Pedophile teacher busted


Cannuck
#121
Quote: Originally Posted by CDNBearView Post

Except for the fact that he has a cache of child porn.

And then on to mental illness...

Ya, the goal posts moved. Even after you briefly admitted to missing the part of the article, about the cache of child porn. Before editing out that refreshing moment.

The article in the OP does not mention a cache of child porn. Nice try though.
 
karrie
+2
#122
Quote: Originally Posted by CannuckView Post

The article in the OP does not mention a cache of child porn. Nice try though.

From the article.... "The cache of 400 photos being reviewed by authorities includes head shots or pictures of smiling children and other more disturbing images of children gagged or blindfolded or both, according to sources who have seen them."

In the article, the police have already stated that the pictures taken at the school never show any students in distress, and only students blindfolded. The fact is that outside of his classroom situation, he sought out those other pictures, of children. So, if you're busy thinking that he was using kids only opportunistically, then why are his other pics, of kids?
 
SLM
+1
#123
Quote: Originally Posted by DaSleeperView Post

Has anyone but me noticed that he has managed in the last two pages with the help of EAO...not only of moving the goal posts, but moved the whole argument to a different arena bjust because he wouldn't admit defeat with Karrie...

With the help of a quick edit.
 
Cannuck
#124
Quote: Originally Posted by karrieView Post

From the article.... "The cache of 400 photos being reviewed by authorities includes head shots or pictures of smiling children and other more disturbing images of children gagged or blindfolded or both, according to sources who have seen them."

In the article, the police have already stated that the pictures taken at the school never show any students in distress, and only students blindfolded. The fact is that outside of his classroom situation, he sought out those other pictures, of children. So, if you're busy thinking that he was using kids only opportunistically, then why are his other pics, of kids?

You are making assumptions. The article does not state that the photos were of different children than those that attended his class.

Is it really that difficult to wait for the facts of the case before you pass judgement on what this guy is or isn't?
 
CDNBear
+3
#125
Quote: Originally Posted by CannuckView Post

The article in the OP does not mention a cache of child porn. Nice try though.

I know you haven't the ability to grasp things, unless someone actually spells it out for you...

Quote:

The cache of 400 photos being reviewed by authorities includes head shots or pictures of smiling children and other more disturbing images of children gagged or blindfolded or both, according to sources who have seen them.

Children in bondage, is considered child porn by the courts. Hence why it's illegal.

Back to your original claims though...

Evidence was insufficient to charge teacher in '94, D.A. says - latimes.com (external - login to view)

Oh oh, fondled a girl.

Mark Berndt - L.A. NOW - latimes.com (external - login to view)

Two others? You don't say!

For someone who claims to be so concerned with facts, you sure don't like them.
 
karrie
+3
#126
Quote: Originally Posted by CannuckView Post

You are making assumptions. The article does not state that the photos were of different children than those that attended his class.

Is it really that difficult to wait for the facts of the case before you pass judgement on what this guy is or isn't?

Not one thing about my assumption is outside of the assumptions made by law. Not one thing about my assumption has been directed at stripping him of any rights. So no, I don't think, given the facts, that it's a) the wrong assumption, or b) a harmful assumption in any form.

While people have decided to attribute things to my assumption, like vigilanteism, a dislike for the mentally ill, a desire to bypass the court system and summarily sentence the guy, those are assumptions as well, and in no way applied by the fact that I've called someone who committed pretty clear pedophilic acts, a pedophile.
 
CDNBear
+1
#127
Quote: Originally Posted by karrieView Post

While people have decided to attribute things to my assumption, like vigilanteism, a dislike for the mentally ill, a desire to bypass the court system and summarily sentence the guy, those are assumptions as well, and in no way applied by the fact that I've called someone who committed pretty clear pedophilic acts, a pedophile.

cannuck's hypocrisy knows no bounds.
 
DaSleeper
#128
Quote: Originally Posted by CDNBearView Post

cannuck's hypocrisy knows no bounds.

Nothing surprising there...
 
Cannuck
#129
Quote: Originally Posted by CDNBearView Post


Back to your original claims though...

Evidence was insufficient to charge teacher in '94, D.A. says - latimes.com (external - login to view)

Oh oh, fondled a girl.

Mark Berndt - L.A. NOW - latimes.com (external - login to view)

Two others? You don't say!

For someone who claims to be so concerned with facts, you sure don't like them.

It's about time somebody posted some facts.

Quote: Originally Posted by karrieView Post

....and in no way applied by the fact that I've called someone who committed pretty clear pedophilic acts, a pedophile.

