Alleged Child Pornographers Targeted Around the World

Yes, LM, I heartily agree with you. This thread also opened up a side issue that is beneficial to know about, which is the file-sharing programs like Limewire and learning about this is good and is not off-topic because it is the excuse being used by one of the defendants who lays all the blame for his being in trouble with the law upon this software program.

I am still rejoicing that there are task forces making these busts because I want to see this abuse of children halted and those who abuse children in this manner removed from society and the child victims rescued from it.

I just spoke to someone that I know uses Limewire. I asked if he had ever seen any sort of porn while downloading music. The answer was NO. He said that porn wouldn't come through in a music file, only in a picture or video file.

This is a lengthy article that goes along with this thread.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]


A story recently surfaced saying malware could plant child porn on innocent people's computers without their knowledge. Just how real is this threat? And how can you keep it from happening to you?

Being accused of possessing child pornography can ruin people's reputations, confront them with overwhelming legal bills and, if convicted, and deprive them of their freedom for years if sentenced to prison time, and perhaps for life, if they're required to register as sex offenders.

That is why, at least in part, a recent case outlined by the Associated Press raised concerns over computer viruses being used to plant child pornography on people's computers. But the innocent have little to fear, according to experts. The AP story reported about the case of Michael Fiola, a former Massachusetts state employee whose state-owned work computer was found to contain illegal child pornography images. He was fired and charged with possession of child pornography which, had he been convicted, could have landed him in prison for up to five years, according to the AP.

Sexually explicit images of children--who are often being exploited--are not protected by the First Amendment because they may memorialize, celebrate, or encourage sexual crimes against children deemed defenseless victims. Although Fiola avoided a child porn conviction, he reportedly has suffered related indignities, including death threats and friend abandonment. The AP said he and his wife liquidated their savings and spent $250,000 on legal fees.

Ultimately, charges were dropped after Fiola's defense showed that his computer was infected by a virus that was "programmed to visit as many as 40 child porn sites per minute," something that a human couldn't do, even if he or she tried. Other reports about this case indicate that the antivirus software on Fiola's computer was out of date and therefore was not protecting him against malware. Could it happen to you?
How likely is a case like Fiola's? If viruses are capable of putting illegal content on people's computers, aren't we all at risk of being arrested for serious crimes we never meant to commit? And if it is possible for this to happen, isn't "the virus did it" claim likely to become the mantra of every defense attorney who represents people accused of possessing child pornography?

To help answer these questions, I spoke with security experts, legal scholars, former prosecutors, and Justice Department officials. The consensus? It is indeed possible for malicious software to plant child pornography--or any other type of file, for that matter--on an innocent person's computer, but being possible doesn't mean it's likely. And forensics experts can detect intention.

Thanks for the education, Linda.

Your a speed reader BJ.
:lol!:
Computer forensics will sort this whole mess out.

More from LM's link......a must read!

"A good forensics expert would try to determine how (the images) got on the computer and who was responsible for putting them there," he said. "That would be determined by looking at the totality of the evidence, not just the fact that there were images there."

Things a good investigator would look into include whether the suspect was sitting at the computer at the time the images were downloaded. Was he using the computer to send e-mail or visit other Web sites at the time? "There is always some type of trail we can follow to determine if the person were likely actively involved in the process of downloading the material," Geraghty said.

Investigators can usually figure out if an image was downloaded intentionally, based on other activity that took place on the computer at the time.

Another indicator is the time lapse between image downloads. A virus or Trojan horse is likely to download multiple images at a time, sometimes faster than might be humanly possible to do manually. A person who collects child pornography typically acquires it over a period of time, and a forensic investigation of the computer should reveal that.

"It's the excuse of the moment for defendants," he said. "Lots of child porn defendants try to blame (images found on their computers) on viruses, but it's almost never true. You can actually figure this out. In the handful of cases that have been problematic, it looks as if everyone moved too quickly. The agency discovered material and immediately jumped to conclusions." Malone added that "good, solid forensics would be able to tell in virtually every case."

