"I’m watching you, little girl"

I’m referring to Joshua Kistler the 31 year old pervert recently sentenced to 24 years in prison for his online predatory behavior. What did he do?

First he posed as a 15 year old boy using images of his own son. He sent those pictures and videos to young girls and claimed to be dying of Leukemia….all to entice them into sending him sexually explicit pictures of themselves. The girls ranged in age from 12-14.

On March 11, 2005, FBI agents in Portland served a search warrant on defendant’s residence, recovering numerous CD’s and two computers that the defendant admitted to containing files of movies of young women in various states of undress, some of which were taken and recorded without their knowledge. In addition, a forensic examination revealed thousands of images containing depictions of child pornography.But hey, it gets worse.

He had a program which had recorded the girls on their web cams without their knowledge and he saved the videos.

He stated that he’d “always been a collector”

As part of his plea deal he gave agents detailed information about the software he used to view and record webcam video without alerting the person with whom he was sharing a connection, software designed to simulate reciprocal webcam video for the purpose of deceiving those minors with whom he was chatting.

This was eerily similar in a way to the case of the stolen panties except that the creep factor on this guy is off the scale. I suppose it should come as no surprise. We have no doubt that guys like this have no respect for others, including the little girls they claim to just love. Interesting that this guy made the comment

“I’m sorry for the harm I’ve caused,” he said. “I wasn’t aware I was causing any harm.”

I found that interesting. And especially when you take into consideration pervert attacks on any law against their behavior. They don’t like the idea that their privacy might be invaded. But the privacy of these young girls meant nothing. Just like their psychological well-being meant nothing. In fact none of the girls meant anything at all to this man except as a means to achieve sexual gratification. So what makes him different than these other guys? He got caught. That’s the only difference.

Now what do the pedofreaks think about this?

Apple

believes its an over reaction on the girls part…. obviously he shouldn’t have been so sneaky but 24 years in prison seems an excessive sentence

Mediapunk

You can only be charged with possession of child pornography. It is not illegal to look at it or view it on a web cam. To my knowledge, there are no laws barring sexual type talk with minors

Infinity:

The first amendment simply does not apply anymore, free speech does not legally exist in the United States anymore

Patrick Kiernan of the FBI Internet Crimes Taskforce says:

“You wouldn’t invite a stranger into your house, or into your bedroom. Don’t let your computer do the same thing.”

Some recommended steps to help protect your child from this sort of thing include:

• do not let your children have computers in their rooms; put them in open rooms only

• keep your computer turned off when you aren’t using it, and if you have a webcam, turn it to the wall when you are not using it, or at least obstruct the view

• purchase your children an email account instead of having them use a free one.

These men have one thing on their minds……..and it’s not the well-being of your child. I believe we’ll be seeing more cases like this. We should all warn everyone of this danger. This man, like so many of these online pedofreaks we see, simply has no soul.

A Parent’s Worst Nightmare

“You are a parent’s worst nightmare. You are one nightmare that I’m going to put to rest today.”

Judge Chet Tharpe said as he sentenced Steven Schurgard to 85 years in prison.

Steven’s father had reportedly turned his son in for his illegal acts back in 2002 after Steven threatened to kill his father. Apparently he had an anger management problem. But he had more problems than that, much more.

When Temple Terrace police went to serve Schurgard, the man who test drove cars for work and lived with his mother answered the door with a gun tucked in the waist of his pants. He threatened police and told them he had child pornography on his computer. Police returned with a search warrant and seized Schurgard’s computer and a cache of video and cassette tapes.

Though 617 child porn images were found on Steven’s computer, including video tapes of a teenage boy engaged in sex acts in the home Steven shared with his mother….rather than face a trial he plead guilty to three counts of promoting a sexual performance by a child, one count of lewd and lascivious conduct with a victim younger than 18 and five counts of possession of child pornography.

All that was left was to be sentenced by the judge. He could have received as little as 4 years.

Steven Schurgard, who once called himself “a full-fledged pedophile” on his Web site, told a judge Thursday that he was sorry for owning child pornography and filming a young man engaged in a sex act.

But when some of his videos Steven had made were played for the judge….Steven hummed along.

“No one else will ever do. I’m still in love with you.”

