2011.02.24 Deviant images & 🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬 found on a computer and memory stick

[Velouria]

Ya know.....it just dawned on me. It's pretty stoopid to be going to speak at a child "trafficking" rally, the same week it is released that child was found in your home. The two go hand in hand........She has a way of pointing the finger at herself doesn't she?

Sure does. Reminds me of that saying about pointing the finger and having three fingers pointing back at you...

On the other hand, perhaps BD really should be speaking at the child trafficking rally. She may just know a whooooole lot more about the subject than we'd given her credit for.

 

[Truthwillsetufree]

I think that statement was made to let them know it could happen at any minute...make em' squirm kinda thing. And the funny thing is, it was found in THEIR bedroom, both of them should have the RSO label attached. Ya can't defend that, there's no defending child . There is no way he had a memory stick and she didn't know what was on it. No way. They seem to have a jealous type relationship, they knew everything each other did. IMO.

Agree with ya. The way things work where I live even if you are riding in a car with some friends and ya'll get pulled over for whatever reason and there are drugs in the car...everybody
goes to jail. I don't think child and beastiality on a stick should be any different.

 

[BeanE]

I don't get it either -- Texas is supposed to be a kick-arss state (death penalty and all). Why are they wrapping these 2 in cotton-wool?

:waitasec:

Mel

They're not. They don't arrest until they can charge. They don't charge until the DA feels he has enough evidence to win at trial.

They have to prove who downloaded the images. It takes a lot of time to nail that down, because multiple people typically access a single computer. They can't even say it was this person's userid that downloaded them, therefore it's this person, because people share (and steal and hack) passwords. They have to get proof that the person was the only person who could have been on the computer at the times the images were downloaded.

 

[Velouria]

I wonder how long before she makes some kind of 'statement' in response. ?

Bring it on.

Notice how every time BD makes one of her big announcements, LE comes roaring back with a real jaw-dropper?

 

[CN2Souls]

I our state.

Possessing, distributing, transmitting and manfacturing child are all illegal in the State of Florida and are third degree felonies covered under Florida Statutes 847.0135, 847.0138 and 827.071.

 

[katydid23]

They're not. They don't arrest until they can charge. They don't charge until the DA feels he has enough evidence to win at trial.

They have to prove who downloaded the images. It takes a lot of time to nail that down, because multiple people typically access a single computer. They can't even say it was this person's userid that downloaded them, therefore it's this person, because people share (and steal and hack) passwords. They have to get proof that the person was the only person who could have been on the computer at the times the images were downloaded.

That might be one reason he liked using the 'family' computer. If this was on his personal laptop he would be in jail already. By using mom's, he can blame her bf or his uncle or brother. Lots of wiggle room.
The memory stick, same thing. Can't prove who transferred it. They can blame it on anyone.

 

[BeanE]

Oops there goes another rubber tree plant, she had high hopes, high hopes.

Morning teh...She's going down down down in that burning ring of fire.

I wonder what else they found on that puter...eh?

I'm wondering what they found on that CD that was behind movies or something in the bedroom.

 

[BeanE]

I wonder how long before she makes some kind of 'statement' in response. ?

I keep checking to see if she cancels that lil web chat on Monday lol.

 

[Blue Eyed Chick]

I'm sure that they were holding the memory stick for a friend. A friend that is mysteriously missing.

 

[Melanie]

They're not. They don't arrest until they can charge. They don't charge until the DA feels he has enough evidence to win at trial.

They have to prove who downloaded the images. It takes a lot of time to nail that down, because multiple people typically access a single computer. They can't even say it was this person's userid that downloaded them, therefore it's this person, because people share (and steal and hack) passwords. They have to get proof that the person was the only person who could have been on the computer at the times the images were downloaded.

I'm yappin on about possession. You don't have to figure out who downloaded it or when. If it's in your dresser drawer and if LE can conclude that BJD knew about it then she should be charged. Of course BJD is gonna say "occifer I had no idea that was there" -- but she was in possession. If it was in her panty drawer, that doesn't put her in a good light. Again, I don't know if it was in her panty drawer or not. In TX you only have to knowingly possess. Wonder if her fingerprints are on it? All questions that have to be answered I guess.

MOO

Mel

(1) the person knowingly or intentionally possesses
visual material that visually depicts a child younger than 18 years
of age at the time the image of the child was made who is engaging in
sexual conduct.

 

[Truthwillsetufree]

It is certainly illegal. The fact that he has not been arrested yet makes me wonder f they were maybe hoping that if they let him be free to go about his business that maybe he would mess up. I think they are wanting to find Hailey, and until they do, they are putting him on hold. IMO

If he tried to get on a plane and leave the country, or tried to drive over into Mexico, he would be arrested imo.

BBM- SA would't last 24 hours in Mexico...he would be calling The Texas Rangers to come and get him. Survival in Mexico takes a certain kind of man and SA isn't it. IMO SA doesn't have the b*lls to run for the border, he is a bully in his little circle of the world, intimidating women, children and apparantly animals. In his short stint as an adult he just hasn't ran across the type of man who will in fact put him in his place so to speak. I do think his time is comin'.