Sorry I wasn't around all day to join the convo, but what BJ says is true- The porn files must be downloaded as pictures or videos, not as music... however, per previous discussion, many times when you click something to download, you get something totally different from what you expected. This has happened.

Someone mentioned that my neighbor's children were probably not downloading kiddy porn. While this is true, there were other types of porn that ended up on their computer. Again, I don't know whether these boys were responsible themselves or if they were just blaming Limewire because of it's notoriety.

A Trojan is not a virus, but it tricks your computer security sometimes into allowing it to be downloaded, and once it gains access, the remote computer may use your computer in a variety of ways, but one of the most common is to store their files on your hard drive.

Great thought, BJ! Of course, I never thought about that either, it would not be the same type of file (different file extensions like jpeg, bitmap, etc. instead of wav files, etc.) and he never had any pic files come through, interesting point in his answer.

Also, thanks for the expert's explanations contained in that article you found, LM and BJ. It really sheds a lot of light on this subject.

Lilone wrote:Sorry I wasn't around all day to join the convo, but what BJ says is true- The porn files must be downloaded as pictures or videos, not as music... however, per previous discussion, many times when you click something to download, you get something totally different from what you expected. This has happened.

Someone mentioned that my neighbor's children were probably not downloading kiddy porn. While this is true, there were other types of porn that ended up on their computer. Again, I don't know whether these boys were responsible themselves or if they were just blaming Limewire because of it's notoriety.

A Trojan is not a virus, but it tricks your computer security sometimes into allowing it to be downloaded, and once it gains access, the remote computer may use your computer in a variety of ways, but one of the most common is to store their files on your hard drive.

With young teens, parents can tell themselves, just by looking in the computer history. If the kids were searching the net, looking for porn, they will see it in the history. They will see wherever they have been all over the net. When they get a little older, they learn how to go in and delete the history and make it more difficult for a parent to know.

Limewire uses a variety of file extensions, but I think the most common music files are mp3... however, sometimes these files are disguised. It does confuse the average non-expert computer user, but the FBI will figure it out.

My hope is that they get these people, but good. Back in 1994 they were using a program called "Witness" to watch computer user's keystrokes, thereby following their cyber-surfing. There is probably a much better program in use now.

You're right!---Mp3 is the format that most downloaders of music would use.

A very computer-savvy guy once told me that I could retrieve a file that I had long ago deleted totally from my hard drive, by using an available program. Since, I have heard other techs say that, if you ever get rid of your hard drive, don't think you have removed things by uninstalling and deleting and even wiping the drive clean. Your files can still be brought back. They advise that you should take an axe to it or let a truck run over it or saw it up into pieces before throwing it away because all your files are really still there until you have written over those sectors with new files.

by TerryRose Today at 11:07 pm You're right!---Mp3 is the format that most downloaders of music would use.

There is a p2p site called MP3 Rocket similar to Limewire.

(1) Create, record, photograph, film, develop, reproduce, or publish any material that shows a minor participating or engaging in sexual activity, masturbation, or bestiality;

(2) Advertise for sale or dissemination, sell, distribute, transport, disseminate, exhibit, or display any material that shows a minor participating or engaging in sexual activity, masturbation, or bestiality;

Many of the defendants were charged with only these two crimes. As written they could both be satisfied by an image found on your computer. It looks like they made up names for each image to make it look as if the defendants had committed many different crimes of the worst type. Having an image, possible planted there, is a far cry from creating that image. Misuse of a minor is a far cry from having an image on your computer and son on. The charges in the article ilie with a grain of truth to make people focus on the possible crimes rather than guilt or innocence or even what the person may have done. The publised article implies some sort of proactive initiation when all that even might have been was an image.

BJ in OR wrote:All but two of the accused are charged with Pandering u(Creation). I would like to know exactly what this term means.

I looked it up in the Ohio revised code. Many of the defendants are charged on the court dockets with only two.
(1) Create, record, photograph, film, develop, reproduce, or publish any material that shows a minor participating or engaging in sexual activity, masturbation, or bestiality;

(2) Advertise for sale or dissemination, sell, distribute, transport, disseminate, exhibit, or display any material that shows a minor participating or engaging in sexual activity, masturbation, or bestiality;

You can see that both of these statutes can be broken with just an image found on your computer that could have been planted. it looks as if they made up a name for whatever number of images found that is found in each statute. A good way to lie convincingly with a grain of truth.