Is it any wonder then that the judge threw the book at him? We should have more of this type of judicial responsibility, and not just at the arrogant, in-your-face attitude of those like Steven Schurgard.

Schurgard’s open plea left the length of his sentence up to the judge. Tharpe watched a video of a 13-year-old boy whom Schurgard plied with video games, drugs and alcohol, then filmed performing sexual acts. He saw a sampling of the obscene images from the man’s computer. He was also shown evidence that would not have been allowed at trial but could be used by the judge to determine character. One video, set to the music from Jaws, showed Schurgard peeking through his blinds at a boy playing outside. Another captured him giggling guiltily as he flipped through pictures of naked boys and showed off literature from the North American Man/Boy Love Association, of which he was a member.

The DA “He is the very epitome of what parents lay in bed at night worrying about.”

The defense attorney: argued that the 13-year-old had been a willing participant

The judge: “The only regret I have is that I can only sentence you to 85 years”

Trucker: “I think he was just doing what all of us would do if these damn laws didn’t force us to obey them. I know the law shouldn’t be broken, but to give an honest, wonderful person like that life in prison, and knowing that he would never intentionally harm a child is just preposterous.”

Albert Ross: “maybe steve just doesn’t know the meaning of fear, but he still gets hero status in my book.”

Let’s look at what one of those videos were, shall we? Is this meant to instill fear in the hearts of parents? Is it meant to mock society? What the hell was he thinking when Steven Schurgard made this video and posted it on his website?? Norbert said it was meant to be humor. I, for one, am not laughing.

Priorities

Isaak Gowhari

A man has pleaded guilty to animal cruelty charges after bringing a 7-month-old Doberman puppy with broken ribs and leg injuries to a shelter and telling the workers there that his hands hurt from hitting her.

Isaak Gowhari, 34, was sentenced to 45 days in county jail after entering his plea to the misdemeanor counts. The judge also barred Gowhari from owning an animal for three years.

Andrew C. James

In January 2007, Andrew C. James, a man with two prior domestic assault convictions, pled guilty to sexually assaulting a 4-year-old boy in Vermont. In a plea bargain, he was given a $22 fine and sentenced to rehabilitation and lifetime probation. Today, he walks a free man.

In the first instance we have a dog who can’t testify. In the second instance we have a little boy with a learning disability who can’t testify. These two totally unrelated cases speak volumes. What’s your priority?

ACLU-backed demonic child pornster will serve his 200 years

by Glib Fortuna @ 9:43 am. Filed under ACLU
I hope he lives that long and is treated, well, like people of his ilk are normally treated in jail.

Don Surber reports: Supreme court OKs 200 years for child porn
Proving not everyone in Washington has lost his mind, justices denied an appeal of a 200-year sentence for a high school teacher who downloaded child porn from 1996 until he was caught in 2002, Reuters reported.

Without any comment, the high court declined to hear the constitutional challenge to the sentence given to Morton Berger, who at the time of his arrest in 2002 was a married, 52-year-old high school teacher with no prior criminal record.

Berger’s lawyers said his lengthy punishment was grossly disproportionate to his crime and exceeded the sentences regularly imposed in Arizona for violent crimes that result in serious injury to the victim.

But child porn is a violent crime. A person rapes a child and photographs it. By downloading child porn, a man becomes an accessory to the crime after the fact.

Said Reuters:
Evidence at trial established that Berger possessed numerous videos and photo images of different children, some younger than 10 years old, being subjected to sexual acts with adults and other children.The jury heard testimony that Berger had downloaded child pornography on his computer from 1996 to 2002. He was convicted on 20 separate counts.

The ACLU of Arizona had helped with this appeal. Its press release said:
Cruel & Unusual Punishment (State v. Berger):
ACLU cooperating attorney Don Peters assisted in filing a brief asking the U.S. Supreme Court to consider overturning a 200-year sentence that was given to a man who was found to be in possession of child pornography. Morton Berger was charged with 20 separate counts of sexual exploitation of a minor under the age of 15 and sentenced to 20 consecutive 10-year sentences for possession of child pornography.

The Arizona Supreme Court upheld the conviction and rejected the ACLU’s argument that the sentence was excessive and violated the Eighth Amendment’s ban on cruel and unusual punishment.