That's only because you don't understand what pedophilia is.
 
CDNBear
+3
#130
Quote: Originally Posted by CannuckView Post

It's about time somebody posted some facts.

I read all that before I made my first post. All the links were in the article in the OP.

You mean you didn't do any research before you started to comment? That was a rhetorical question, since you already edited out the part where you admitted to not seeing the part about the cache of child porn.

Quote:

That's only because you don't understand what pedophilia is.

Apparently she does. Since the teacher in the article is a pedophile, as the mounting evidence seems to show.

Poor cannuck, PWND again.
 
karrie
+1
#131
Quote: Originally Posted by CannuckView Post

It's about time somebody posted some facts.



That's only because you don't understand what pedophilia is.

I understand perfectly well the clinical bubble you're trying to apply to pedophilia. The problem is, clinical definitions don't apply to real world life a good portion of the time. Especially when it comes to human behaviour and sexual issues.
 
Cannuck
#132
Quote: Originally Posted by CDNBearView Post

I read all that before I made my first post. All the links were in the article in the OP.

You mean you didn't do any research before you started to comment? That was a rhetorical question, since you already edited out the part where you admitted to not seeing the part about the cache of child porn.

I read the links. They still don't prove the guy is a pedophile. They prove he is most likely a child molester.

Quote: Originally Posted by CDNBearView Post

Apparently she does. Since the teacher in the article is a pedophile, as the mounting evidence seems to show.

The "mounting evidence" may show it but the article in the OP certainly doesn't.
 
CDNBear
+2
#133
Quote: Originally Posted by CannuckView Post

I read the links.

Hence the fact that you missed the cache of child porn.

No wonder your so easily PWND, your reading skills are obviously below a grade 9 level.
 
Cannuck
#134
Quote: Originally Posted by CDNBearView Post

Hence the fact that you missed the cache of child porn.

No. I did not.
 
SLM
+2
#135
Quote: Originally Posted by CannuckView Post

No. I did not.

Those weren't the words I read, pre-edit.
 
CDNBear
+4
#136
Quote: Originally Posted by CannuckView Post

No. I did not.

First you admitted to Karrie, that you didn't see it (Before you dishonestly edited that out), then you claimed children in bondage, wasn't child porn.

I'm glad you now admit that children in bondage is child porn.

So we have a teacher, feeding semen to kids, with a cache of child porn, several allegations of sexual assault. It doesn't take the deductive reasoning of the fictitious Sherlock Holmes to come to the reasoned conclusion, he has a predilection for children (The cache of child porn) and acted on the opportunity provided by his position.

Oh, by the way. You just got PWND again.

Quote: Originally Posted by SLMView Post

Those weren't the words I read, pre-edit.

I have no doubt he will now deny ever having admitted he missed that part of the article.
 
SLM
#137
Quote: Originally Posted by CDNBearView Post

First you admitted to Karrie, that you didn't see it (Before you dishonestly edited that out), then you claimed children in bondage, wasn't child porn.

I'm glad you now admit that children in bondage is child porn.

So we have a teacher, feeding semen to kids, with a cache of child porn, several allegations of sexual assault. It doesn't take the deductive reasoning of the fictitious Sherlock Holmes to come to the reasoned conclusion, he has a predilection for children (The cache of child porn) and acted on the opportunity provided by his position.

Oh, by the way. You just got PWND again.

I have no doubt he will now deny ever having admitted he missed that part of the article.

Just out of curiosity, what do you think is faster? The edit function or the quote function? I've always wondered that.
 
Cannuck
#138
Quote: Originally Posted by CDNBearView Post

So we have a teacher, feeding semen to kids, with a cache of child porn, several allegations of sexual assault. It doesn't take the deductive reasoning of the fictitious Sherlock Holmes to come to the reasoned conclusion, he has a predilection for children (The cache of child porn) and acted on the opportunity provided by his position.

No, all it takes is the fictitious reasoning skills of one CB.

Do you find this picture to be pornographic?




"(CNN) -- A 21-year-old man in Chicago is charged with battery after allegedly binding his toddler's wrists, ankles and mouth with tape and posting a photo online.
Above the photo of the girl, which Andre Curry allegedly put on his Facebook page, were the words, "This is wut happens wen my baby hits me back. "
The Facebook page appears to have been taken down. But the image was picked up by other websites. The Cook County State's Attorney's Office also told CNN that the caption was with the photo on Curry's Facebook page.
Andy Conklin, a spokesman for the state's attorney's office, said the girl is 22 months old.
A public defender for Curry did not immediately return a call from CNN on Wednesday.
Curry is charged with aggravated domestic battery, Chicago police said. He appeared in court Wednesday, where bond was set at $100,000, the state's attorney's office said.
Conklin said the next court date will be December 27.
The photo at issue shows the girl with painter's tape over her mouth and binding her wrists and ankles."