The hard drive will show what kind of activity there was in regards to any of the files.....how many times an image or video was viewed and whether it was forwarded to others.

I too am horrified by such hideous child abuse, but how long will people take these cases seriously if they become a witch hunt for political or other gain? Publishing the list of the accused if the way it was done and before any conviction makes it a media event and punishes everyone in advance of their day in court. Listing dozens of separate crimes when court records show only two is misleading rhetoric. I wish child pornographers would be stopped and punished and sent to coventry away from normal people but making this a media event is not a good way to do it. They have
punished possibly innocent people without a thought.

It will also show if the images were created by the owner of that individual computer, that is if they were downloaded from a camera or scanned in. I am sure the investigation continues over who did what---they are probably able to ID the children also in the images if they are one and the same children who live with the person who created the images. There is no sunshine law in Ohio and most facts will be kept from the public until trial, I think.

Neoflander, do you believe that Casey Anthony, Phillip Garrido, Drew Peterson, Christopher Coleman, Melissa Huckaby..or any accused should not be in the media?

Don't forget Anthony Sowell.

I would think, as stated upthread..that the feds would not haphazardly arrest someone without a boat load of information on that person's computer.

That being said, if any of the 50 named people in Cleveland are found innocent, I will be the first person to make that known in BOLD.

Bold and Big Letters

Oh yes. HOW could what he did NOT be put in the media?

I was in Canton at the time that happened, visiting my Mom; Cleveland's only about an hour or so away. It was all over the news.

Also, BJ..you reported on kiddee porn in Akron the other day on another site..Akron and Canton are basically next to each other..both about an hour from Cleveland.

These sickos live secret hidden lives as they commit crimes against the innocent... children!
If torturing them in the Media bothers them... WELL GOOD!
Shinning a light down in the crevices where they live, sounds like a good plan to me.
Perhaps they wouldn't be so apt to harm children if they know the world is watching.

neoaflander wrote:I too am horrified by such hideous child abuse, but how long will people take these cases seriously if they become a witch hunt for political or other gain? Publishing the list of the accused if the way it was done and before any conviction makes it a media event and punishes everyone in advance of their day in court. Listing dozens of separate crimes when court records show only two is misleading rhetoric. I wish child pornographers would be stopped and punished and sent to coventry away from normal people but making this a media event is not a good way to do it. They have
punished possibly innocent people without a thought.

The title of your post is misleading... when the better part of your comment is in defense of the accused child molesters.
I'm certain our jails and prisons house people who are innocent of the crimes for which they have been convicted. Accused child molesters and abusers don't have a corner on this market, because it happens all the time.
I think most of us agree that we have a flawed judicial system.

I think the "MEDIA" offers people the right to hear the facts as they are known and make judgements on their own.
I think when Bad Reporting is done there is someone right behind them happy to report the facts.

I am thinking this thread is in alignment with the other thread about the 50 people arrested for child porn? If so, I agree, Nightspinner. The title of the post is extremely misleading. Just Who are the victimized children in this scenario, neoflander?

I know if I or any of my family or friends were accused of a heinous crime such as child porn, I of course would want to believe them. But this particular crime is a very secretive thing for these people. It is not something they discuss with others, even their best friends. IMHO, it is the absolute worst crime other than actual rape and murder of a child that a person can commit.

And, Yes..we have a flawed judicial system. Convicted sex offenders are let out of prison and fall between the cracks. It happens all the time, and then they strike again.

Children are being abused and neglected and the DCF or CPS investigates..yet does not a damned thing until it is too late. The parent murders their child or the child goes missing.

And I could not agree more with NiteSpinner. Shine the light on the accused child pornographers. Let them know they are being watched.

I also invite our members to read the thread on exactly What is Human Trafficking? These poor children deserve a normal life. This makes me sick!

by neoaflander Today at 12:31 am Publishing the list of the accused if the way it was done and before any conviction makes it a media event and punishes everyone in advance of their day in court.

