OT: Prayer requested....Update
R.L.Warflight
requested that my wife and myself drive down to see him on Monay.... he said he
is finished with his investigation of our computers, but he said there are a
few items he wants to discuss with my wife and myself..... he assures us that
nothing is wrong, and that they will not be waiting to arrest us (it worries me
that he even mentions THAT)
My wife asked if we get the computers back on Monday as well, and he said
we wouldn't, BUT we WOULD get them back before Friday. This seems like good
news, but I'm still quite nervious, and would still like it if my friends here
would say a wee prayer for us.....
On the job front.... the Union says they can get me work at Ralphs (hough
they don't give me any garentees, other than they will give me a good word
there) and it's the same thing I WAS doing, at the same pay, BUT it will be in
Compton at night which is TWICE the distance to the old job (I don't worry
about Compton at night, it's actually not that bad a place) The start date
however PROBABLY won't be until spring. I can probably get something closer to
home, but at almost half the pay..... but the stress levels would be a lot
better, and I would get to do faire (I actually have a connection with Palomar
Water, a FYNE sponsor of faire, as many employees there are rennies as well....
they even have company parties at faire.... but they aren't currently hiring,
however the person I talked to said they will see if they know anyone
hiring.... so that's something)
Christmas will be rather small this year, but as long as there's family, who
cares, right? I'm STILL going to make Wassail, and Jana will STILL make
Vitabrod (her family recipe hasn't changed in over 500 years.....except the
yeast part for obvious reasons)
Here's to hoping I find work soon though.....
I just thought I'd update everyone, and thank everyone for their words of
support so far.... I think I would have spontaniously combusted by now without
you all!
"Warflight the Wrong"
Taxationus Piratica of Sarcastica. He who kisses up to Gojira.
Stupid stupid Rat Creatures!
"Founder, but not namer of Renntopia"
WWN Vampyre of the Week
84.4% FaireFolk corrupt
Keeper of"Rex"the"Rennie Dogma"
ITFC#0059
Stosh d' Gypsy
--
Stosh d'Gypsy ;{ž
IBRSC #373 Bard #116
Bos'n of the good ship Redtail Hawk, keeper of the cap'n's pickles..
Fisher Price Toy of the Order of the Rampant Clue Stick
66.4% faire corrupt and getting worse all the time!!
"R.L.Warflight" <warf...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20011125030322...@nso-fz.aol.com...
: Well... the federal agent in charge of my case called yesterday.... he
:
:
Pamela
Pamela
Meadhbh McKenzie
Mother to the Makers of Mead
Lil' Red
BLT
Rabble Rouser
Constable Wench
Klutz Extrodinaire (no injuries this week)
Corrupter of Sweet Young Men
"Stosh d' Gypsy" <jaywr...@home.com> wrote in message news:<V49M7.116301$pb4.71...@news2.rdc2.tx.home.com>...
> be strong my brother
>
> --
> Stosh d'Gypsy ;{ş
Josephine Marie Thane
--
Josephine Marie Thane <http://www.josephinemariethane.com>
Minstrosity <http://www.minstrosity.com>
-Best Music Group, KCRF 2001-
Official AFR Bio Ring Page <http://www.josephinemariethane.com/AFRBioRing.html>
Pinned RenGeek
The SneakyEvil™ Wench
The Psi Corps Ranger - "We live for the Faire. We die for the Faire."
IWG #870, Madame
Bard #122
Rapidus Deportus Mars of Sarcastica. She who stood on
rocky shores and kept the beaches whiskey free.
High Priestess to the Goddess of Love, Carnivorous Acquirer of
Forgotten Readiness and Sensitive Traveler of Eros' Precepts.
Mad Anne Flint, the Pirate.
"Soylens viridis homines est."
---
Pamela wrote:
> seconded
>
> Pamela
> Meadhbh McKenzie
> Mother to the Makers of Mead
> Lil' Red
> BLT
> Rabble Rouser
> Constable Wench
> Klutz Extrodinaire (no injuries this week)
> Corrupter of Sweet Young Men
>
> "Stosh d' Gypsy" <jaywr...@home.com> wrote in message news:<V49M7.116301$pb4.71...@news2.rdc2.tx.home.com>...
> > be strong my brother
> >
> > --
> > Stosh d'Gypsy ;{ž
Melissa
-Melissa
Nocturna le Fey
us know when it's officially over (i.e. the 'few items' are
done discussing!)
I hope that Palomar Water keeps you in mind and hires you
once an opening presents itself. It sounds like a great
atmosphere! :)
Continuing to pray,
Heather
R.L.Warflight wrote:
--
Nocturna - Mistress of the Fey
Court Painter to the Queen of Faerie
Wench #1878: Femina Flagello Dominae *
~ Dissembler of the Double-Entendre
~ Practitioner of the Parlance of Poesy
~ Honorary Orator of All Things Shakespeare
~ Keeper of the Mr. Mister Hot Rogue Spritzer (TM)
~ Possessed of The Erotic Tongue, from whose font
a sensuous spring of verse doth flow--and soaketh
the breeches of mortal men far and wide.
* She Who Wields the Whip
http://www.members.home.net/gwynnith/
R.L.Warflight
I'm sitting up here, at 0330 hours, unable to sleep due to the ordeal I may
or may not have to endure today.... scared stiff to even go down there, but
knowing that I have to....
After the words of encouragment from the people I'm proud to call friends, I
think I can go to bed now....
You guys are what I needed!
Night all.... I'll let everyone know what's up tomorrow evening! (Provided
I'm not sitting in a jail somewhere....)
I'm fearful that the agent isn't being entirely truthful, and the "come out
to meet with me to answer a few questions" is a fancy way of saying "come out
and we'll arrest you here on our terms, thus saving us a trip to your place,
where we saw medieval swords and crossbows on your wall."
Mayhaps I watch too many cop shows.... I would figure that if they intended
to arrest me, they would come here to do it, and not ask for both of us to come
out to them.... plus they DID say that we would get the computers back later
this week, and I really don't see them making such a bold statement if it
wasn't true.... they would say "we don't know" or "no comment" or something
like that.... I would think....