 

[Peliman]

[Snipped]

Why would it need to go to a grand jury? Child is against the law regardless of how you look at it. I want to know why arrests haven't been made! They found this in early January?

Without disclosing what her defense could be, think elements of a crime and what needs proved to bring a case that sticks.

 

[SoSueMe]

I our state.

Possessing, distributing, transmitting and manfacturing child are all illegal in the State of Florida and are third degree felonies covered under Florida Statutes 847.0135, 847.0138 and 827.071.

EXACTLY! Possession!

 

[CN2Souls]

I'm yappin on about possession. You don't have to figure out who downloaded it or when. If it's in your dresser drawer and if LE can conclude that BJD knew about it then she should be charged. Of course BJD is gonna say "occifer I had no idea that was there" -- but she was in possession. If it was in her panty drawer, that doesn't put her in a good light. Again, I don't know if it was in her panty drawer or not. In TX you only have to knowingly possess. Wonder if her fingerprints are on it? All questions that have to be answered I guess.

MOO

Mel

(1) the person knowingly or intentionally possesses
visual material that visually depicts a child younger than 18 years
of age at the time the image of the child was made who is engaging in
sexual conduct.

Yes Mel,
Possession in this state is inferred to the home owner.

Any CD, DVD, Memory Sticks, Flash Drives and Literature is all inferred to the home owner.

Especially if it is in her Panty Drawer...

And didn't BD say it was HER HOUSE.

 

[SoSueMe]

Without disclosing what her defense could be, think elements of a crime and what needs proved to bring a case that sticks.

Oh please Peliman, I'm too angry to think that hard this morning. LOL

Possession is all I'm looking at right now. I would think initially, they would both be culpable. Arrest them both and see who flips? Since they found the same type of photos on his mother's computer, I would think SA would be the better candidate for an arrest that would stick.

 

[Melanie]

EXACTLY! Possession!

Yuppers, but we all know she's gonna fake knowing anything about it (a true Gone with the Wind moment).

Just like acknowledging they liked horror movies (but inserted - we watched comedy movies too).

Well now we know what else they also liked to watch!

MOO

Mel

 

[Melanie]

Yes Mel,
Possession in this state is inferred to the home owner.

Any CD, DVD, Memory Sticks, Flash Drives and Literature is all inferred to the home owner.

Especially if it is in her Panty Drawer...

And didn't BD say it was HER HOUSE.

:floorlaugh:

Oh you got me there. She sure says "her house", "her couch", "her living room" "her daughter".

She sure is a possessive little thang isn't she.

Mel

 

[ThoughtFox]

With what we know, you may now consider it "that big of a deal".

Almost 109,000 images and videos depicting "deviant acts" and were found on a computer and memory stick confiscated in the investigating of the disappearance of Colorado City teenager Hailey Dunn...

The Dell Inspiron 530 computer contained "approximately 108,498 pictures depicting deviant acts," ...

A memory stick confiscated from a dresser in the master bedroom of the Dunn residence in Colorado City was found to contain "320 images and videos of a pornographic nature."

Both the computer and the memory stick contain images depicting bestiality and child , said Mitchell County Sheriff Patrick Toombs.

http://www.reporternews.com/news/20...und-computer-mother-suspect-case/?partner=RSS

For me, it's a huge deal. :cow:

Here's what strikes me as amazing.

Let's assume that each picture counts as one "file" in that computer.

I have a computer with a large memory and I run virus and malware scans all the time that "count" the files inside my computer. This is the only computer we have, and it holds ALL of our family photos, artwork, music files, game files, documents, gadgets, program files, plus whatever runs the computer.

On a complete scan, it finds about 400,000 files.

If SA's mother's computer has the same memory as my computer, then One-Fourth of her computer was filled with images! One Fourth!

On a quick scan, my anti-virus searches through about 200,000 files that include pictures from the internet, temporary files, etc.

So . . . if SA's pictures weren't even downloaded and came just from the Internet Cache, that would be HALF of his internet files came from .

That is flippin' incredible to me. That's a staggering amount even for someone addicted to .

 

[SoSueMe]

I've steadfastly defended BD as someone who wants to stand by her man and refuses to believe SA is involved in Hailey's disappearance. I still believe that, but now I want to see what she does now that this information is out there.

If she didn't know about the child before, she d@rn sure knows about it now! Are you still going to stand by this deviant Billie?

Can I call him a deviant? I don't want to get a TO.

 

[Truthwillsetufree]

They're not. They don't arrest until they can charge. They don't charge until the DA feels he has enough evidence to win at trial.

They have to prove who downloaded the images. It takes a lot of time to nail that down, because multiple people typically access a single computer. They can't even say it was this person's userid that downloaded them, therefore it's this person, because people share (and steal and hack) passwords. They have to get proof that the person was the only person who could have been on the computer at the times the images were downloaded.

Yep, and that takes time and in this case I'm sure LE want ever T crossed and every I dotted.