Spanky the Clown arrested on kiddie porn charges.
De-nutting at dawn with rusty garden shears.
“Behind the clown nose, however, this man appears to have been supporting an industry that trades in the exploitation of children.”
“Spanky” - and nobody suspected anything?!?!
There’s a lesson here. Never pay for your illegal porn with a credit card…er I mean don’t look at illegal porn at all!
Seriously though. Spanky the Clown? The name is creepy enough.
There’s very few clown names that AREN’T creepy.
Clowns and sex crimes against kids - they go together like peanut butter and jelly!
Not that I support kiddie porn or nothin’ but it’s not like Spanky was dragging kids out of the audience behind the lion cage for a diddle.
But kids, remember, the next time a clown invites you to help pitch a tent under a Big Top, run!
Well, at least it wasn’t Gacy the Clown.
I dunno Otto it’s very common for molesters to get themselves into a position where they interact with children to reduce suspicion and increase access. I think even if he hadn’t done anything yet it’s a poor sign he had the indicators and the access.
It says right in the article the first people the officials targeted were people with access to children. Seems a logical way to do it myself.
I’ve said it before, I’ll say it again.
Clowns are evil.
EVIL.
EE-VEEL. Like froo-its of the De-veel.
Rusty garden shears and a big… red… hot… poker. You can be sure he’d never think about kids in that way again. I hate people sometimes.
Not saying the circus world isn’t a better place without Spanky in it, just that there’s a difference between “access to children” as an entertainer in front of a large crowd and “access to children” in a smaller or one-on-one setting. Like, Michael Jackson wouldn’t snatch a kid out of the fifth row at a concert but no parent in her right mind should let the child visit Neverland.
It might be tasteless, but I laughed when I saw the headline. Then the picture loaded. Holy crap, that’s a scary clown.
They don’t like pedophiles in prison. Somehow I’m not sure if a pedophile and former clown would make it long enough to be put into solitary.
He’s sick, getting off child porn, but I can’t understand why you’d say something like this. He wasn’t molesting children himself or anything like that. Yes, very wrong, and he deserves a long amount of jail time and rehabilitation, and “Must not work/live/be near children”, but not that.
Sounds like it wasn’t the mothers he wanted to fuck…
I agree with Aslan. What Spanky the Clown did was horrendous and he deserves to be prosecuted full for his crimes but to suggest that he should be castrated (or were you implying something even more significant?) with rusty shears and then raped with a superheated rod of metal is just as horrible.
It’s 2004, not 1004.
Where did I specify rape for Spanky? You put that into the mix, not me. I gave my initial reaction to a subject I loathe. I wish I could completely remove the entire matter from the world. I can’t and maybe it’s wrong of me to voice my reaction to it but it’s my opinion. I’m not what you’d call a bleeding heart. I cannot understand what is attractive about child porn and I cannot forgive the people who enjoy it. In any of its forms. Maybe he didn’t do the deed in the flesh… yet. But he won’t be able to now and it’s a good thing. I don’t think it’s such a stretch to consider Spanky a time bomb. He had access to kids and he enjoyed child porn. I think his choice of sexual entertainment speaks volumes about character.
If not sodomy, what? The only other thing I can think you would use it for is cauterizing his wounds after barbarically castrating him with equipment which is ill suited for such a delicate procedure and is also rusty, which could lead to tetnus.
Is this what you were implying instead? It’s no better than what I originally assumed. If not, please tell me what you did mean.
As **Aslan ** said, he is a sick SOB for getting off on child pornography and I have little sympathy for anyone who indulges in it (I actually got my current job because the deviant before me was caught looking at it) but the people looking at it are still have certain Constitutional rights, including protection against cruel and unusual punishment. Your implied method of dealing with him is both.
I’d just like to point out that the article seems to go out of its way to not imply he actually possessed any incriminating porn at all - in fact, all he did was use a billing service that included as its clients some child porn sites.
Or that’s how it appears to read, anyway.
I thouhgt it said it found thousands of images on his machine?