It's funny ... up until all this started, I used to trust the feds quite
well, and always figured it could never happen to me, because I'm not a law
breaker (other than that time I was pulled over while driving at warp 10, or
the time the secret service patted me down because I made the "What's that? An
anal probe?" comment to Al Gore's agents at Universal (didn't know the
Democrats were even there that day.... long story though)
Anyway.... I'm babbling at this point....
'Night all!
And thanks again to everyone for your words of encouragement! What would I
do without you all?
Josephine Marie Thane
> It's funny ... up until all this started, I used to trust the feds quite
> well,
Why? The more I learn, the less I trust them. And I'm not talking about "learn
from The X Files", either, but from RL (other people's experiences, thankfully).
Duncan aka Russ
--
Duncan of Strathclyde, Scotland and wherever else the wind blows me
The Mad Scot of the Pounce Ninjas
Member of the Order of the Rampant Clue Stick
AoHellius Infiltratious of Sarcastica. He who prefers Greek pork to the
other green meat.
The kilt-clad lookout of the Redtail Hawk, scourge of the sea
The Late, lost Soul of Rentopia
England forever, and Scotland for just a wee bit more!
*Freedom is just another word for nothin' left to lose
*With my shield, or on it - Trojan Warriors BC
*I never trust extremists, they are too close to the edges and fall off WAY
too easy
*Spirituality is rooted in desire. We long for something we can neither name
nor describe, but which is no less real because of our inability to capture
it with words. ~ Mary Jo Weaver ~
RenMerc #436 of the Outlanders
Bard #293
Rogue #831
http://www.geocities.com/n527nr
"R.L.Warflight" <warf...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20011126063352...@nso-cf.aol.com...
mark deering
;0)
--
Kat
Lady Sarah Sheffelde
We may not have it all together......But together we have it all.
Wench # 1698, twas a very good year.
High Priestess to the Goddess of Love, Perpetual Seer of Floral
Unconditionality and Candied Hoper of Soulful Violets.
"Mistress Violet"
Darth MOM.
Life is tough, but I am tougher.
'Dirty Ethel Kidd' The Pirates air head daughter.
Reproductus Aspxia Pigementitus of Sarcastica.
She who throws out the Mafioso with the bathwater.
R.L.Warflight
I hate our government.
They lied about giving back the computer. They also lied about needing to
"clear a few things up".
I was subjected to an interrogation today... a FIVE HOUR interrogation, and
many threats against my wife and children were made by the two federal agents
that did the questioning.
They were unable to find the files that the original "intention to
investigate" form had listed, but rather than say "Oh ... we were wrong, you
didn't do it" they asked me repeatedly "what kind of evidence elimination
program" I am using that could have deleted the files they were looking for.
(they checked deleted files, and those files were NEVER downloaded)
They also found plenty of porn on my machine. First they said it was over
800 pictures, but then they said it was 500, but when they showed it to me, a
lot of it was repeats of the same picture. There were other pictures that were
partial pictures (like they were from advertisements, and the ad was made up of
several .JPEG images) and the pictures that seemed the most questionable looked
as though they were Internet ads, or "porn spam" pictures (you know... the ones
that pop up in e-mails from time to time, or the ones that come up when your
browser goes crazy, and pops up about 200 porn sites all at once due to a code
put in the html)
They said that they have concluded that I'm either a "collector" of child
porn, or a "molester"!!!! They claim that their job is to find out which, even
if it means interrogating my kids, and all their friends. The pictures they had
"found" did NOT all look underaged, and very few of them even looked remotely
familiar, but they claim that all the porn on my computer is from between
September 2001, and October 22, 2001, (three days before they took the
computer) and that I must have found a way to delete the stuff from before, as
they believe that I have a "problem". I assured them that I do NOT have any
"file elimination" program, and they were most welcome to check the computer,
and then they started asking me "what about Norton Anti-virus?" I'm sorry, but
"Norton Anti-virus" is NOT a file elimination program!
They showed me picture after picture, and asked me for each one "How old
does she look? How about that one? She looks kinda flat chested to be in her
30s! She could be an early developer!" PICTURE AFTER PICTURE!!!! These people
showed me MORE porn than I've ever seen on the Internet! They kept asking me
about what sites I've been to, and why some of the pictures say "lolita" in the
file structure! They kept asking me about web sites that I never even heard of,
and claiming that they think pictures on my computer came from those sites, but
then minutes later stating that they had not seen these pictures before, as
they thing they are "new to the net", and then asking me about that!
They then gave me a form to fill out... a confession they wanted me to fill
out, and threatened me that if I didn't fill it out, that they would bring my
wife in, and interrogate her, as well as interrogate all of my children, and
should any charges be filed, they would be filed against every member of my
family... HOWEVER, if I filled out their confession, they would only pursue me,
and leave my family out of it.
I had no choice but to fill out their form. Had I not, they would have
brought in my wife and kids, and showed them all those pictures, most of which
were VERY graphic, and quite sickening, and the emotional scars would have been
deep I'm sure. I filled it out, and I only admitted on it that anything on the
hard drive is my responsibility, and nobody else's, but I also included that
the images are not familiar to me, and it is possible they were from spam, or
"pop-up" advertisements.
Every picture they showed me was from the "archives" of the web browser....
pictures that have been downloaded by the browser, and not the user. (every
picture you see on a web page is stored in a folder, and archived, so the page
will come up faster next time)
It was a VERY scary situation.... I feel like I was raped or something....
I'm VERY ANGRY over this!
They kept my disabled wife, and youngest son in a small waiting room for the
five hours ... it was a room about the size of a large bathroom stall, and she
was going NUTS in there wondering what was happening ... they would tell her
nothing....
I HATE this.
This is the most helpless feeling in the world.
I thought we had laws to prevent this kind of thing!
Excuse me for a while, as I think I'm going to be quite bitter for a long
time after all of this.
The situation, as it stands is this: They still have yet to file any
charges. They said it's not up to them, but up to a government attorney. They
said the worst case scenario is that a Federal Attorney will take the case, and
file charges, and if that's the case, I could be looking at a three year jail
sentence, and if a State Attorney decides to take it instead, the worst case is
a misdemeanor, and a slap on the wrist.
