James Lynch has said he intends to seek the death penalty if Neulander is convicted....


What's the difference? This man paid to have another committ a murder. He has been charged with murder. People who pay to have others committ child molestation should not be charged with that crime also?

If not, then justice is NOT being served!!!

AWESOME point Tatertot, and exactly what I've been trying to say.

Patriot - do you know what stipulation means? Because it makes no sense in the context you keep using it. You apparantly are trying to say "speculation", not "stipulation"...?

Pat,
I’m sorry in advance for the thread jack…My sadness and general feeling of displacement on the boards reached a break point where I finally felt like I have to say something.

All,

The antagonism and mores that I see expressed in terms of self-esteem with aggressive frequency on these boards is a pernicious abstraction (and that's no pun on the title of this thread) that serves no purpose other than to bully and indulge in offering opinions that are out of relation to the well-being of our community.

Most recently, outrage spews from several members who do not care for the topical questions and views posted by others in direct response to chasterwebb's situation. Regardless of personal distaste, the opinions proffered were primarily with regard to ethics, morals and law, all three of which are determined by time, place and circumstance. They are relative concepts of human conduct that interact with each other but lack any real permanence. They are changing and evolving ideologies.

A modern understanding may be thus: Ethics is a study or considered reasoning of facts and information to determine what is good or right in theory. Morals are concerned with applied behavior or actual doing based on feeling, beliefs and values. Law is the articulated rule-set of what must and must not be done in a given situation. Thrown into the mix in what I think is an effort to add abstract dimension to an argument but without much regard for objectivity, is religion, which may encompass a person’s relation to that regarded as holy, spiritual, supernatural, powerful, revered or considered worthy of devotion.

Some may find certain opinions offensive to their sense of values, but when one of us speaks honestly about her observations, shows personal integrity and is seeking betterment and not harm – for herself foremost and possibly for others as well, that person IS acting ethically and does not deserve reproach.

Our challenge and ultimate goal on the MB boards is to support each other in our efforts to build our marriages. To achieve our goal we promote self-improvement and self-realization of the individual, not self-esteem. The self-esteem we perceive in ourselves isn’t what helps us achieve; it is the after-effect of achievement.

Support for each other requires more than tacit agreement or ego-boosts. As part of the journey to understand the deeper sense of ourselves, we rely on more than self-culture and examination. We come together in an effort to go outside ourselves and contribute experience, style, philosophy, humor and even fantasies with a purpose toward using that shared lore to help each person gain strength and self-improvement and carry those qualities over into our marriages.

We face problems relating our own contribution to the contributions of others. It’s hard to make assured statements about right and wrong for others especially when others’ areas of experience are very different and removed from our own. It seems that if a subject holds a lot of interest to us in mass, then it is worthy of discussion. It is not arguable, I think, to perpetuate the air of certitude through moralizing and self-aggrandizing that is propounded on the boards today.

No amount of tyrannical arguing will ever convince me that what I consider wrong is right. So, if I'm not someone who shares your beliefs and you want to persuade me, you have to present reasons, that I can buy into or not, in support of your position. And I think it is essential to speak with courtesy and respect for the contributions of others in a public forum created for examining the benefits of attitudes and behaviors that touch the lives us all.

Some people are so afraid of any idea that is outside of their understanding that they will not look at the reality of our time, actions and consequences. The fear clouds our perceptions and paralyzes us from even considering possibilities of relevant action. Some view pacifism as self-deception and weakness. Other people believe intense inward contemplation of spirituality is all that is necessary to justify our existence.

I believe that the knowledge passed from person to person from the most overt statements through the most subtle of statements influences each of us and resounds in our minds indefinitely. It becomes part of our choices and actions whether we perceive it or not. The mind is always open to reflection and critique, because without those there is no growth.

Discussion and negotiation are not exercises for letting the other person have my way. Conversation is not a game that at all costs, must be won, do or die. Seeing ourselves with proper perspective and sufficiently overcoming those flaws and fears that plague us in our marriages and really, all of our everyday relationships, requires us to stop being intolerant of the unique and divine each of us represents in this life.


Sally

she probably is very impressionable and submissive. I really don't know. The option of calling him at work to get his story and then calling the police seemed to fit the quickness of reporting and the get his side first idea. If it was strength she needed to do the right thing, she took a great step by reaching out to a forum. Also, the advice froz gave her with links to child protection websites with hotlines and resources was outstanding, IMO.

Sure, the situation is risky. No saving her from that. I have professed be smart and protect yourself. But, on the topic of societal punishment, you and I both know that society will never forgive this man his wrongdoing, if he is in fact convicted of a sex crime against a child. Now, given that, I think it takes more scrutiny than just frying the guy without getting his side. No one wants to address the fact that there could be a logical explanation. Maybe the ignorance of that makes it easy to judge. But, lets play what if(regardless of how unlikely) and say that this man had these disks because he confiscated them from someone. She happens to find them and he has a logical explanation. Maybe he was fighting inside himself to turn in his nephew or whoever he got these from. Not everyone is so quick to turn in their friends and relatives. So, it is a logical explanation to me that this could possibly be the why here.

