Found Deceased UT - MacKenzie "Kenzie" Lueck, 23, Salt Lake City, 17 June 2019 #19 *ARREST*

Status
Not open for further replies.
  • #541
“The new charging documents show Ajayi met a woman on an unnamed dating app last year. She went to his house and had dinner with him. The sexual abuse occurred after dinner while they were watching television, the documents say.

The investigation into Lueck's death also led officials to charge Ajayi with 19 counts of sexual exploitation of a minor after investigators discovered child 🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬 on his computer.

He has not yet entered pleas to those charges.

The Salt Lake Legal Defenders Association, which has been assigned to represent Ajayi, said it does not plan to comment on the charges.”

USA Today:
Suspect in Utah student Mackenzie Lueck's death is charged in a second case
The charge in the case anyone wants to see the exact legal language on it:


76-5a-3. Sexual exploitation of a minor -- Offenses.
(1) A person is guilty of sexual exploitation of a minor:
(a) when the person knowingly produces, distributes, possesses, or possesses with intent to distribute, child 🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬; or
(b) if the person is a minor's parent or legal guardian and knowingly consents to or permits that minor to be sexually exploited under Subsection (1)(a).
(2) Sexual exploitation of a minor is a felony of the second degree.
(3) It is a separate offense under this section:
(a) for each minor depicted, and if more than one minor is depicted in the child 🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬 in violation of this section, the depiction of each individual minor in the child 🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬 is a separate offense; and
(b) each time the same minor is depicted in different child 🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬.
(4) It is an affirmative defense to a charge of violating this section that no person under 18 years of age was actually depicted in the visual depiction or used in producing or advertising the visual depiction.
 
  • #542
The charge in the case anyone wants to see the exact legal language on it:


76-5a-3. Sexual exploitation of a minor -- Offenses.
(1) A person is guilty of sexual exploitation of a minor:
(a) when the person knowingly produces, distributes, possesses, or possesses with intent to distribute, child 🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬; or
(b) if the person is a minor's parent or legal guardian and knowingly consents to or permits that minor to be sexually exploited under Subsection (1)(a).
(2) Sexual exploitation of a minor is a felony of the second degree.
(3) It is a separate offense under this section:
(a) for each minor depicted, and if more than one minor is depicted in the child 🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬 in violation of this section, the depiction of each individual minor in the child 🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬 is a separate offense; and
(b) each time the same minor is depicted in different child 🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬.
(4) It is an affirmative defense to a charge of violating this section that no person under 18 years of age was actually depicted in the visual depiction or used in producing or advertising the visual depiction.

Let me cross check this in the CP resources section and see if there’s anything additional that is noteworthy...

“76-5a-3”
Child 🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬 Resources and Information

ETA:

18 U.S.C. § 2251- Sexual Exploitation of Children
(Production of child 🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬)
18 U.S.C. § 2251A- Selling and Buying of Children
18 U.S.C. § 2252- Certain activities relating to material involving the sexual exploitation of minors
(Possession, distribution and receipt of child 🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬)
18 U.S.C. § 2252A- certain activities relating to material constituting or containing child 🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬
18 U.S.C. § 2256- Definitions
18 U.S.C. § 2260- Production of sexually explicit depictions of a minor for importation into the United States

Images of child 🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬 are not protected under First Amendment rights, and are illegal contraband under federal law. Section 2256 of Title 18, United States Code, defines child 🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬 as any visual depiction of sexually explicit conduct involving a minor (someone under 18 years of age). Visual depictions include photographs, videos, digital or computer generated images indistinguishable from an actual minor, and images created, adapted, or modified, but appear to depict an identifiable, actual minor. Undeveloped film, undeveloped videotape, and electronically stored data that can be converted into a visual image of child 🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬 are also deemed illegal visual depictions under federal law.

Notably, the legal definition of sexually explicit conduct does not require that an image depict a child engaging in sexual activity. A picture of a naked child may constitute illegal child 🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬 if it is sufficiently sexually suggestive. Additionally, the age of consent for sexual activity in a given state is irrelevant; any depiction of a minor under 18 years of age engaging in sexually explicit conduct is illegal.