A little later they also said it's possible that nobody will take it if they
feel no crime has been committed, BUT they said if that's the case, they will
STILL be required to purge the hard drive of EVERY jpeg image (a lot of which
are family photos that can not be replaced, and have yet to be backed up)
I'm now VERY sick to my stomach, and have a MASSIVE migraine, and just want
to go crawl into a hole and just die!
My wife is so upset by all of this, she won't talk to anyone, and is feeling
suicidal (literally) and now that's even more pressure, and more to weigh me
down.
WHY DO THEY HAVE TO HARASS US AND NOT GET OFF THEIR ASSES AND GO AFTER
TERRORISTS, AND REAL CHILD PORNOGRAPHERS!?!
They looked at my other two computers, and couldn't find ANY porn on them.
They couldn't find the files that started this search to begin with. They
couldn't even find anything they considered questionable dated before September
of this year, and the pictures they DID find, most were blurry (they asked me
how I made them blurry as well) and didn't even look like children!
I hate this.
I hate them.
I'm just going to surround myself with this little cloud of negativity
right now, and sulk for a while.
Happy frikkin holidays, eh?
(sorry to bring everyone down..... as you can see, life's kinda rough right
now.... I feel like I've just been called a heretic, and am being tried by the
inquisition.)
Oh, they are also going to start monitoring all the Yahoo-Groups that I'm
on...
Victoria McDonnell
> Oh, they are also going to start monitoring all the Yahoo-Groups that I'm
> on...
Well then, to anyone that reads this looking for evidence of some
perverted guy I say...feck you all, go do something better with my
husband's tax dollars. Geez, we have feckin' terrorists out there
crashing planes into national landmarks and you're worried about the
endless supply of adult entertainment on the web?
Go arrest some Muslim fundamentalists!
--
Victoria McDonnell
http://vmcdonnell.net
"A real feminist accepts her God-given gift of womanhood and doesn't
feel that in order to be strong or equal must be a man" - Me
Robert A. Matern
NEVER sign anything that your lawyer has not approved.
YOU NEED A LAWYER NOW!!! Even a FREE ONE is better than NONE, at this
point!
I am including some links which may help, I hope...
Pre-Paid Legal Services Network
http://www.accessispower.com/
Lawyer referral and Free Legal Advice
http://law.about.com/cs/attorneyreferral/index.htm
Options when you can't afford a Lawyer... with weblinks (may need
re-joining)
http://law.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?site=http%3A%2F%2Fprairielaw.com
%2Farticles%2Farticle.asp%3FchannelId%3D11%26subId%3D80%26articleId%3D1355
Hope things improve for you...
Maybe we can get those agents reassigned... to Afghanistan!
"R.L.Warflight" <warf...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20011127015435...@nso-cl.aol.com...
Josephine Marie Thane
> I thought we had laws to prevent this kind of thing!
We used to, until the government "reforms" enacted by Bush and Ashcroft after
9/11. We lost some of our civil rights and freedoms with those, and the government
has greater "investigative" rights (read: "We can nose even farther into your
private life, and you can't do a damn thing about it, because it's all legal").
Frankly, I would not have signed the damn paper without a lawyer working for me
present. You still have that right. What they did was coercion, and that's still
illegal. Would that have meant that my spouse and child see hours and hours of
porno pictures courtesy of "spam receipt central" AOL? Maybe. At which point the
spouse and child, yes, have to go into therapy, and a fairly massive lawsuit can be
filed against the agents specifically and the government and the appropriate
department generally (note that your lawyer, if competent, thinks of this because
at this point you're too traumatized to think straight as well).
> WHY DO THEY HAVE TO HARASS US AND NOT GET OFF THEIR ASSES AND GO AFTER
> TERRORISTS, AND REAL CHILD PORNOGRAPHERS!?!
Because McCarthyism is now alive and well in the United States of America.
Disclaimer: I am a Libertarian. I am not a member of the ACLU. I am not an
attorney, athough I work for a law firm. The opinions expressed herein are my own
and are not to be construed as actual legal advice. I did not vote for George W.
Bush. I did inspect my punchcard ballot before turning it in, and it was clean, so
my vote did count. I do not live in Florida.
--
Josephine Marie Thane
Al White
> "R.L.Warflight" wrote:
>
> > I thought we had laws to prevent this kind of thing!
>
> We used to, until the government "reforms" enacted by Bush and Ashcroft after
> 9/11. We lost some of our civil rights and freedoms with those, and the government
> has greater "investigative" rights (read: "We can nose even farther into your
> private life, and you can't do a damn thing about it, because it's all legal").
It was longer ago than that... And it was not Bush, Clinton, or even older Bush. Child
pornography is a heinous crime, but the violation of the innocent by the government is
even more so.
What happened, friends, was Anita Hill. With that incident, the american public
accepted the premise that the seriousness of the charges was more important than the
accuracy of the charges. Since that time, crimes against women and children have been
exempted from checks and balances. Men are guilty, no matter what. Oh, and if we can't
find evidence? Never mind; we'll just accuse you of destroying the evidence. And then
we'll charge you with both crimes...
R.L., if those feds had made good on their promise to show the porn to your wife and
kids, they would have been guilty of the very crime that they accused you of committing
- and worse. I'm sure if you weren't dazed from the multitudinous stresses of your
recent past, you would have stood toe to toe with those power-tripping miscreants and
told them "Yes, show my wife and kids - but in a court room, with a jury of my peers."
I think it might have called their bluff.
Not to give legal advice here, but if I was in that same situation, I would point out
to the agents that they do not know enough about Computers to be playing with this
stuff. Then I'd ask for a tech from their IT department to do a file->find, with a
lawyer present, for files modified after the date they confiscated your machine. Any
files at all modified after that date (and anything they viewed would show up as
'modified', or 'last accessed'). I'd explain to them how a lawyer with only a smidgin
more computer knowledge then them could eat them alive on the witless stand.
But it's not me... I dunno; call your Congressperson... ?
For the rest -
If using Netscape, go to edit->preferences. Click on "Navigator" and then the "Clear
History" button.
