For BIOS passwords: remove the motherboard battery for about 5 minutes to reset the BIOS to factory defaults (on modern motherboards there’s often a jumper marked “clear CMOS” that you can short or a switch you can toggle to do that without having to go to the trouble of removing the battery). Since most home computers already are at factory default because most users don’t dare fiddle around in there, it’s not a big deal.
It’s also very traceable because when Dad comes home the BIOS password isn’t there any more.
I found one law review article: Beyond the Pleasure Principle: The Criminalization of Consensual Sadomasochistic Sex; Pa, Monica; 11 Tex. J. Women & L. 51 (2001-2002).
The article begins the discussion of case law with this framing:
That article then cites several cases in support of the claim that consent is not a defense for various activities done in the context of BDSM. None of the cases involves anything like the instant case, and indeed in all of them either the victims testified that they did not consent or the injuries inflicted were much more severe than those discussed here. The opinions contain dicta of varying strengths discussing how immaterial evidence of consent might be.
The first case mentioned is People v. Samuels, 250 Cal.App.2d 501 (1967). Samuels made a pair of films “…depicting a gagged and naked man strung up in an unfinished room, receiving a beating with whips and lashes…” from the accused. Injuries from the beating are visible on the victim’s buttocks, the small of his back and further up on his body at the conclusion of the event. Note also that this case was in 1967, and that Samuels was charged with possession and distribution of obscene material as well as assault.
Samuels’ defense was that the injuries were faked, applied by cosmetics. But the prosecution’s experts testified that the camera film had no splices and the claim that the film was stopped to apply cosmetics was not credible.
The next case is Commonwealth v. Appleby, 402 NE 2d 1051 (1980). Here the victim testified that he did not consent to the beating, and in dicta the court observed that even if he had, it was severe enough to make consent a non-issue; the victim was thrashed with a modified heavy riding crop.
In State v Collier, 372 NW 2d 303 (Ct. App. 1985), the victim, an out-call model/prostitute, testified she did not consent when her boss attacked her after she returned from an engagement with no money:
His defense was that she consented, and the trial court refused to instruct the jury that consent would have changed anything, again pointing out that individuals cannot consent to serious injury.
So my take-away from the cited cases is that the dividing line is “serious injury.”
While the law review article takes a dispproving tone over the state’s ability to punish any consensual activity, I’d point out it was written before Lawerence, and most of the fire at the state’s ability to criminalize consensual sexual activity was extinguished with that ruling anyway.
I’d be interested to see how Lawrence bears on this.
If a spanking with a wooden spoon counts as serious injury, I’d wager this beating rose to that level. I have no doubt this left major bruising.
However, on reflection, I’d probably think that if it meets the level of serious injury, it wouldn’t count as legal child discipline. Unfortunately protectors are much more likely to go after the S & M community than a good old boy judge.
I think we all would. If there’s anything that would make this thread better, it’s a bunch more long posts about the subtleties of case law surrounding the myriad of circumstances under which people may hit each other. Riveting!
Likewise when I say I will kill a child to protect myself from harm, that is no idle boast either.
BTW, how much harm? Would you kill a parent to prevent a spanking? From screaming verbal abuse – that’s something my father subjected us to and I don’t think he deserved to be killed for it.
Your position is not without merit. Having said that, it’s important to remember that as a 14 year old in Texas seven years ago, the prevailing legal authority makes it unclear as to whether this is technically speaking a whuppin’ or a hidin’.
Correct in both cases. I’d be mildly surprised to find a modern motherboard without a DIP switch or jumper to clear the BIOS password, but even if it didn’t, removing the battery will solve the issue.
Yes, unless the drive or some data thereunder was encrypted, my bootable Ubuntu disk can mount NTFS partitions and read the data that’s on it quite easily.
In fact, unless the drive is encrypted, I can download the SAM file from Windows, and start hacking the passwords. A nice rainbow table should give me the clear text of any passwords under 16 characters in no time at all.
All this talk about passwords and encryption and bootable this and that are fine, but my guess is that this judge is way more likely to beat his computer with a belt than bother to learn about security measures he might take for it. It’s WAY easier and probably cheaper, assuming you already have a belt.
Well, let’s just take several pages to delve into the fascinating legal minutiae that may or may not be related to the matter, having made clear of course that we do not substantially disagree with the opinion that the father in this case may have exceeded what some would hold as a standard for acceptable parental behavior.
I think you need to make this passage longer, and more detailed. You’re an erotic writer. Your readers want to savor each lash of the whip - how hard? Where did it land? Was it one that hurt ‘good’ or hurt ‘bad’?
Also, nothing is unsexier than ‘parapherinalia’ of ‘various types.’ Writing is about being specific.
Do that, throw in an introductory paragraph about her looks, and come back to me.
Dude, you have an exhaustive history of sidetracking shit like this with legal nitpicking. When people respond to that legal nitpicking (which is your purpose in doing it), you don’t get to pull the “pay attention to my main point!” argument, since the main point of your arguments are NEVER the main issue at hand.
There’s no one answer to your question, and you know it. A bare handed spank administered to the diapered bottom of a toddler who nearly ran out into traffic? Of course not. A grown man wielding a belt against a cowering girl? Absolutely.
Screaming verbal abuse? No. If I thought it would do any good, I’d step between the adult and child. Otherwise, I’d report the adult to protective services.
The sadly ironic part of this is he’s a family court judge.
Let that sink in.
It’s his job to determine if parents are fit to be parents.
I don’t think this is so much about prosecution for the crime of child abuse (and I’m sorry, no bullshit justification will convince me that it wasn’t flat out child abuse) as it is about professional integrity and conflict of interest. Who the hell wants this guy hearing your custody case in court? :eek: I don’t care if he’s prosecuted or not (although I think he should be). It’s more important to me that this asshole doesn’t get to keep telling other people how they are not fit to be parents and making decisions about what proper parenting looks like for other people. Judges are lawyers usually, right? Shouldn’t there be some sort of professional ethics violation about hearing child abuse cases in court and then going home to beat the shit out of your own kid?