Are you referring to the arrest of the 50 people for possession of child porn in Cleveland? Would you suggest that all arrests and subsequent trials are made private? Should the accused be identified only if, and after, there is a conviction? Do you think that every arrest for a crime against a child is only done for political gain? What was to be gained when Casey Anthony, Alyssa Bustamante, Raul Castro, Melissa Huckaby, Mario McNeill and so many others were arrested for crimes against children? The only thing gained, IMO, was that these people were locked up so that they couldn't harm another child. No political gain in that. I'm not sure where you are going with this thread.

The media is very important in helping find missing people and even murder victims. The media should not be blamed for doing their job. Our section is titled "the accused" Not "the convicted" If any of these people are found innocent we will help spread the word. Of course I will merge the threads.

Wrap wrote "I know if I or any of my family or friends were accused of a heinous crime such as child porn, I of course would want to believe them. But this particular crime is a very secretive thing for these people. It is not something they discuss with others, even their best friends. IMHO, it is the absolute worst crime other than actual rape and murder of a child that a person can commit."

Thoughts on your last sentence:
I have always maintained that the images photographed must be most often the ACTUAL rape of a child if they are not computer generated. If they are photographic images, then a rape of a child has occurred. Secondly, I have long suspected that some of the abused children don't survive the physical assault on them by heavy, brutal adults, and therefore can actually be pics of a murder of a child. Without spelling it out too much, there can be suffocation, hemorrhage, etc. leading to their deaths. This is why I originally was quick to start this subject at VH with the news of this bust when it occurred---these are heinous crimes against children, they are rapes and potentially murders of children. JMHO

Yes terryrose your right. It is important to not lose sight of the Children that are the true victims of crimes like this. Not the accused. However I do believe that the accused people who do this also cause their whole family to be victims as well.

In our members only area is the research on Grand Parents rights.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Wrapitup wrote:Neoflander, do you believe that Casey Anthony, Phillip Garrido, Drew Peterson, Christopher Coleman, Melissa Huckaby..or any accused should not be in the media?

rdin

but my son should not have. he lost everything. job of 15 yrs just for the investigation, life savings for defense. and he is not even guilty. The charges they published were a lie according to the court docket. It was worded to make you believe "creation" when that charge can mean an image found on your computer. see my previous post, many of the defendants only had two charges of pandering.
For my son, a hideous miscarriage of justice is taking place. His life is wrecked even if the charges are dismissed. The punishment has come before the trial. He will have to rebuild theit as if he were a felon. What a wicked group of people, to do this to the innocent to justify their big federal grants, and their own sorry existence. I bet they love looking at the porn legally.

The article published seems to be an attempt to make people focus on the crime, and not on the guilt or innocence of the accused.
If yo

Hopefully justice will prevail.

TerryRose wrote:Wrap wrote "I know if I or any of my family or friends were accused of a heinous crime such as child porn, I of course would want to believe them. But this particular crime is a very secretive thing for these people. It is not something they discuss with others, even their best friends. IMHO, it is the absolute worst crime other than actual rape and murder of a child that a person can commit."

Thoughts on your last sentence:
I have always maintained that the images photographed must be most often the ACTUAL rape of a child if they are not computer generated. If they are photographic images, then a rape of a child has occurred. Secondly, I have long suspected that some of the abused children don't survive the physical assault on them by heavy, brutal adults, and therefore can actually be pics of a murder of a child. Without spelling it out too much, there can be suffocation, hemorrhage, etc. leading to their deaths. This is why I originally was quick to start this subject at VH with the news of this bust when it occurred---these are heinous crimes against children, they are rapes and potentially murders of children. JMHO

Consider what CAN be known about a person, whether they work 14 hours a day, who they spend there time with when not at work. People do not live their lives under a basket or in a vacuum. I am hoping that so much of the stuff is time stamped during times when my sons whereabouts are absolutely known that the case will have to be thrown out. Of course this will be after the damage is done, but what is that compared to Bill Mason being elected Sec of State. Everyone on this blog should remember that this could be you. The invasion could be financial or any other possible cyber crime. Do you remember how many problems banks and other institutions have had security breaks for thousands of customers?

