2011.02.24 Deviant images & *advertiser censored* found on a computer and memory stick

[Baxter]

I just posted on the BD reaction thread, that you can view memory stick photos, via playstation.


http://us.playstation.com/support/answer/index.htm?a_id=438

 

[LetItBe]

This is extremely graphic, if one doesn't want to know detailed information do not click the link.

I wonder where their collection rests on the Copine Scale? Will we ever know?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copine_scale

Thanks but I don't want to click. It may answer my question though. Does it?

 

[passionflower]

wondering if BD herself had been sexully abused?
and brain washed to think it is perfectly alright?
BD mom had her awfully young and BD had her son awfully young.
Is there a pattern?
Any shrinks here?
Once you are a certain age, it's ok?
and fun to take everything to the next level+

 

[Knox]

"It's definitely a shock," said Dunn, adding, "I've talked to him [Adkins] about it a little bit and I'll talk to Shawn a little more [later]."


"Of course, he didn't put anything like that on there," insists Dunn about the *advertiser censored* accusations.

http://bigcountryhomepage.com/fulltext/?nxd_id=346806


A "little" bit again. Well BD, I bet someone is going to jail for a "little bit". And I'm not talking about ur Mom.

Odd the way she framed that sentence. "I've talked to him about it a little bit and I'll talk to Shawn a little more later".

Almost sounds like him and Shawn are two different people? Guess it's just Billie-speak?

 

[Quiche]

Thanks but I don't want to click. It may answer my question though. Does it?

No, I don't think it does. The scale doesn't distinguish ages, only the type.

 

[hollyblue]

The question is: Why didn't she/they get rid of it before the cops showed up?

Doesn't make sense.

It bothers me that LE said there were no pictures of HD on the computer....and left out the stick and CD-R. What ever is on them could have come from their use of a camera/video or somebody else.

This investigation has now split into two major ones. Hailey and child *advertiser censored*.

I'm getting sick and tired of her BS.....c'mon BD tell LE EVERYTHING you can possible think of....everything.....otherwise, I hope you swing both ways and since it will prolly be a charge on child *advertiser censored*.....not a smooth lap dance. The biggest and "ugliest" will be your only choice as protector. :woohoo: Think about it...... I'm with MK, your not a dufus, you better start showing those street smarts girl.

Not nice, but that's the way I feel right now. :maddening:

Where's Hailey?

 

[grandmaj]

I am not confident that there was never a computer in the Billie Dunn household. I'm not buying it with all of this technology that has been discussed over and over. I wonder if some things were removed from the home before LE was called. And things forgotten like the memory card and CD?

 

[Quiche]

I believe BD thought she was above being searched. jmo

 

[Gardenlady]

Snipped...

I really don't know how to ask this so I guess I'll just blurt it out. I often hear in the news about child *advertiser censored* being found on someone's computer. Is this child *advertiser censored* of like 15 years of age and the child looked like they were 20 and someone inadvertently stumbled on a site because they were looking for adult *advertiser censored*? Or is this 6 year olds who when you see there is no mistaking the obvious? Do they actually like google images "child *advertiser censored*"? I hope I have worded my question right. The whole thing is disgusting. Why, why, why? Why not just be satisfied with looking at adult *advertiser censored* if the person is into that kind of thing. I just don't understand anyone doing that? UGH.

I've wondered that too. Are they images of adult women (18+) who look and are posed like physically mature teens, or posed like Lolitas? Or are we talking physically immature, pre-pubescent children? I think there's a difference between the two, in terms of deviance, and in terms of whether or not the *advertiser censored* has to do with HDs disappearance. If SA is into late-teen girls, then he's in a very large group of men out there (just look at all those 'college girls gone wild!' DVDs that I see advertised late night on cable, when I can't sleep! There is a reason that the guy who started the whole girls gone wild franchise is a very rich man). But if SA is into young children, and that is the type of child *advertiser censored* he has, then that is so many levels of deviant and wrong and disgusting, and is a completely different story.

IMO - the fact that he's got what they're terming "child *advertiser censored*", plus bestiality, and they're using the word "deviant", I'm going to guess that it is younger children he has *advertiser censored* of, and he's not just a guy who likes 17/18 year old, physically mature young women, KWIM? Just my guess though. Last night on NG, JC said that LE will not say what types of pictures these are, exactly.

So I guess that is my long winded way of saying, in answer to your question, tha we don't know yet what types of child *advertiser censored* they are, and LE isn't saying.

 

[belimom]

I am not confident that there was never a computer in the Billie Dunn household. I'm not buying it with all of this technology that has been discussed over and over. I wonder if some things were removed from the home before LE was called. And things forgotten like the memory card and CD?

You know, there may have been other evidence of a computer having been in the home that LE found -- software, power adapters, cables, etc. I wonder now if that's one of the things they were looking for in the dump.

 

[Knox]

I am not confident that there was never a computer in the Billie Dunn household. I'm not buying it with all of this technology that has been discussed over and over. I wonder if some things were removed from the home before LE was called. And things forgotten like the memory card and CD?

I am right there with you, speculating it was a Laptop!! Also wondering if this isn't what they are looking for at one of the Landfills. I guess DD could answer that that question for LE though right? Or was it a super secret laptop and always left in the *bedroom*?

 

[LetItBe]

Thank you so much GardenLady. I am so glad I'm not the only one. I don't feel so stupid now. You said what I was trying to say but much better.

 

[mmmagique]

I truly feel sick at my stomach. I don't have any doubt left in me that she was not involved.....none. She's a very disturbed individual.

All imo.

