FBI violated my son's ADA rights

[Jiro]

"Two separate offenses against the person that when used in one expression may be defined as any unlawful and unpermitted touching of another. Assault is an act that creates an apprehension in another of an imminent, harmful, or offensive contact. The act consists of a threat of harm accompanied by an apparent, present ability to carry out the threat. Battery is a harmful or offensive touching of another.

The main distinction between the two offenses is the existence or nonexistence of a touching or contact. While contact is an essential element of battery, there must be an absence of contact for assault. Sometimes assault is defined loosely to include battery."
Assault and Battery legal definition of Assault and Battery. Assault and Battery synonyms by the Free Online Law Dictionary.

NOW you've given a very good example of 2 criminal charges that are "SIMILAR but NOT the same thing" - Battery and Assault. Those distinctive thing makes a difference when it comes to sentencing.

But in previous post - I was responding to Steinhauer's post about "Threatening" and "Assault." Those 2 things are not similar at all in terms of law.

 

[posts from hell]

Let me correct you right there. About your previous post where you said threatening and assaulting are similar but not the same thing.... Let me point it out that those two are not actually similar at all.

Threatening is where no physical harm has occurred.
Assault is where physical harm has occurred.
Pretty simple there in the court of law. nothing similar at all.

Now... pedophile and child pornography are actually intertwined together. we're not on medical or psychology subject. this is a legal subject so in the court of law, pedophile and child pornography are pretty much the same thing.


so are you implying that he viewed child pornography by mistake?


how? You're telling me that a person participating in threesome by watching them is a rapist?

"Two separate offenses against the person that when used in one expression may be defined as any unlawful and unpermitted touching of another. Assault is an act that creates an apprehension in another of an imminent, harmful, or offensive contact. The act consists of a threat of harm accompanied by an apparent, present ability to carry out the threat. Battery is a harmful or offensive touching of another.

The main distinction between the two offenses is the existence or nonexistence of a touching or contact. While contact is an essential element of battery, there must be an absence of contact for assault. Sometimes assault is defined loosely to include battery."
Assault and Battery legal definition of Assault and Battery. Assault and Battery synonyms by the Free Online Law Dictionary.

See colors for reference.

 

[Steinhauer]

feel free to make a new thread about "pedophiles" having consensual sex because one of them is just 1 year shy of legal age.

That is not what happened in OP's case. You need to learn how to be objective.

I was making an off hand remark at how people are being given damaging labels when in fact the label does not fit the situation.

According to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), pedophilia is a paraphilia in which a person has intense and recurrent sexual urges towards and fantasies about prepubescent children and on which feelings they have either acted or which cause distress or interpersonal difficulty.[1]

That is the legal definition. Did the OP's son act on his urges against a child?

Were the two consenting 17 years olds (who are currently married for 11 years) really pedophile child molesters?


In other words, are they a mencae to society on the same level as a serial rapist/murderer? Why isn't the public made aware of the address/locations of the violent members of society out on parole?

 

[Reba]

That is the legal definition. Did the OP's son act on his urges against a child?

We don't know.

"...or which cause distress or interpersonal difficulty"

We also don't know if he experienced the above, which is the rest of the definition.

We do know that child porno is made by exploiting children. Participating in child porno supports an industry that endangers, abuses and exploits children.

Were the two consenting 17 years olds (who are currently married for 11 years) really pedophile child molesters?

I have no idea what case you're talking about, or how it relates to this one.

 

[Jiro]

That is the legal definition. Did the OP's son act on his urges against a child?

Were the two consenting 17 years olds (who are currently married for 11 years) really pedophile child molesters?

um.... that's a medical definition.

In legal definition - what can a person (pedophile) can get arrested for?

You can answer my question with yes/no for each of them.
1. child pornography?
2. child molestation?
3. child prostitution?

In other words, are they a mencae to society on the same level as a serial rapist/murderer? Why isn't the public made aware of the address/locations of the violent members of society out on parole?

feel free to make a new thread about it. that has nothing to do with OP's situation.

 

[Steinhauer]

We don't know.

