I had two phones, one phone was being used by a person who was around my daughter. I found the child porn sites on his phone and went to the police, due to I have a land contract with this person who is the childs father, in this state I cannot deny him access to this home. So I went to the police and told them I needed to report that xx was looking at child porn on my phone. He stated that I was a victim because of the child, therefor someone would be out. He even told me that I was suppose to look at the pictures to see if the children were nude. He told me straight to my face that viewing child porn is legal it is a federal offense. He closed the case which I did not know, so I went back a talk to the chief and he gave me the forensic detective. I gave my new equipment to the police and turn him in when he came to my home, because I did kick him out but did not say I was going to the police. After more than a year a warrant was denied and I have no idea why because I have a copy of all the disgusting things he had and ect. So yes this officer lied and closed the case, and I’ve discovered other things they did wrong hence no warrant. I have pulled all the law books both state and federal, I know the codes and I will properly write the General Attorney in my state because it was denied by a Federal General Attorney, due to improper procedures and paperwork not being filled out properly. And it gets worse but I’m not going it that. I would not mislead a question, thanks for you thoughts.
It was child porn and I will leave this forum as you are men who probably look at child porn as you are mocking and being disrespectful. Go you know what.
…Well, that escalated quickly.
You started a thread with an ambiguous description of an alleged crime. Your last post gave a clear indication of a crime if their were pictures of nude children on the phone. In that case notifying the AG is the proper thing to do. Don’t get mad at us if your question sounded fishy, you wrote it. And accusing us of viewing child porn is in no way justified.
While I’m sorry for what you’re dealing with, this comment was uncalled for and inappropriate in this forum. Please don’t use personal insults against other posters.
I hope you’ll stick around; I think you’ll find there are people here willing to try to help you through this if you’re patient about explaining the circumstances as best as you can. Good luck.
Apparently answering questions from Beth2 means you look at child porn. If we follow the logic, what this means is that the original officer who answered her question looks at child porn, which means the whole incident is a cover up for a giant child porn ring! ALERT THE MEDIA.
I’m sorry but why is it okay for Bill Door to be rude and mocking like someone would make up something, and other statements and I cannot defend myself against him. I thanked the others privately. If people have an open and reasonable question or response that is appropriate. But saying that the police said it was not a minor and whistling dirty songs while they passed my house is disrespectful. But I’m suppose to be okay with that, maybe he should have held his tongue as well considering he didn’t ask a question to know any more information. So TriPolar and Pantastic would you accept that kind of behavior to a question of this nature. It was to the person who was rude. I will leave the forum as the moderator seems Bill has appropriate responses also. Thanks for all the people who gave me good information.
Beth2, we did not know who you were responding to. There’s a triangle with an exclamation point in the upper right corner of each post displayed. If you think something is inappropriate click that and the moderators will be notified. Click on the Quote button if you want to respond directly to a particular post.
Because sometimes people do make things up. Or they misunderstand something that’s happening.
You have to realize that to other people on the internet, you’re just an anonymous stranger. You may be telling us the straight truth. Or you may be lying or leaving out important details or misunderstanding what the law is. We have no way of knowing.
Beth2, I’m not saying that the police never lie, far from it, they lie all the time, but they do it for a reason. They lie to get a conviction, they lie to establish probable cause where none exists, they lie to get out of trouble, or to make money on overtime.
What they don’t usually do is lie to let a child pornographer get away with it. They love to arrest people like that, it’s good press and an easy conviction. I submit that if that’s what you think happened you’re wrong about the nature of the offense, that if it was really child pornography there would have been an arrest. Maybe those sites aren’t really child pornography and are just people who appear to be underage.
Was I perhaps dismissive of your concerns? Sure I was. The run on sentences and punctuation anomalies irked me, and I responded in a less than cordial fashion, but that’s the internet for you, it’s not all puppies and rainbows.
And as far as not being able to defend yourself against me, why not?
So what is it when they tell people they have to talk to cops or it’s obstruction or they can’t videotape cops on the street because it’s illegal wiretapping or some other BS law they made up?
Can I ask Beth2 a question or 2? Is the crime that he visited child porn sites or that he had child porn of your child on the phone? If it is visiting sites, the officer may have been mistaking thinking the crime is to actually download the porn and not just visiting the sites. It could have also been that he was on sites with child porn but could claim didn’t know. For example if he went on hotblondes dot com that had child porn on it the cop may look at that as a oops while there is no excuse if he visited nakkedpreteens dot ru. Also what is the jurisdiction? I lived on a lot that was an enclave of unincorporated land. Any crimes had to be reported to the Sheriff and not the local city cops. You mentioned “federal” so maybe there is no state law against it but a federal law instead in which case it goes to the FBI.
All that being said, if he could not take the report for whatever reason, he should have directed you to the appropriate agency. I can sympathise with you. While not as serious as child porn, my wife was being scammed and despite plenty of evidence I received no response from the local police from where the letter was sent, the USPS investigations office (using US Mail) or the FBI (crossing state borders).
nm
What I’m curious about is: in a case like this, where the phone actually belonged to the OP and not the person she was accusing, how do the police establish who was the one who viewed the child porn? If I was a cop and someone brought in their own phone and accused their ex of viewing child porn on it, my first suspicion would be that it was a frame-up.
one would think beth2 would have had some serious explaining to do @ the police station - being in possession of child porn itself is usually the charge - viewing is ‘secondary’ to posession as it were.