Then click on Advanced, and Cache, and click the Clear Disk Cache button.
The first part will clear the URL's of the sites you've visited. The second will erase
the images cached for faster loading.
Then empty your recycle bin.
Do a back-up.
Then go to My Computer, right click on your hard drive, select "Tools". Check for
problems. If it finds none, click on "Defragment". This will move files around on your
hard drive, eliminating most (if not all) of the erased files. (Files are not truely
'erased', but removed from the FAT table by changing the first character of the file
name to a 'sigma' character. The info is still there to be unerased by such things as
Norton Utilities.)
There are tools out there that will do a true erase, writing X's in the slack space
seven times or more, so that only the very most sophisticated tools can recover purged
info - and unless you're involved in drug running big time, not worth the Gov't time
and expense. But the steps outlined above would protect you from someone of my level of
'super user' from finding anything damning...
"Storey"
--
Astoria Weaver
Bard #179, RenMerc #350
Keeper of the Mead Horde Theme Song.
"Stinky Chucklebuns"
Loudus Hexadecimalis Obnoxious of Sarcastica.
Vending savior of tacky PJ's.
Storey's Story - http://sites.netscape.net/v2cib226/homepage
Butterfly Bill
> Every picture they showed me was from the "archives" of the web
> browser....
> pictures that have been downloaded by the browser, and not the user.
> (every picture you see on a web page is stored in a folder, and
> archived, so the page will come up faster next time)
There is a file called C:\WINDOWS\Temporary Internet Files that I open
every three or four days (I have a shortcut to it on my desktop) and I go
Select All and then rightclick the highlighted stack to select Delete.
Hundreds of files pile up in only a few days of normal surfing. Even if the
law ain't on your ass, you should do this regularly.
-BB
Butterfly Bill
> For the rest -
>
> If using Netscape, go to edit->preferences. Click on "Navigator" and
> then the "Clear History" button.
> Then click on Advanced, and Cache, and click the Clear Disk Cache
> button. The first part will clear the URL's of the sites you've
> visited. The second will erase the images cached for faster loading.
> Then empty your recycle bin.
On Internet Explorer:
Under Tools select Options...
Select the General tab
There you will find a button for Clear History. You can also set the number
of days to save history to zero. There is also a button under Temporary
Internet Files that says Delete Files.
Do this often. Your hard disc won't feel so constipated.
-Butterfly Bill
"Greetings, milady...or is it milord?...or..um...."
First Rogu'ench of Renntopia
RenGeek with pewter computer hooter
Solarus Juvenillius Pastritis of Sarcastica. He who Grouches
while Biting the Wax Tadpole.
"difficile est ponere caput meum in umbilicam tuam, portis caelorum
apertis"
homepage: http://www.grapevine.net/~butterflybill/BB.htm
music on mp3.com: http://artists.mp3s.com/artists/247/butterfly_bill.html
Nocturna le Fey
used cannot express the full fury of my disgust at this
obscenity. Please, Warflight, call some of the advocate
agencies' numbers I listed!
Heather
R.L.Warflight wrote:
Allie aka Eeyore
Be strong, Warflight. Scream and yell all you need to; no one here will argue
that you don't deserve to. I know so many of us wish we could help ease this.
Allie aka Eeyore *Donkeys kill more people annually than plane crashes*
Wench #659
Jenny Bonny O'Malley-The Tail of the High Seas
Navigator - The Merry Raven
Aislinn MacGuinness
Rosen MacRevis-Clan IronWolf
TowerWench to the Paw Prince
Bard #21
Victoria McDonnell
>
> Replied via email--and still all of the censored expletives
> used cannot express the full fury of my disgust at this
> obscenity. Please, Warflight, call some of the advocate
> agencies' numbers I listed!
Hey, those weren't censored expletives, I really say "feck", picked it
up accross the pond, it gets the meaning across without being really
vulgar. Arse is my other fav, and gobshite! Ireland is good for
colorful langugae.
Nocturna le Fey
> Hey, those weren't censored expletives, I really say "feck", picked it
> up accross the pond, it gets the meaning across without being really
> vulgar. Arse is my other fav, and gobshite!
Oh no, not yours--but *my* email was full of heavily
censored expletives! I like gobshite, as well as 'folkin'
hell'!
Butterfly Bill
> (sorry to bring everyone down..... as you can see, life's kinda rough
> right now.... I feel like I've just been called a heretic, and am being
> tried by the inquisition.)
Well, this post did bring me down in a way for a while, it got me doing a
lot of thinking and self-examining, but you don't have to be sorry for
that. I am now going to try to gather some thoughts using the discipline
of writing, but in no particular order. I'm picking a few of your words as
takeoff points. I hope you don't feel I'm flaming, because I definitely
don't want to kick anyone while he is as down as you are right now. But
the words got me to thinking...
> I hate our government.
I don't hate our government, as a monolith. There are some parts of it I
hate, like the Drug Enforcement Administration, the Central Intelligence
Agency, and the Forest Service Incident Command Team. But I don't hate the
National Weather Service, the Veteran's Administration, the National Park
Service, or many other governmental agencies. I'll trust any law
enforcement agency about as far as I can throw a Union Pacific Big Boy with
the tender attached.
> They lied about giving back the computer. They also lied about
> needing to "clear a few things up".
Because everybody lies to them, and they think the only way they can get
you to reveal the truth and obey is to trick you.
I like to think that my best defense against this sort of thing would be
simply having nothing to hide, and nothing that anybody could blackmail me
for. I don't have any wife and kids to hide anything from, I have never
been married and don't think I ever will be until the divorce and alimony
laws are changed. One of the main reasons I'd rather put up with the
physical strain, the being outside in bad weather, the irregularity, the
danger, and the not so high pay of doing construction work, rather than
getting a "good job", has been the freedom I get from being able to be
honest. Construction work is a repository for wierdoes and outcasts, and
my sins are small compared to some of the others I have worked with. All
my employers have known that I smoke marijuana, wear women's clothes, and
go around naked at Rainbow Gatherings, and I have never had to worry about
losing my job because secrets were found out. If I ever were to encounter
someone unaccepting, I would be able to just walk out on his ass and walk
on to another job without having to fill out an application where I list
the last six places I worked and why I left. I've pretty much let it all
hang out on Usenet for the last four years, and on my website. They would
find on my computer a file in My Documents that I have named "Pornography",
where I have some pictures downloaded from
alt.binaries.picture.exhibitionism.public, and I found out long ago that if
you try going to those websites linked to there, most of the time they are
lying, and the other times you have to pay, so I don't go to them any more.