"...or which cause distress or interpersonal difficulty"

We also don't know if he experienced the above, which is the rest of the definition.

We do know that child porno is made by exploiting children. Participating in child porno supports an industry that endangers, abuses and exploits children.

I have no idea what case you're talking about, or how it relates to this one.

exactly, and no mention was made as to whether the person, or persons, whom made the internet content he was viewing have been apprehended. Why is it even on the internet?

Its like .... a drug user vs. the dealers. Using is definitely heinous, but supplying the users doubly so.

 

[whatdidyousay!]

Maybe I am wrong

I would think that a pedophile has caused physical harm to a child. As in the act of enticement, or the act of molestation.

Perhaps they are intertwined, but I do not see it as the same thing as a person who watches child pornography. They are BOTH sick and disgusting, however, did the person who viewed the child pornography molest or entice the child?

I have always been under the impression that a pedophile stalked children for physical interaction. I would MUCH rather that those individuals be locked up in the slammer than someone who has a non threatening mental disorder that could be corrected through counselling.

Wow Did I read this right ! You mean to tell me a person watching child pornography does not harm a child! Did you never stop to think about demand and supply! When a pedophile watched child pornography is put a demand on for MORE child pornography and that mean more children are kidnapped and sexually abused! I would love to see every person that watch
child pornography and made it behind bars for good! If the FBI could arrest everyone then all our children will be safe!

 

[Jiro]

exactly, and no mention was made as to whether the person, or persons, whom made the internet content he was viewing have been apprehended. Why is it even on the internet?

Its like .... a drug user vs. the dealers. Using is definitely heinous, but supplying the users doubly so.

if the drug dealer dropped a drug on street and you saw that.... you picked it up, put it in your pocket, and whistle away.

should you be arrested for what you just did?

 

[Steinhauer]

um.... that's a medical definition.

In legal definition - what can a person (pedophile) can get arrested for?

You can answer my question with yes/no for each of them.
1. child pornography?
2. child molestation?
3. child prostitution?


feel free to make a new thread about it. that has nothing to do with OP's situation.

Well, lets see ... suppose someone is in possession of cocaine, are they usually arrested for using the cocaine, or possession?

Can they be arrested for distribution? or possession? What if they did not use cocaine or distribute?

The implications to distribute and use cocaine are there, but can they be arrested for those crimes if those crimes had not been committed?


Was the OP's son arrested for pedophilia (the act of molesting a child, the physical act of acting upon his urges, his urges made him incompetent interpersonally)? Or, was he arrested for possession of child pornography?

 

[Steinhauer]

if the drug dealer dropped a drug on street and you saw that.... you picked it up, put it in your pocket, and whistle away.

should you be arrested for what you just did?

good question. I personally wouldn't do that (and I have seen it happen many times in DC).

Usually, I would walk in the other direction before the gunfire erupted.

Picking it up, putting it in your pocket and walking away would just be stupid. I don't know if there is a law against being stupid ... maybe there should be one, we could always use more laws (sarcasm).

 

[Jiro]

See colors for reference.

let me refer you to New Jersey's actual criminal law (and I believe it's very similar to many other states' criminal laws) -

2C:12-1 Assault.

2C:12-1. Assault. a. Simple assault. A person is guilty of assault if he:

(1)Attempts to cause or purposely, knowingly or recklessly causes bodily injury to another; or

(2)Negligently causes bodily injury to another with a deadly weapon; or

(3)Attempts by physical menace to put another in fear of imminent serious bodily injury.

and then there's aggravated assault which you know rest.

Now about "threat"... it can be disorderly conduct, extortion, blackmail, etc. hence.... "threat" bears no similarity to Assault.

 

[Reba]

exactly, and no mention was made as to whether the person, or persons, whom made the internet content he was viewing have been apprehended. Why is it even on the internet?

Its like .... a drug user vs. the dealers. Using is definitely heinous, but supplying the users doubly so.

We can hope that the information that the authorities got off his computer will help them find and prosecute some of the creators and distributors of the porn.

I guess there was no mention of it because the OP/mom wasn't concerned about that. She's only concerned about her son.

