Sounds like some Internet Noob who is ecstatic that some Nigerian Prince wants to reward him if he helps with a few money transfers
Townsend and Child Porn?
- Thread starter RobertScorpio
- Start date
Sounds like some Internet Noob who is ecstatic that some Nigerian Prince wants to reward him if he helps with a few money transfers
You realize it's Towshend right?
I remember this story, and the bizarre "excuse" Townsend gave afterward. But there are two arguments going on here: one, cut and dried, did he do something illegal? He's admitted that he did. Two, did he do anything immoral? He and his defenders argue that he did not, and that there's no evidence that he did.
Some questions -
- why the four year delay between his access and the police follow-up?
- what kind of evidence would the police expect to find? I'm no expert, but I know how to erase my browser history! In all seriousness, would the police expect to find anything four years later? Even if he was just looking, not distributing?
- where's the book he was writing?
- I'll offer the site http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Police_caution as an interesting piece of background - this makes it sound like Townsend plea-bargained his way out of something more serious - doesn't it? (UK residents - are these things typical?)
I don't have a dog in this fight - I don't care if he performs at the Super Bowl or not, and don't see any harm in it. But his story strains credibility. I'd like to believe he did something stupid instead of something immoral, but the latter seems far more likely for a famous, wealthy man admitting his guilt to the police.
Isn't that next weeks DATELINE topic?
Sounds like some Internet Noob who is ecstatic that some Nigerian Prince wants to reward him if he helps with a few money transfers
Popular theory has it that that people with sexual perversions/addictions bury themselves in it. If you're into kiddy porn you don't just check a website once in a four-year period. If he was into kiddy porn they would've found it all over the place on his computers and home. And considering the guy was in his late 50s when this happened, yeah, it's possible he didn't know how to delete his browser history and even if he did know how, doing such a thing hardly 100% removes the evidence.
It was dropped, possibly in the light of the "publicity" this incident caused.
Police cautions are very common. They are typically handed out for anything where the person involved is willing to admit a relatively minor offence. It's a slap on the wrist. The accused is just saying "sorry guv, won't do it again".
As I've said, if the police thought that they had a solid case to prove that Townshend was a paedophile then they most certainly would not have just given him a caution. The police, and more importantly the CPS, would have been all over him and he would be doing significant jail time if found guilty.
RobertScorpio
Pariah
The question over "here" in America is if he got the benefit of the doubt because of who he is...not what he was accused of doing. Does being a famous person, who is well liked, give you a better chance with the 'legal system' than someone who is of a lower income bracket...
Rob
It's a mixed bag.
On one hand, you might be better equipped to "get away with it" if you're famous.
On the other hand, you have elected District Attorneys who would just love to have a famous name or two on the list of people they've convicted.
RobertScorpio
Pariah
Actually a portion of his book was published as an online essay in, I believe, 2002, called "A Different Bomb." So there is some evidence that he was actually doing work on this topic.
I agree that PT was incredibly stupid to use a credit card on this site, even if it was for legitimate research, because it's illegal to access this stuff even for research purposes (unless, of course, you're with law enforcement). And as others have pointed out, his financial contribution to the site may have helped contribute to child abuse. So yes, he broke the law, he acknowledged it and accepted responsibility.
But there's very little evidence that the guy is a pedophile who is a danger to children, and that's the whole point of sex offender registration - so people know when there are dangerous predators in their midsts. PT clearly is not in this category.
Question though. Does anybody really think Townsend is a pedophile, has ever acted towards kids inappropriately, or even was looking at this material for his own enjoyment? Pedophilia is a seriously intense fixation with a high recidivism rate so it is unlikely that anyone so inclined would have such a small and isolated incidence. It's an unpopular stand, but the zero tolerance policy isn't a good idea for anything, even child porn.
One thing's for sure, Pete won't get fooled again on this issue.
No, I don't think he's a pedophile.
I do however think he's burnt out of his fucking mind to the point he's a clueless moron.
See how children can't defend themselves, it's our job as a society to protect them. There should be zero tolerance when it come to the abuse and exploitation of children.
Unless he's looking for Pictures of Lily.
Actually he was looking for a bargain, the best he ever had.
Similar threads