And if my bosses found out about that, they would probably grin. I don't
have to care what anybody shows to whom, I'm free.
> WHY DO THEY HAVE TO HARASS US AND NOT GET OFF THEIR ASSES AND GO
> AFTER TERRORISTS, AND REAL CHILD PORNOGRAPHERS!?!
What a basic crock of shit the basic charge against you is in the first
place. Child pornography. Does that mean simply pictures of naked
children? I've been in five environments so far where I haven't needed
pictures, I've been able to see the real thing, with the full knowledge and
often the presence of their parents. And there has been no shame or
uptightness around it, it has been accepted as normal. The first has been
and continues to be Rainbow Gatherings. The second was three rural
intentional communities, Shannon Farm, Twin Oaks, Virginia, and Earthaven,
North Carolina. The third was Lake Edun Naturist Park near Topeka, Kansas,
a private nudist camp. The fourth was Hippie Hollow and Marshall Ford on
the shores of Lake Travis, near Austin, Texas, both totally open to the
public. And the last was the Sundance Cafe, a vegetarian restaurant in the
late '70s across from the University of New Mexico in Albuquerque, where
two of the women who worked there routinely brought their preschool sons
naked, in the summer. It was possible there, and I can't accept that it
can't be possible everywhere.
But it's CHILD pornography! and that's the rub. I know that child
molesting is the one crime where you are guilty until proven without the
shadow of a doubt innocent as soon as you have been accused. I won't go
near anybody else's kid unless the parent is a very good friend of mine.
If I am walking past the elementary school a block from my house and the
kids are out in the playground, I'll walk down the other side of the street
rather than have anyone think I'm stopping to look. There isn't a parent
in this universe who can think rationally and objectively about their own
kid, every one is a she bear if you come into any kind of conflict with
their child, and I treat kids like dynamite. Some might think this cold,
but for a single man like me, it's self defense.
I hope they don't go after the real child pornographers, and subject
someone else to what you went thru. I hope we build a society with honest
sexual morality where pornography disappears for lack of interest.
> This is the most helpless feeling in the world.
>
> I thought we had laws to prevent this kind of thing!
You ain't helpless, and there ARE laws against this sort of thing. I hope
you turn around and get a lawyer experienced with civil liberty issues and
fight this.
And in conclusion, I think that was one of the most well written essays
with effective use of single sentences contrasted with paragraphs that I
have seen on Usenet. You do have a skill when you are worked up.
R.L.Warflight
<butter...@grapevine.net> writes:
>You ain't helpless, and there ARE laws against this sort of thing. I hope
>you turn around and get a lawyer experienced with civil liberty issues and
>fight this.
There's the rub.
I'm broke.
I don't have a job (though I have a prospective job in the works, but it
barely pays for feeding us, let alone all our bills AND a lawyer) and no lawyer
will take this kind of case. There's no money to be made in it. If they don't
prosecute, then nothing happens, and the lawyer fees are spent on nothing, and
no matter how hard you try to sue the feds, they will ALWAYS be "just doing
their job" and not liable for any hardships you may have suffered during their
"just doing their job".
If they prosecute, and I win, again, I will receive no money for "winning"
I'll only have my freedom... a freedom that will be tied up for the next 12 or
more years trying to pay off lawyer fees, and I would have been better off
loosing, and going to jail. Again, the law sees the feds in this matter as
"just doing their job" and until laws are put in place to protect the rights we
are SUPPOSED to already have, they can just keep doing it.
In this country, we like to think that people are innocent until proven
guilty, and the accused doesn't have to defend themselves, as it's the
prosecution's job to prove guilt, not the other way around. The judge, and jury
are to assume innocence. HOWEVER, the judges typically hand out jail time
(waiting for trial) and issue bail amounts for these "innocent" people ...
granted, it's out of necessity ... and the assumption of innocence is out of
the question for the law enforcement officers. If they assumed innocence from
anyone who hasn't gone to trial, they would not be able to do their basic job.
They HAVE to assume guilt to investigate. Same with the prosecutor ... how does
someone prosecute someone they assume innocent?
I was on a jury a few years back, and it was a three month trial.... the
defendants (yes, there were three of them ... they were all tried "separately"
but all at the same time, and that meant under the "conspiracy laws" in this
state, in a trial like that, if one is convicted, all must be convicted.... had
they been tried separately, that couldn't have happened) and these defendants
spent TWO YEARS in jail waiting trial. Why so long? They were tried for the
same crime once before, and the trial ended in a deadlock. The majority of the
jurors in the first trial said "not guilty."
In this country, you can't be tried twice for the same crime, right?
Wrong. See ... they pulled a bank robbery in San Bernadino, and were caught
in that county, but released two days later, when two of the four defendants
were caught again two days after release attempting the same crime in Riverside
County.
When the prosecution failed to convict in San Bernadino, they tried them
AGAIN for the same two crimes in Riverside, one year after the end of the first
trial.
The defense attorneys were okay with this, and so was the DA, and everyone
else it seems.
These "innocent" men were advised by their attorneys to NOT speak for
themselves, as they need NOT prove innocence, as innocence is assumed.
They were convicted.
Had they been allowed to speak for themselves? I don't know what would have
happened then ... the evidence was VERY strong, and I have no regrets for my
decision as a juror, however, in my situation, if I were to go to trial, and
not speak up, and let the prosecution do all the talking, I'm sure the
"evidence" they claim to have against me will speak to the jury.
This is just opinion on my part, but I know human nature, and I remember the
guy on the jury I was on that was "in a hurry" and tried to badger a juror that
wasn't sure of what was happening, and I remember the court telling the forman
"if we don't have a verdict soon, the judge COULD have jurors removed, or held
in contempt."