 

[Jiro]

good question. I personally wouldn't do that (and I have seen it happen many times in DC).

Usually, I would walk in the other direction before the gunfire erupted.

please answer my question to a very specific hypothetical situation. I'm not interested in what you'd do.

I'm asking if you believe you should be arrested for what you just did... picking up a drug and putting it in your pocket.

 

[Reba]

Well, lets see ... suppose someone is in possession of cocaine, are they usually arrested for using the cocaine, or possession?

Can they be arrested for distribution? or possession? What if they did not use cocaine or distribute?

The implications to distribute and use cocaine are there, but can they be arrested for those crimes if those crimes had not been committed?

Depends on the amount of the drug.

There is such a charge as "intent to distribute." That means they don't have to be caught in the act of distribution.

Was the OP's son arrested for pedophilia (the act of molesting a child, the physical act of acting upon his urges, his urges made him incompetent interpersonally)? Or, was he arrested for possession of child pornography?

We don't know.

Not all people who view child pornography become active pedophiles. However, most (if not) all pedophiles started out with viewing child porn before they became active, and most (if not all) pedophiles have child porn in their possession when they are arrested.

There is a definite correlation.

 

[Jiro]

Well, lets see ... suppose someone is in possession of cocaine, are they usually arrested for using the cocaine, or possession?

Can they be arrested for distribution? or possession? What if they did not use cocaine or distribute?

The implications to distribute and use cocaine are there, but can they be arrested for those crimes if those crimes had not been committed?

There are only 2 charges - possession of ----- and distribution of ------. There is no criminal charge for "using" an illegal drug because possession itself is illegal. It doesn't matter if you consumed it or not.

Based on questions you're asking me.... I take it that you are not fully aware of simple drug laws that have been around for decades?

Was the OP's son arrested for pedophilia (the act of molesting a child, the physical act of acting upon his urges, his urges made him incompetent interpersonally)? Or, was he arrested for possession of child pornography?

There's a criminal charge called "pedophilia"??? wow... I didn't know we have Thought Police!!!

 

[Steinhauer]

We can hope that the information that the authorities got off his computer will help them find and prosecute some of the creators and distributors of the porn.

I guess there was no mention of it because the OP/mom wasn't concerned about that. She's only concerned about her son.

I can't blame her. But yes, it is obvious. Mothers first instinct is to always protect their children no matter what.

But , parenting, is allowing them to get their just punishment.

 

[Reba]

I can't blame her. But yes, it is obvious. Mothers first instinct is to always protect their children no matter what.

But , parenting, is allowing them to get their just punishment.

He might be too old for parenting.

 

[whatdidyousay!]

if the drug dealer dropped a drug on street and you saw that.... you picked it up, put it in your pocket, and whistle away.

should you be arrested for what you just did?

I once found some pot on the ground at a gas station and turned it in to the police station. The cop asked me if found it at a certain gas station and I told the cop yes I did , and that was all the cop wanted to know. It was in a sandwich bag , I guess there was enough for four joints .

 

[Steinhauer]

Depends on the amount of the drug.

There is such a charge as "intent to distribute." That means they don't have to be caught in the act of distribution.


We don't know.

Not all people who view child pornography become active pedophiles. However, most (if not) all pedophiles started out with viewing child porn before they became active, and most (if not all) pedophiles have child porn in their possession when they are arrested.

There is a definite correlation.

I know there is a correlation, but until an individual acts on their impulses, they are not a threat. Georgia has no law for "pre-murder" (just making a point).

Any individual caught entertaining the notion of engaging in sexual acts with minors definitely needs to be confronted, whether they have acted on those impulses or not. If acted upon, there is no recourse, in my opinion, other than being locked up. Those caught with child pornography whom have not acted on their impulses, again, in my opinion, need serious counselling and monitoring.

Prison just may teach them how NOT to get caught when they get out.

 

[Jiro]

I once found some pot on the ground at a gas station and turned it in to the police station. The cop asked me if found it at a certain gas station and I told the cop yes I did , and that was all the cop wanted to know. It was in a sandwich bag , I guess there was enough for four joints .

you're lucky that it wasn't part of undercover sting operation