The federal Supreme Court rejection of this case comes on the heels of the arrest on Friday of Charles Rust-Tierney, a former president of the ACLU in Virginia, on child porn charges.

Dang! 200 years? I hope he packed some clean underwear and a lunch.

H/T JAY

Unsympathetic

Let me state this up front: I am a convert, from agnostic to a believer. I believe in God, in Good and Evil. But I feel I have to write about this turn of events from an unsympathetic viewpoint.

From The Sierra Times:

SAN DIEGO – The Roman Catholic Diocese of San Diego said Tuesday that it planned to file for bankruptcy protection to put off going to trial in more than 140 lawsuits alleging sexual abuse by priests.

When I worked Child Abuse for a major California law enforcement agency I had the prime suspect in one of my cases “disappeared” and moved from the local diocese. I was not at all pleased. Additionally, at the time, I was told to drop the case and move on with others.

Wrong is wrong, and Evil is Evil, no matter the robe or uniform or inclination. I am fresh out of sympathy when I read of this turn of events.

BZ

Orange County, CA Ex-judge Kline gets prison

Six years of legal wrangling ends with former O.C. Superior Court judge sentenced to 27 months for child pornography.

By LARRY WELBORN
The Orange County Register
LOS ANGELES – Former Superior Court Judge Ronald C. Kline offered “a lifetime of apologies” and then collapsed Tuesday as he was sentenced to 27 months in federal prison for possession of child pornography.

Kline, 66, had just learned that U.S. District Court Judge Consuelo B. Marshall was rejecting his bid to be placed on probation when his eyes fluttered and his knees buckled.

“I think I’m going to faint,” he said as he crumbled into the arms of Paul S. Meyer, his defense attorney…

… Tuesday’s sentencing ended nearly six years of legal wrangling that saw Kline charged at one point with possessing child pornography in federal court and child molestation in state courts.

The state case was ultimately dismissed, based on a U.S. Supreme Court ruling that the prosecution was pressed beyond the statute of limitations.

The federal pornography case was also threatened in 2003 when Marshall ruled that the evidence of pornographic images found on his home computer had been illegally seized.

But a federal appeals court disagreed with Marshall in 2004, and the pornography charges were reinstated.

A year later, in December 2005, the ex-judge pleaded guilty and broke down in tears…

…Tuesday, he lost his freedom. He will not be eligible for parole until he serves at least 23 months. He was given until May 21 to report to federal prison.

Marshall said Tuesday that the seriousness of the porn charges demanded that Kline be punished. She ordered that Kline be registered as a sex offender for the rest of his life, that he not possess any computer equipment and that he not access the Internet during three years of probation.

Kline admitted he stored more than 100 sexually explicit photos of under-age boys on his computer and on several disks found at his Irvine home in November 2001.

Police caught onto Kline after a Canadian computer whiz hacked into the judge’s Irvine home computer and discovered sexually explicit images of young boys and a diary that revealed Kline’s fantasies involving young boys. A subsequent search of his court computer revealed more images and more Web sites…

Read entire article Here

Hide if you must, but we will find you.

What Kind of Mother is This?

We all too often learn of adults engaging in illegal activity with minors but sometimes there is a twist that takes it from simply illegal to just plain strange.

Imagine that you are an adult woman with a 38 year old boyfriend, and you are temporarily unable to function sexually due to an operation you just had and you don’t want to lose the boyfriend.

Solution: Give him written permission to have sex with your 15 year old daughter, and reward her with material things and a few more privileges.

This is not technically pedophilia, but statutory rape. However he apparently had sex with even younger girls which is. (In Michigan Child Molestation is under 13 while 13 to 17 is Statutory Rape).

First question: Why would any sane mother do this to her daughter or perhaps allow her to have sex with an adult?

Second question: Why would she want a man who would have sex with her daughter?

Third question: Why would any self-respecting man get involved in such a situation?

An adult man having the desire to have sex with a teen-aged girl is perhaps alot closer to normal than desiring a 6 or 7 year old, but to act on that desire shows a lack of maturity, discipline and principle. It’s still illegal, and rightly so (more to protect young women – - and young men – - from exploitation than to prevent perversion.)