Two of these guys were looking at life sentences, and the court had NO
business telling the media that we would deliberate for a week. (we deliberated
for three weeks..... there were many charges, and as jurors, we didn't want to
make any rash decisions, as we were determining the fate of four young people)
If they prosecute, and I get arrested, or even if I just have to go to
court, I will loose any job I might manage to get in the next few weeks.
I will loose any pay I could have got from any such job.
My wife and children will go hungry, and my father-in-law who has been
putting us up for the last year, and has been benefiting from my income until
it was lost last month, will loose his home, car, and everything he owns. (he's
on the verge of that as it is)
The state, and the fed will give me NOTHING for the time they have caused
me, or the hardships they inflicted on my family, and there is no lawyer I've
contacted so far that will even discuss this case, or work "pro-bono" because
there is no money to be gained, and their time will be wasted on the case ...
win or loose.
Thus, the helplessness that I'm feeling right now....
If I could just run outside and start screaming at everyone I met on the
street, and bang my head against every wall from here to Devore, I would still
not be able to shake this feeling of complete helplessness.
R.L.Warflight
<vmcdo...@vmcdonnell.net> writes:
>Hey, those weren't censored expletives, I really say "feck", picked it
>up accross the pond, it gets the meaning across without being really
>vulgar. Arse is my other fav, and gobshite! Ireland is good for
>colorful langugae.
Heh.... if I learned ANYTHING from radio, it's how to swear responsibly!
We can say "Friggin" on the radio, and "Jack-Hole" is a GREAT one!
"Butt" is acceptable by FCC standards, and any combination you can come up
with is generally open game.... You can also say some words, but not combine
them. Like "Damn", or "God" or ever "Gawd", but the last two can NOT be used
with the first. "Bitch" is okay, but only if refering to onesself, a dog, or a
male individual, but if you refer to a female with that word, and it's not
yourself, you COULD be in trouble.
ANY word is okay after 10PM, and before 5AM, HOWEVER< most sponsors will
pull their ads if you use them, so it's best to stick to FCC rules anyway....
True talent is being able to speak with strength, and passion without using
words that make you cheap.
(these rules do NOT apply to radio in Seattle area, as the FCC has been known
to fine stations for "suggested profainity".... and I can attest to THAT!)
Butterfly Bill
> In article <Xns9166EB2D621Dbu...@209.242.76.10>,
> Butterfly Bill <butter...@grapevine.net> writes:
>
>>You ain't helpless, and there ARE laws against this sort of thing. I
>>hope you turn around and get a lawyer experienced with civil liberty
>>issues and fight this.
>
> There's the rub.
>
> I'm broke.
>
Please at least try to talk with someone in the ACLU about this. There are
lawyers who will do pro bono work for free, if they involve issues
meaningful to them. Please don't give up until you have contacted all the
people that Nocturno le Fey and Robert Matern have given you contacts for
and you KNOW, not just assume, that you have no recourses.
-BB
Aodhan
>
> And thanks again to everyone for your words of encouragement! What would I
>do without you all?
I realize this is a bit late, since I haven't been following the
thread recently, but my good wishes as well are coming your way! Hope
everything goes well, and that you pass through this experience
unscathed!
Aodhan
The Silver Tongued
Words to live by..."In my world, bad girls get spanked"
Matt Hackell
few elements of your rant.
From the book of warf...@aol.com ...
> In article <Xns9166EB2D621Dbu...@209.242.76.10>, Butterfly Bill
> <butter...@grapevine.net> writes:
>
> >You ain't helpless, and there ARE laws against this sort of thing. I hope
> >you turn around and get a lawyer experienced with civil liberty issues and
> >fight this.
>
> There's the rub.
>
> I'm broke.
>
> I don't have a job (though I have a prospective job in the works, but it
> barely pays for feeding us, let alone all our bills AND a lawyer) and no lawyer
> will take this kind of case. There's no money to be made in it.
Seriously, look into public interest groups. And keep looking. There are
a lot of them out there, and this is their bread-and-butter. People have
mentioned the ACLU repeatedly, but they're just one of dozens of legal
advocacy groups that might help you pro bono.
> If they don't prosecute, then nothing happens, and the lawyer fees are spent
> on nothing, and no matter how hard you try to sue the feds, they will ALWAYS
> be "just doing their job" and not liable for any hardships you may have
> suffered during their "just doing their job".
It is difficult to collect against government officials for acts in the
line of duty; that's true. However, the federal government has created a
number of causes of action against itself for civil rights violations.
I'm only a first-year law student, but I've already dealt with a half-
dozen cases involving one or more of these claims.
Among other things, the government must pay the attorney's fees of a
successful plaintiff if they lose. And although it is not easy to prove,
you have a real case, one that could in fact result in real damages.
Keep searching. Don't give up.
[snip]
> In this country, we like to think that people are innocent until proven
> guilty, and the accused doesn't have to defend themselves, as it's the
> prosecution's job to prove guilt, not the other way around. The judge, and jury
> are to assume innocence. HOWEVER, the judges typically hand out jail time
> (waiting for trial) and issue bail amounts for these "innocent" people ...
> granted, it's out of necessity ... and the assumption of innocence is out of
> the question for the law enforcement officers. If they assumed innocence from
> anyone who hasn't gone to trial, they would not be able to do their basic job.
> They HAVE to assume guilt to investigate. Same with the prosecutor ... how does
> someone prosecute someone they assume innocent?
Well, the law assumes you are innocent until proven guilty beyond a
reasonable doubt. The prosecutor's role is to prove you guilty--that's
his job, and without it the system would not work.
Is it uncomfortable? It sure is; it's not called the adversarial system
for nothing. But it does work most of the time.
> I was on a jury a few years back, and it was a three month trial.... the
> defendants (yes, there were three of them ... they were all tried "separately"
> but all at the same time, and that meant under the "conspiracy laws" in this
> state, in a trial like that, if one is convicted, all must be convicted.... had
> they been tried separately, that couldn't have happened) and these defendants
> spent TWO YEARS in jail waiting trial. Why so long? They were tried for the
> same crime once before, and the trial ended in a deadlock. The majority of the
> jurors in the first trial said "not guilty."