NiteSpinR wrote:These sickos live secret hidden lives as they commit crimes against the innocent... children!
If torturing them in the Media bothers them... WELL GOOD!
Shinning a light down in the crevices where they live, sounds like a good plan to me.
Perhaps they wouldn't be so apt to harm children if they know the world is watching.

h

what about the innocent that were caught in the net? Should they be ruined along with the guilty? If they actually wanted to catch the perpetrators and instead of creating a media event, they would not have published pictures or decieved you with lists of charges for each one that are not even mentioned in court documents of charges. The article is misleading to the point of being an outright law, and when an investigator, weeks before the accusation, gets you fired, and your employer does not tell you why till you are accused, there is something rotten.

We are not going to change reporting crimes in the news. We are not throwing stones at any one of the accused. As I said the family of the accused becomes victims too. What about the kids that were raped and tortured? Don't you want justice for them? If your Son is innocent he was a right to sue his employer that fired him. I doubt this would ever be me or my Son's. If they saw anything resembling Children in Porn they would report it. I just can't believe these are trumped up charges as you claim. Fair warning know what is on your computer. I know you believe your Son is innocent and I don't blame you. Have you read any of the post that deals with virus or hackers supposedly putting children porn on computers? Computer forensics will sort this all out. I am sorry for what you’re going through.

Neo, I have said from the beginning that I suspect some people end up viewing or having child porn on their computers because they dismiss it as harmless dirty pictures and are not offended as some of us would be. They may occasionally view regular porn and they will always say it is their right "because they are over 21". They may end up with kiddie porn which might come from the same source as their "harmless dirty pictures". If this has happened to any of the accused, I do indeed feel sorry for them that they find themselves in such a fix because of it. I couldn't tell you any of the names that were published. My only concern is that LE has tracked the source of these images and rescued the children and I am still hoping they have done that. The main perps hopefully have been arrested, the children rescued from them, and the perps will now be kept away from children and society. If there are some who wound up accidentally with an image or two on their computers, then I doubt the DA will waste much taxpayer money on prosecuting them after they come to see that these were not sought after by the owner of said computer, but had been placed there by someone else.

I didn't get an answer to my questions in an earlier comment.

Are you referring to the arrest of the 50 people for possession of child porn in Cleveland? Would you suggest that all arrests and subsequent trials are made private? Should the accused be identified only if, and after, there is a conviction? Do you think that every arrest for a crime against a child is only done for political gain? What was to be gained when Casey Anthony, Alyssa Bustamante, Raul Castro, Melissa Huckaby, Mario McNeill and so many others were arrested for crimes against children? The only thing gained, IMO, was that these people were locked up so that they couldn't harm another child. No political gain in that. I'm not sure where you are going with this thread.

by TerryRose Today at 12:11 pm Neo, I have said from the beginning that I suspect some people end up viewing or having child porn on their computers because they dismiss it as harmless dirty pictures and are not offended as some of us would be.

I looked at the MySpace page of one of the accused and there was a picture of someone watching 'adult porn' on a computer in the Photo section of the account. The image on the computer was VERY graphic!

BJ in OR wrote:

by TerryRose Today at 12:11 pm Neo, I have said from the beginning that I suspect some people end up viewing or having child porn on their computers because they dismiss it as harmless dirty pictures and are not offended as some of us would be.

I looked at the MySpace page of one of the accused and there was a picture of someone watching 'adult porn' on a computer in the Photo section of the account. The image on the computer was VERY graphic!

I wonder why there was no grand jury. In our system, if someone is accused, a grand jury usually decides if there is sufficient evidence to proceed to trial. Wonderjushow they circumvented this part of our js?temustice sy

my kid does not have myspace.

Are you sure there was no grand jury? That should be easy to research. I will take care of that.

by neoaflander Today at 1:16 pm I wonder why there was no grand jury. In our system, if someone is accused, a grand jury usually decides if there is sufficient evidence to proceed to trial. Wonderjushow they circumvented this part of our js?temustice sy

That's a question that you should be asking your son's attorney.

