'Swirly Face' pedophile faces ten new charges

[spaminator]

'Swirly Face' pedophile faces ten new charges
QMI Agency
First posted: Friday, March 28, 2014 06:32 PM EDT | Updated: Friday, March 28, 2014 06:39 PM EDT
Police in B.C. laid 10 new charges on a convicted sex tourist accused of child sex offences in both Canada and Cambodia.
Christopher Paul Neil, known as "Swirly Face" for the way he digitally distorted his face in sexual abuse photos posted online, spent five years in a Thai prison after being found guilty in 2008 of molesting children in that country.
He was arrested Sept. 30, 2012 as he stepped off a plane in Vancouver, under a section of the Criminal Code pertaining to actions that can cause fear of sexual offences to persons under the age of 16.
Neil, 37, was released from custody less than a week later under strict conditions, including he not own any devices capable of accessing the Internet.
RCMP continued to investigate allegations he had raped young boys in Vietnam and Cambodia, while Vancouver police allege he has possessed and viewed child pornography since his return.
On Friday, he was charged with offences including sexual touching in Cambodia and possession of child pornography in Canada.
Neil remains in custody pending his next court appearance Monday.
An undated photo of Christopher Paul Neil taken from the Interpol web site on October 16, 2007.

'Swirly Face' pedophile faces ten new charges | Canada | News | Toronto Sun

 

[PoliticalNick]

While I despise the thought of people like this walking about the planet I am truly mortified by sections of the criminal code that allow for arrest and detention of a person based upon fear of what 'might' happen in the future or allow for prosecution of events that occurred outside of Canadian legal jurisdiction. I think it is one of those situations where it gets put forward as the end justifying the means when in reality everything about these laws is unconstitutional, undemocratic and just plain wrong.

Think for a minute of applying these standards to other laws or how some other laws are not subject to the ridiculous notions embedded in these sections. For example, how about getting fined in Canada for speeding in Belgium or having to pay another ticket here for a parking ticket in Mexico. Why do we not prosecute drug dealers in Brazil or a Canadian that murders someone in South Africa? We don't, in fact, even prosecute rapists if it occurs outside of Canadian borders.

The whole idea of arrest & jail for something that could happen in the future sounds like a sci-fi movie. Who the hell is qualified to determine the future. If we really do have someone like this then all the worlds problems can be solved real quick but I happen to believe there are no real clairvoyants or seers or fortune tellers and certainly nobody that has the skill to determine if or when a person may commit a crime. Major point here is I 'might' do 120mph on the freeway tomorrow but the govt cannot arrest me or give me a ticket for it today and that is how it should be. Whether it be a speeding ticket or the rape of a seven year old our constitution and law does not allow for prosecution based on probability of future events or events occurring outside our legal borders. Allowing legislation such as that applied to this man is the beginning of a very slippery slope I am not willing to start down.

 

[Sal]

While I despise the thought of people like this walking about the planet I am truly mortified by sections of the criminal code that allow for arrest and detention of a person based upon fear of what 'might' happen in the future or allow for prosecution of events that occurred outside of Canadian legal jurisdiction. I think it is one of those situations where it gets put forward as the end justifying the means when in reality everything about these laws is unconstitutional, undemocratic and just plain wrong.

Think for a minute of applying these standards to other laws or how some other laws are not subject to the ridiculous notions embedded in these sections. For example, how about getting fined in Canada for speeding in Belgium or having to pay another ticket here for a parking ticket in Mexico. Why do we not prosecute drug dealers in Brazil or a Canadian that murders someone in South Africa? We don't, in fact, even prosecute rapists if it occurs outside of Canadian borders.

The whole idea of arrest & jail for something that could happen in the future sounds like a sci-fi movie. Who the hell is qualified to determine the future. If we really do have someone like this then all the worlds problems can be solved real quick but I happen to believe there are no real clairvoyants or seers or fortune tellers and certainly nobody that has the skill to determine if or when a person may commit a crime. Major point here is I 'might' do 120mph on the freeway tomorrow but the govt cannot arrest me or give me a ticket for it today and that is how it should be. Whether it be a speeding ticket or the rape of a seven year old our constitution and law does not allow for prosecution based on probability of future events or events occurring outside our legal borders. Allowing legislation such as that applied to this man is the beginning of a very slippery slope I am not willing to start down.

I see your point but how should this be handled? He is a pedophile not a speeder.

 

[Goober]

While I despise the thought of people like this walking about the planet I am truly mortified by sections of the criminal code that allow for arrest and detention of a person based upon fear of what 'might' happen in the future or allow for prosecution of events that occurred outside of Canadian legal jurisdiction. I think it is one of those situations where it gets put forward as the end justifying the means when in reality everything about these laws is unconstitutional, undemocratic and just plain wrong.

Think for a minute of applying these standards to other laws or how some other laws are not subject to the ridiculous notions embedded in these sections. For example, how about getting fined in Canada for speeding in Belgium or having to pay another ticket here for a parking ticket in Mexico. Why do we not prosecute drug dealers in Brazil or a Canadian that murders someone in South Africa? We don't, in fact, even prosecute rapists if it occurs outside of Canadian borders.

The whole idea of arrest & jail for something that could happen in the future sounds like a sci-fi movie. Who the hell is qualified to determine the future. If we really do have someone like this then all the worlds problems can be solved real quick but I happen to believe there are no real clairvoyants or seers or fortune tellers and certainly nobody that has the skill to determine if or when a person may commit a crime. Major point here is I 'might' do 120mph on the freeway tomorrow but the govt cannot arrest me or give me a ticket for it today and that is how it should be. Whether it be a speeding ticket or the rape of a seven year old our constitution and law does not allow for prosecution based on probability of future events or events occurring outside our legal borders. Allowing legislation such as that applied to this man is the beginning of a very slippery slope I am not willing to start down.

He was convicted. He is a threat. There is no humane cure.He was placed on court imposed restrictions.
I see no problem with the law, same as anyone joining a terror group in another country can be charged or denied a passport.

 

[shadowshiv]

I would have loved to have seen the look on this monster's face once he realized that his oh-so-clever attempt to mask his identity failed. Toss his *** into a dark jail cell and keep him there until he starts growing moss.

He was convicted. He is a threat. There is no humane cure.He was placed on court imposed restrictions.
I see no problem with the law, same as anyone joining a terror group in another country can be charged or denied a passport.

And if the police are correct, it looks like he has looked at child porn yet again. I have no doubt that if given the opportunity he would molest more children. Hence my earlier comment.