>
> In this country, you can't be tried twice for the same crime, right?
Right.
> Wrong. See ... they pulled a bank robbery in San Bernadino, and were caught
> in that county, but released two days later, when two of the four defendants
> were caught again two days after release attempting the same crime in Riverside
> County.
> When the prosecution failed to convict in San Bernadino, they tried them
> AGAIN for the same two crimes in Riverside, one year after the end of the first
> trial.
> The defense attorneys were okay with this, and so was the DA, and everyone
> else it seems.
That's because a mistrial is not a trial, and a case in which the jury
fails to reach a verdict is deemed a mistrial. It is as if the first
trial never happened. What is not legal is to be tried again for a crime
you have already been _acquitted_ of. The defendants above were not
acquitted.
> These "innocent" men were advised by their attorneys to NOT speak for
> themselves, as they need NOT prove innocence, as innocence is assumed.
>
> They were convicted.
As to this, I cannot speak, not knowing the facts. Most likely, the
attorneys felt that these men were bad witnesses (perhaps they had
little credibility; perhaps they were guilty as hell and putting them on
the stand would only have cemented that) and chose to try to win on the
weakness of the prosecutor's case. That failed, but if it was a
strategic choice, they probably believed they would have lost if they
_did_ put them on.
> Had they been allowed to speak for themselves? I don't know what would have
> happened then ... the evidence was VERY strong, and I have no regrets for my
> decision as a juror, however, in my situation, if I were to go to trial, and
> not speak up, and let the prosecution do all the talking, I'm sure the
> "evidence" they claim to have against me will speak to the jury.
Your case is perhaps different, in that you can tell the truth, the
whole truth, and nothing else but without incriminating yourself. But
it's something to discuss with your attorney.
[snip]
> The state, and the fed will give me NOTHING for the time they have caused
> me, or the hardships they inflicted on my family, and there is no lawyer I've
> contacted so far that will even discuss this case, or work "pro-bono" because
> there is no money to be gained, and their time will be wasted on the case ...
> win or loose.
That's what pro bono means--they know they won't get money, but they are
doing it because these cases need to be tried to protect the rights of
others like you. There are attorneys out there that do this. Thousands
of them. Some do it with only part of their time; for others, it's a
career.
--
Matt Hackell
"We're not thinking straight today."
"No, I'm definitely thinking lesbian."
"Is that like thinking outside the box?"
"..." "No."
James Sweetland
there *are* lawyers out there who will help--the "pro bono" idea.
Certainly check with the ACLU--local, state, and national. Check all
those other leads people have suggested.
and, not to be too harsh, but the current pay rate for prison work
is not very good, much lower than the minimum wage. In that context,
even going into debt to get legal advice is cheaper than the
alternative.
And, on a related topic--the child pornography laws say, in effect,
that the visual (not verbal) depiction of someone who appears to be
under 18, in a sexual context, is illegal. Obviously, the question
of how old someone *appears* to be is open to some leeway, as is the
question of "sexual context". That's why you *need* a lawyer--
the question of whether or not anything on your computer even is illegal
is unfortunately open to some judgment--and the agents have apparently
made a judgment already. But, it appears you have not been arrested
or charged with anything--so there is still hope.
Wish I could help more, but am not a lawyer. so--(((hugs))) and prayers
--
James Sweetland, Bristol gamer,
Aodhan
>porn, or a "molester"!!!! They claim that their job is to find out which, even
Hmmm...500 files only? Next time you "talk" with the agents, I
strongly suggest that you have a legal advisor present. Others have
given some good free sources. Take a look at where they are pulling
these files from, as others have pointed out, I would bet that a large
part of them, if not all, are from cached temporary internet files.
Also, if you were a "collector", your file count would be somewhere in
the many thousands, not 500 "pieces" files.
>if it means interrogating my kids, and all their friends. The pictures they had
>"found" did NOT all look underaged, and very few of them even looked remotely
>familiar, but they claim that all the porn on my computer is from between
>September 2001, and October 22, 2001, (three days before they took the
>computer) and that I must have found a way to delete the stuff from before, as
>they believe that I have a "problem". I assured them that I do NOT have any
>"file elimination" program, and they were most welcome to check the computer,
>and then they started asking me "what about Norton Anti-virus?" I'm sorry, but
>"Norton Anti-virus" is NOT a file elimination program!
If they are so computer ignorant as to confuse a virus checking
program for a file elimination program, then request a technical savvy
agent to come in on the situation.
> They showed me picture after picture, and asked me for each one "How old
>does she look? How about that one? She looks kinda flat chested to be in her
>30s! She could be an early developer!" PICTURE AFTER PICTURE!!!! These people
ANY decent doctor, and especially one specializing in children/teens
can take a look at a picture and tell you if they are underage or not.
There are certain things (such as aureolae development, etc) that give
a fairly close age approximation.
>showed me MORE porn than I've ever seen on the Internet! They kept asking me
>about what sites I've been to, and why some of the pictures say "lolita" in the
>file structure! They kept asking me about web sites that I never even heard of,
How about because "lolita" has become a pornography "buzzword" since
some movie came out...I think it was even called "Lolita". Now,
everyone uses it as a lure.
> They then gave me a form to fill out... a confession they wanted me to fill
>out, and threatened me that if I didn't fill it out, that they would bring my
>wife in, and interrogate her, as well as interrogate all of my children, and
>should any charges be filed, they would be filed against every member of my
>family... HOWEVER, if I filled out their confession, they would only pursue me,
>and leave my family out of it.
Well, I can't say don't worry about this, but any confession that is
obtained by deceit, coercion, or under false pretenses is invalid. You
really need a lawyer if you can get one at all.
> The situation, as it stands is this: They still have yet to file any
>charges. They said it's not up to them, but up to a government attorney. They
They don't actually have to file charges unless you are in custody,
and then they have to do it within 72 hours IIRC. I think there are
limits on how long they can keep seized property without producing
charges as well.