You've made the claim that pictures of gagged children is child porn. You are wrong (as usual). Pictures of gagged kids may be pornographic and the may not be. This teacher may be a pedophile and he may not be. Why do you wish to make that judgement before you have all the facts
 
JLM
+1
#139
Pedophile does in fact have two shades of meaning, the Greek literal translation which means loving children, and the legal generally accepted definition in Canada which means performing sexual acts on children, the first is honourable, the second is depraved, nefarious and disgusting!
 
CDNBear
#140
Quote: Originally Posted by CannuckView Post

You've made the claim that pictures of gagged children is child porn.

And you agreed they were. So what's your beef?

Quote:

You are wrong (as usual). Pictures of gagged kids may be pornographic and the may not be.

Funny, you ask me, Why do you wish to make that judgement before you have all the facts. After you state unequivocally that I'm wrong. Right before you state that children in bondage may be pornographic. The irony in your, the sites self proclaimed champion of logical consistency, post is palpable.

When I bring up intent and context next, I guess that will just give you more ammo to ignore being called out for admitting you missed the portion of the OP describing the cache of, as you have already admitted, child porn.

This dance you do, when you are to fragile to admit your errors, is most entertaining.
 
Cannuck
#141
Quote: Originally Posted by JLMView Post

....the legal generally accepted definition in Canada which means performing sexual acts on children

No. That would be sexual assault.
 
gerryh
-1
#142
Quote: Originally Posted by CannuckView Post

I have a wife that is mentally ill. Early onset dementia, thyroid issues, the list goes on. It's been a merry-go round for 2 years trying to get her the help she needs. Everybody passes the buck. Two nights ago she grabbed he mother by the throat. Is that her fault?


No, that would be your fault for knowing her problems and what the possibilities in behaviorism might be and being neglectful in ensuring that everyone in contact with her is not safe.
 
Cannuck
#143
Quote: Originally Posted by CDNBearView Post

And you agreed they were. So what's your beef?

I haven't seen the pictures. I can't say they are pornographic. I'll leave that sort of thing to you.

Quote: Originally Posted by CDNBearView Post

Funny, you ask me, Why do you wish to make that judgement before you have all the facts. After you state unequivocally that I'm wrong.

Because you are wrong. You have made the claim that pictures of gagged kids is kiddie porn. The picture I posted is not kiddie porn. It proves your statement was false. That's a fact....or do you disagree that the picture isn't pornographic?
 
gerryh
+1
#144
is a picture of a half nakid granny in pig tails and a school girl skirt kiddie porn?
 
Cannuck
#145
Quote: Originally Posted by gerryhView Post

No, that would be your fault for knowing her problems and what the possibilities in behaviorism might be and being neglectful in ensuring that everyone in contact with her is not safe.

LOL...shows what you know. I have no control over her unless and until I am granted guardianship. That can't be done until the courts say she is a danger to herself or others. Thanks for the input though.
 
gerryh
#146
she's your wife.
 
Cannuck
#147
Quote: Originally Posted by gerryhView Post

she's your wife.

So...?
 
DaSleeper
+2
#148
Cannuck's favorite dance...

Bugs Bunny39s square dance in 39Hillbilly Hare39 best quality subtitlesmp4 - YouTube

 
gerryh
+1
#149
Quote: Originally Posted by CannuckView Post

So...?


That says so much right there.



and I know you won't know why or what.
 
Nuggler
#150
Why would a teacher be busted for teaching a pedophile?

I don't much like pedos, but they deserve an education, eh?

d'oh.

Mebee he'll further his education in prison, and we'll pay for it.

.....................so will he..............(your cell mate, fuknuts)
 

Similar Threads

0
Dozens Busted For Child Porn At Pentagon
by Stretch | Jul 25th, 2010
4
Big Bang Busted
by darkbeaver | Feb 23rd, 2008
1
Busted
by Jo Canadian | Apr 30th, 2005
26
BUSTER BUSTED
by galianomama | Mar 30th, 2005
5
Santa's helpers busted
by Col Man | Jan 6th, 2005
no new posts