CritterFan1 wrote:Hopefully justice will prevail.

I surely hope and pray that justice will prevail and that the children will be rescued o
btw-does anyone here have actual knowledge of the images claimed by the da or are we just believing it because he said so?

by neoaflander Today at 2:13 pm btw-does anyone here have actual knowledge of the images claimed by the da or are we just believing it because he said so?

That is another question for your son's attorney; I hope he has one. I don't understand what you think we at VH can do for you.

Terry Rose wrote:

Wrap wrote "I know if I or any of my family or friends were accused of a heinous crime such as child porn, I of course would want to believe them. But this particular crime is a very secretive thing for these people. It is not something they discuss with others, even their best friends. IMHO, it is the absolute worst crime other than actual rape and murder of a child that a person can commit."

I wholeheartedly agree. Most of the time, the actual picture taking is when the child is being raped. Even typing these words makes me ill!!

Neoaflander, You are also a parent of a person that has been accused. I am very sorry to hear that. I have to agree that this DA that you keep talking about would not waste his time with your son if he is innocent. But, before the DA came along, there was a sting operation by the feds. The DA is only the one who decides if the case will go forward IF a Grand Jury brings in a True Bill.

I hope your son has great counsel and BJ is correct, he should be asking his attorney WHY there was no Grand Jury in this case. I find that rather improbable.

Also, I am happy that you are here if only just to vent but there really is not much we can do for you except read your thoughts and give you our thoughts back, which I believe we have done and will keep doing. I offer you solace as I know this must be very, very difficult for you.

Also, if you can.. would you please answer BJ's question.

Neoaflander,
Do you think your son is the only innocent one out of the 50, or do you think the rest of the accused are guilty?

CLEVELAND -- Cuyahoga County Prosecutor Bill Mason announced the indictment of 50 people in the largest child porn investigation in Ohio's history. Operation Cyber Safe, is a major child porn investigation involving 32 different agencies..

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

indictment
1 a : the action or the legal process of indicting b : the state of being indicted
2 : a formal written statement framed by a prosecuting authority and found by a jury (as a grand jury) charging a person with an offense

That tells me that a grand jury did meet before they were charged. I can find nothing that indicates a grand jury did not meet. After reading the article posted above my mind was refreshed on the fact 14 juveniles were involved in trading or creating the porn as well. Those kids have not been named correct? I am like any one involved in this ring should have been arrested and charged.

If you lay down with dogs you wake up with fleas.

Critter don't take offense to that okay? My Mom always quoted that to me through out my life.

lindamarie wrote:

CLEVELAND -- Cuyahoga County Prosecutor Bill Mason announced the indictment of 50 people in the largest child porn investigation in Ohio's history. Operation Cyber Safe, is a major child porn investigation involving 32 different agencies..

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

indictment
1 a : the action or the legal process of indicting b : the state of being indicted
2 : a formal written statement framed by a prosecuting authority and found by a jury (as a grand jury) charging a person with an offense

That tells me that a grand jury did meet before they were charged. I can find nothing that indicates a grand jury did not meet. After reading the article posted above my mind was refreshed on the fact 14 juveniles were involved in trading or creating the porn as well. Those kids have not been named correct? I am like any one involved in this ring should have been arrested and charged.

If you lay down with dogs you wake up with fleas.

Critter don't take offense to that okay? My Mom always quoted that to me through out my life.

my son has no knowledge of it and i can find no court record of it. dont they have to tell you?

I'm feeling invisible. I can't seem to get answers to my questions. I thought this thread was for a back and forth discussion.

BJ in OR wrote:Neoaflander,
Do you think your son is the only innocent one out of the 50, or do you think the rest of the accused are guilty?

How could I know? I dont know any of those people. I have some knowledge about my son. I have also more than I wanted to know how the da's office can deceive people in a public forum. If you break any part of a statute you are guilty of all of it.
they can then name all parts of the statute as crimes you are accused of committing, hence the many, many, charges. I invite the prosecutor to explain it to us at any time in this case.