But if she calls the police immediately and he has to explain his story to them then maybe that is the way to go. But what about his feeling for his wife now. He has done nothing wrong other than be torn over a difficult situation and then she made an assumption(that HE owned them) and he is now running under the label of child porn guy. He is also wondering why his wife would simply ask and trust him? And I extend that he might resent that. All because she did not give him the chance to explain. And then he has the pain and struggle of getting past something he never did anyway(because no one would believe him anyway... right?)

I run under the idea that if you are going to do something someone that labels them forever, you better be damn sure you are right.

Now, the children in the pictures need to be saved and I would be in the first bus/plane/car to the location of this porn making filth place to 'deal' with the sick ********* myself. If I knew where they were. But a picture file can't give you that. The internet history and all that can sure... and if there is a history in the internet browser for these sites, then is sure doesn't look good for Mr Husband. As I recall, she said she looked through history and could find anything.

It is disgusting that these children in the pictures were not protected from this horror. And they of course should be saved. And we should protect or children everywhere. I protect mine. No one messes with my kids. period. But I have a little knowledge of computers(you know... what with a CS degree and all) and I know what can be extracted from picture files and computers. You will not find all your magic answers for these children in those places. But they are a start.

And as far as our wisdom, she came and asked for it. That is a big step. A credit to her. I certainly hope she made it through. But we can not live her life for her. I just pray she posts today and she and the child are fine. For as fine as they could be if he is in fact a sicko.

Pat.
No you have never said you were for child porn. I hope I never implied that you did. My thoughts on this whole can of worms are the same as yours, I, however, am not able to put into words as well as you. People misunderstand my stance, and you say it so precisely. So, I sit back and read, and try to get through all the chastizing of people's pov.

I think this is one of those debates where both sides have very valuable arguments, and I think it went to deep for Chaster to understand. I really hope these debates did not scare her off.

I think the only real loss is that it goes from this guy posesing disks of child porn to this guy being a serial child molester. He should be held accountable for possesion of the disk, that is all at this point.

why do I get the feeling people are trying to insult my intelligence? <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/confused.gif" alt="" /> Does this discredit me? Does it make it easier to attack my points(that most don't even understand, obviously, save LH it seems).

Geez, lemonman said irregardless and he's a Dr. for cripes sake.

Anyway, I am probably being touchy. Sorry for that. Yes, I meant speculation. Thank you for the correction.

"Some people are so afraid of any idea that is outside of their understanding that they will not look at the reality of our time, actions and consequences. The fear clouds our perceptions and paralyzes us from even considering possibilities of relevant action. Some view pacifism as self-deception and weakness. Other people believe intense inward contemplation of spirituality is all that is necessary to justify our existence."

Sorry, but I do not think that encouraging this woman to put herself in possible danger or to open herself to the possibility of being manipulated into turning a blind eye is
"intense inward contemplation of spiritaulity"...

Sally, this is a pretty cut and dry situation, no need and no place for lots of inward contemplation at the moment for this woman. If we believe what she says, then inward contemplation needs to happen later, not now. Furthermore, how much contemplation is necessary for me or anyone else to see that a man in posession of illegal material in which children were harmed in the making of needs to be turned into the authorities immediately?

Lastly, this whole topic has pretty much absolutely nothing to do wit Marriage Building. Chaster never asked for help saving her marriage in spite of finding out her husband likes to lok at pictures of children being molested and abused. She asked WHAT TO DO about finding out, period.

Sorry, but I for one care NOTHING about MB PC when it comes to this topic. Their marriage SHOULD BE a moot point at this point.

Patriot, this is why there is supposedly no tolerance from a legal standpoint when it comes to the POSESSION of child porn - to "protect the children" and stop the "****". You don't seem to get it that by participating in child pornography in any way, shape or form is TAKING PART in the abuse and molestation of children. There is a whole food chain to this Patriot. Without demand, there is no supply. If people are severely unished for even being in posession of the stuff ONE TIME, the demand will decrease, therefore the supply will decrease. Will it ever be snuffed out for good? Unfortuately, probably not, but that doesn't excuse us from doin our part to try.

For God's sake, Patriot, the man was in posession of child porn. Therefore, he has participated in the abuse of children, at least indirectly.

Why, why, why give him the chance to destroy the evidence? He does not deserve the benefit of the doubt anymore. If the investigation were to turn up nothing, fine, his name can be "cleared". But thinking he'll have some sane explanation for having that disc is like thinking there is an innocent explanation for finding snapshots of your naked best friend in your spouse's desk drawer. What would they be doing? Holding onto them for the friend's spouse for safekeeping? Come On!