> A little later they also said it's possible that nobody will take it if they
>feel no crime has been committed, BUT they said if that's the case, they will
>STILL be required to purge the hard drive of EVERY jpeg image (a lot of which
>are family photos that can not be replaced, and have yet to be backed up)
Uh, I don't think so. As far as I know, if they don't charge you with
anything, they have to return your computer to you in the SAME
condition that they seized it. They may require you to delete any porn
images, but that is as far as they are able to go. They cannot require
you to delete non-related images or files.
> (sorry to bring everyone down..... as you can see, life's kinda rough right
>now.... I feel like I've just been called a heretic, and am being tried by the
>inquisition.)
>
> Oh, they are also going to start monitoring all the Yahoo-Groups that I'm
>on...
Now they are REALLY treading the line of harassment. Also, (Although
this may have changed with the 9/11 enactments), they need to have
some evidence that a crime is being committed before they can monitor
groups specific to you. Otherwise it can be construed as unreasonable
search and seizure. (It was part of the expanded definitions for
wiretapping requirements, but again, it may have changed with the 9/11
stuff).
This really sucks, War. Go use a lawyer or three that advertise free
consultations. If you have a law college near you, talk to the alumni
department. They may know some pro-bono lawyers, or a good, hungry,
young lawyer that might do it for cheap to help get some cases under
his/her belt. Right now you are operating from a position of not
knowing their rights and powers, and not knowing what your rights are.
Robin the Scribner
Get a lawyer!! No way should you be even talking on the phone to these guys
again -- much less meeting them -- without an on-your-side attack dog. They
are already pushing the line (if not crossed it) on how they've pursued
their case as far as the legal process. That could seriously taint the
entire case -- which is pretty weak even if they are claiming it's very
strong. That is why they were pushing for a confession (which a good lawyer
can get thrown out).
Right now, the best they can show is that some *maybe* illegal files were on
the computer. They cannot prove that you were the one who put it there (as
opposed to spammers, etc.). Or that you knew the websites that you visited
had those pictures in their banner ads. The fact that the only files were in
the cache is also somewhat in your favor.
So get thee to a lawyer - a mean, no-holds-barred, take-no-prisoners, never
give up -- never surrender, take your plea bargain and shove it SOB that is
ready and willing to drag them by the short and curlies out into the public
and shine the light of day on their activities and what they are doing.
--
Robin the Scribner
Sir Robert Barton, Baron of Walden
Ollie Ollie Oxenfree of Sarcastica, the BlueLightus Specialus
Member of the Media and Press, Moderate, Republican, and Union Rep
Man of Paradox
Ice Berg evil, 90% below the surface, invisible to the nekkid eye
Bard # 072
High Priest to the Goddess of Love, Devoted Guide to Definitive Purpose and
Raver of Silent Skill
Walter Daniels
> Well..... I went in this afternoon.
> I hate our government.
> They lied about giving back the computer. They also lied about needing to
>"clear a few things up".
> I was subjected to an interrogation today... a FIVE HOUR interrogation, and
>many threats against my wife and children were made by the two federal agents
>that did the questioning.
Your first mistake was to answer any question, after it was clear
that they lied. You need to talk to a lawyer, *right now.* You may
well have grounds for a complaint against the agents, the original
complainant, and the agency itself. IANAL, and I can think of several
vioaltions of your Fifth Amendment rights. BTW, under Cal. law,
_kidnapping_ charges may be possible over the "detention," of your
wife and children.
> Oh, they are also going to start monitoring all the Yahoo-Groups that I'm
>on...
>"Warflight the Wrong"
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
FBN Graphics prints specialties in small quantities at reasonable
prices. Express your interests with a Custom printed T-shirt, mug,
mousepad, or carry bag. We cheerfully print in quantities as small as
one. http://www.digiserve.com/fbngraphics/
Answer the design survey, and win a free prize.
Walter Daniels
>In article <Xns9166EB2D621Dbu...@209.242.76.10>, Butterfly Bill
><butter...@grapevine.net> writes:
>
>>You ain't helpless, and there ARE laws against this sort of thing. I hope
>>you turn around and get a lawyer experienced with civil liberty issues and
>>fight this.
>
> There's the rub.
>
> I'm broke.
>
> I don't have a job (though I have a prospective job in the works, but it
>barely pays for feeding us, let alone all our bills AND a lawyer) and no lawyer
>will take this kind of case.
There *are* lawyers, good ones, who take these cases. It's called
Pro bono (for the good). Your local legal society may be able to give
you a lead.
>There's no money to be made in it. If they don't
>prosecute, then nothing happens, and the lawyer fees are spent on nothing, and
>no matter how hard you try to sue the feds, they will ALWAYS be "just doing
>their job" and not liable for any hardships you may have suffered during their
>"just doing their job".
No, they were _not_. Steve Jackson games, won _major_ bucks, against
the Secret Service, for similar behavior. They repeatedly violated
your rights, the rights of your children, adn they need to be made to
account for it. You *may* have a genuine civil rights case, against
the agents, and the agency. It's called "abuse of power, under color
of authority."
> If they prosecute, and I win, again, I will receive no money for "winning"
>I'll only have my freedom... a freedom that will be tied up for the next 12 or
>more years trying to pay off lawyer fees, and I would have been better off
>loosing, and going to jail. Again, the law sees the feds in this matter as
>"just doing their job" and until laws are put in place to protect the rights we
>are SUPPOSED to already have, they can just keep doing it.
The laws exist. Most often, they are ignored. It is the attitude of,
"I am just an ordinary person" that lets it continue. They will
continue to abuse you, and others, if you _don't_ do something.
> If I could just run outside and start screaming at everyone I met on the
>street, and bang my head against every wall from here to Devore, I would still
>not be able to shake this feeling of complete helplessness.
>
>"Warflight the Wrong"
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
FBN Graphics prints specialties in small quantities at reasonable
prices. Express your interests with a Custom printed T-shirt, mug,
mousepad, or carry bag. We cheerfully print in quantities as small as
one. http://www.digiserve.com/fbngraphics/
Answer the design survey, and win a free prize.
John W. Kennedy
> There *are* lawyers, good ones, who take these cases. It's called
> Pro bono (for the good).
Short for "pro bono publico", actually.
--
John W. Kennedy
(Working from my laptop)