Bean, I've seen that defiant expression ever since the NG days.

I've always seen her look as kind of clueless and flat. At first I blamed the flat affect to drugs and/or shock.

I'm now attributing it to a much more sinister psychological trait.

 

[cluciano63]

I don't see how Billie met SA on MS if she did not have a computer. Most libraries have MS blocked; I doubt she could have trolled MS at work that often, especially a few years ago when she was possibly still a nurse? It does not add up. Maybe they did not pay for internet but I believe there was a computer in that house until recently. As for not getting rid of the memory stick, they either forgot about it or never imagined LE searching every inch of their house.

 

[noneareworthy]

I was under the impression it was a laptop...did anyone go back and look at the affadavit??
My guess is LE orginally got it by asking the standard question about what computers HD had access to. Before thinking it through, someone responded with that one. Which is probably why, a few days later, SA's mother went down asking for it back.

 

[lonetraveler]

You know, there may have been other evidence of a computer having been in the home that LE found -- software, power adapters, cables, etc. I wonder now if that's one of the things they were looking for in the dump.

That's what I was thinking too.

 

[noneareworthy]

I'm also thinking they now have enough to search BD's computer at work on the kiddie *advertiser censored* case (where they didn't with the HD case).

 

[mmmagique]

I haven't read this entire thread. I am very saddened to hear about the child *advertiser censored* being found on the computer. Very sick and disgusting to say the least. I am not knowledgeable in the *advertiser censored* area and I hate to ask a dumb question but I don't know how that stuff works so here it goes.......

I really don't know how to ask this so I guess I'll just blurt it out. I often hear in the news about child *advertiser censored* being found on someone's computer. Is this child *advertiser censored* of like 15 years of age and the child looked like they were 20 and someone inadvertently stumbled on a site because they were looking for adult *advertiser censored*? Or is this 6 year olds who when you see there is no mistaking the obvious? Do they actually like google images "child *advertiser censored*"? I hope I have worded my question right. The whole thing is disgusting. Why, why, why? Why not just be satisfied with looking at adult *advertiser censored* if the person is into that kind of thing. I just don't understand anyone doing that? UGH.

The 2257 laws (which aren't always followed of course) require that anyone who has a site with adult images keep records of a driver's license or other legitimate proof of id and age of the model, and a model's release that states in part that they were 18 or older at the time of the shoot. It's best if you actually have a picture of the model holding the signed release, but it's not necessary)

All of that is leading up to; a lot of men like young looking girls. And many 18 year olds can be made up to look quite young. (shockingly so, imo) So, for people who follow 2257 laws, they will be young women made up to look younger. I don't think the men who are looking for these things are interested in looking at underage children who are made up to look of age. (does that make sense?)

But of course, there are also evil, sick vile people who do unspeakable evil to small children. I don't know where to find those type of images, nor do I ever want to see them (and God bless the police officers who have to look at them in the course of their work)

 

[sorrell skye]

With the volume of images - over 108,000 - I suspect distribution, and I wouldn't be surprised if LE & the DA are suspecting the same.

According to the Texas Penal Code, if there are 6 or more identical images, that constitutes intent to distribute, and is a 2nd degree felony (whereas possession, I believe, is a 3rd degree felony), as well as possibly a federal crime if the images were distributed/transported across state lines. Since the internet is involved, it's more than likely transport across state lines occurred.

I think investigators will try to bring the maximum charges possible with regards to the *advertiser censored*. It's likely the FBI has been called in to assist with the investigation.

It's like if the DEA busts someone with a kilo of pot - that person can be charged with drug trafficking, especially if that person also possesses a scale & other paraphernalia. A kilo of pot is not for personal use, no matter how much of a pothead someone might be.

IMO, 108,000+ images of perverse illegal *advertiser censored* is NOT for personal use. Ugh.

In addition, I believe each image constitutes 1 count. When the number is tallied, there could be charges of 1,000s of counts of illegal *advertiser censored* possession and/or distribution (depending on how many of those images are child *advertiser censored*).

It goes without saying that child *advertiser censored* is one of the most vile, despicable crimes against humanity.

Yet, there sits Billie with her doe eyes, "in the dark", pretending to not know what all the outrage is about.

 

[debloree]

A man near my area last year. One of his closest friends told me he'd never do something like that. Just goes to show you never know what secrets people hide.

I've delted his name and used initials. I don't know what is allowed to be posted Mods? But it may help explain how peer to peer *advertiser censored* images are shared over the internet.
Very sickening IMO.

,*advertiser censored* Freak Sentenced

CLEVELAND - Cuyahoga County Prosecutor Bill Mason, Chair of the Ohio ICAC Task Force, announced that VKL., 51, of Ohio, was sentenced to 10 years in prison for making 486 images of child *advertiser censored* available for trading on the internet. Union County Prosecutor David Phillips' Office, an Ohio ICAC member, prosecuted the case.

The investigation began in 2008, when an ICAC investigator of the Cuyahoga County Prosecutor's Office identified child *advertiser censored* being traded on the internet. Utilizing peer to peer investigative techniques, the ICAC investigator located an IP address with known child *advertiser censored*. Subpoenaed information returned VKL's home address .

Police Department, who executed a search warrant at his home. The Bureau of Criminal Investigation conducted a forensic examination of VLK's computer and found 486 videos/photos of child *advertiser censored* involving children between the ages of 4 and 14. Additionally, chat logs from his computer showed Kirian portraying himself as a 16-year-old boy on-line in order to contact other teens. One teen had sent Kirian a lock of her hair.

http://www.woio.com/Global/story.asp?S=12054249