Guest Posted October 13, 2013 Share Posted October 13, 2013 http://www.exmouthjournal.co.uk/news/adult_baby_escapes_jail_1_2856916 Link to comment
smarti Posted October 13, 2013 Share Posted October 13, 2013 interesting. paraphilic infantilsm entered successfully in mitigation (and receives a legal definitition for maybe the first time), but still fined 350, community service and had to sign the sex offenders register. Link to comment
dummysucker Posted October 13, 2013 Share Posted October 13, 2013 "suffers from a rare condition called paraphilic infantilism". Now lets hope that someone seriously looks into it Link to comment
willnotwill Posted October 13, 2013 Share Posted October 13, 2013 Funny, you search for that term now and all you get is a People Of Walmart photo and an Oliver Beane you tube video. Link to comment
wetman Posted October 13, 2013 Share Posted October 13, 2013 I don't think it's funny or that he got away with anything. His life is, pardon my french, fucked. Link to comment
wetman Posted October 13, 2013 Share Posted October 13, 2013 I've just noticed that the article fails to say why the police looked at his computer in the first place. 1 1 Link to comment
babyleanna75 Posted October 15, 2013 Share Posted October 15, 2013 He probably log into one of those child molester sites police set up to trap them. Having that many pics of children there is something wrong with him. And court order pshyciatrist is the best thing for him. Link to comment
babyleanna75 Posted October 15, 2013 Share Posted October 15, 2013 He probably log into one of those child molester sites police set up to trap them. Having that many pics of children there is something wrong with him. And court order pshyciatrist is the best thing for him. Link to comment
wetman Posted October 16, 2013 Share Posted October 16, 2013 babylee75, all these pictures could just be somewhere in buffers and caches sitting around on your harddisk. The police does not make a difference between a picture found in "/home/joe/pictures/kiddies/lovely" or in "C:/Windows/Internet Explorer/Microsoft/cache/temp/last/tracking". Those pictures were probably from wrong search results. Link to comment
Shawnie Posted October 26, 2013 Share Posted October 26, 2013 If im taking in what I think im taking in he was looking for people in nappies not children even that being said. If your not sexual arroused by people in nappies then why are you looking at such images. I think he was bullshitting a bullshitter. I dont condone such involving children. As a father myself of two relitively small children I would castrate the first one Link to comment
Darkfinn Posted October 28, 2013 Share Posted October 28, 2013 Gotta love nanny state UK punishing thought crimes. Link to comment
babyadduk Posted November 11, 2013 Share Posted November 11, 2013 How many of you even read the article? It said why & how he was caught. It also tell you why he is considered a risk to kids. I know the person he was staying with, but never met him. Glad I didn’t now to. Link to comment
TBlazer Posted November 23, 2013 Share Posted November 23, 2013 Well according to the article the dude had over 90,000 images of children, 250 of which were considered explicit. I also have a hard time believing this wasn't sexual-unless he had some other sort of condition, like OCD, why would he download so many? And why kids? I think the police were correct to monitor him and have him listed as a sex offender. Link to comment
dora_lover Posted December 5, 2013 Share Posted December 5, 2013 he gives babyz a baaaaaaaaaad name. Link to comment
wetman Posted December 6, 2013 Share Posted December 6, 2013 @ babyadduk: I can't find where it says why he was caught, could you point that out? I seem to have a blind spot there... Link to comment
wetman Posted December 6, 2013 Share Posted December 6, 2013 I've just come back to this topic and find that quite a few people would be OK with a quick lynch job to take care of a paedo. In an earlier post I wrote that "he didn't get away with it, he's dead." about the AB in this topic. And I think what happened last week supports that. Link to comment
freswith Posted December 9, 2013 Share Posted December 9, 2013 It is worth noting the British police's "Operation Ore" which targeted Paedophiles in the last decade. 1 Link to comment
Darkfinn Posted December 9, 2013 Share Posted December 9, 2013 Such a pity that our police - once the envy of the world - are now so bored, lazy and incompetent that they feel they have to target us! Link to comment
Guest Posted December 16, 2013 Share Posted December 16, 2013 I know this guy and I can say that he is not even interested in kids and it has not bothered him at all Link to comment
hampshirebaby Posted May 18, 2017 Share Posted May 18, 2017 any one have any update on this guy Link to comment
Fulldiaper Posted August 19, 2017 Share Posted August 19, 2017 Pictures of children in any state will get you into trouble in the US, since laws are so gray when it comes to child pornography. So, storing images of under age persons wearing diapers is not a good idea, smart or even slightly intelligent. Link to comment
AbabeBill Posted August 20, 2017 Share Posted August 20, 2017 Wondering about tv, magazine, and internet ads for children's items? It's pictures of children in diapers. If you produce such ads, where does that put you? What about someone who then looks at such ads? Link to comment
freswith Posted September 1, 2017 Share Posted September 1, 2017 35,000 terrorist to worry Link to comment
Firefly 35 Posted November 26, 2017 Share Posted November 26, 2017 On 9/1/2017 at 12:35 PM, freswith said: 35,000 terrorist to worry ??? Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now