Federal law prohibits the production, distribution, reception, and possession of an image of child 🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬 using or affecting any means or facility of interstate or foreign commerce (See 18 U.S.C. § 2251; 18 U.S.C. § 2252; 18 U.S.C. § 2252A). Specifically, Section 2251 makes it illegal to persuade, induce, entice, or coerce a minor to engage in sexually explicit conduct for purposes of producing visual depictions of that conduct. Any individual who attempts or conspires to commit a child 🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬 offense is also subject to prosecution under federal law.

Federal jurisdiction is implicated if the child 🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬 offense occurred in interstate or foreign commerce. This includes, for example, using the U.S. Mails or common carriers to transport child 🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬 across state or international borders. Additionally, federal jurisdiction almost always applies when the Internet is used to commit a child 🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬 violation. Even if the child 🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬 image itself did not travel across state or international borders, federal law may be implicated if the materials, such as the computer used to download the image or the CD-ROM used to store the image, originated or previously traveled in interstate or foreign commerce.

In addition, Section 2251A of Title 18, United States Code, specifically prohibits any parent, legal guardian or other person in custody or control of a minor under the age of 18, to buy, sell, or transfer custody of that minor for purposes of producing child 🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬.

Lastly, Section 2260 of Title 18, United States Code, prohibits any persons outside of the United States to knowingly produce, receive, transport, ship, or distribute child 🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬 with intent to import or transmit the visual depiction into the United States.

Any violation of federal child 🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬 law is a serious crime, and convicted offenders face severe statutory penalties. For example, a first time offender convicted of producing child 🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬 under 18 U.S.C. § 2251, face fines and a statutory minimum of 15 years to 30 years maximum in prison. A first time offender convicted of transporting child 🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬 in interstate or foreign commerce under 18 U.S.C. § 2252, faces fines and a statutory minimum of 5 years to 20 years maximum in prison. Convicted offenders may face harsher penalties if the offender has prior convictions or if the child 🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬 offense occurred in aggravated situations defined as (i) the images are violent, sadistic, or masochistic in nature, (ii) the minor was sexually abused, or (iii) the offender has prior convictions for child sexual exploitation. In these circumstances, a convicted offender may face up to life imprisonment.

It is important to note that an offender can be prosecuted under state child 🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬 laws in addition to, or instead of, federal law.”




@PommyMommy , unless I’m cross eyed (which is entirely possible), I’m seeing the “meet up” link but not “meet me”...I thought he had that too?

Update #2

Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/peagion

Email:
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]

Instagram: Ayoola (@peagion) • Instagram photos and videos

YouTube: Ayoola Ajayi, courtesy of @SeattleStew

MEETUP: Ayoola A. - Utah Outdoors (Salt Lake City, UT) | Meetup, courtesy of @ZZbball22

Pinterest: Ajayi Ayoola (peagion), courtesy of @diggndeeperstill

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/ayoola-ajayi-937037110/
Resume from LinkedIn: my-resume

VENMO: Yellow Flowers, courtesy of @MFH

Forge Identity: | ICANN WHOIS, courtesy of @ZoriahNZ

Geeks Online LLC: Entity Details: GEEKS ONLINE LLC - Utah Business Search - Utah.gov, courtesy of @CatsMeoww

BBB: Geeks Online, LLC | Better Business Bureau® Profile, courtesy of @bodester413


Coursehero: Assignment 3 Ayoola Ajayi - 1 Mirror Lake in Utah Geological Feature Report Ayoola Ajayi Utah State university 2 Abstract 10,400 feet long elevation | Course Hero, courtesy of @CatsMeoww

Modeling: Ayoola Ajayi - a model from United States

Model Mayhem: pigion, courtesy of @24Brix

His book: Ayoola Ajayi

MYSPACE: Ayoola ajayi Adisa (humble88) on Myspace, courtesy of @diggndeeperstill

Gaming: Team Nightmares - Liquipedia - The StarCraft II Encyclopedia, courtesy of @kiaatcher

Starcraft II thread started by AA:https://us.battle.net/forums/en/sc2/topic/2878488630?page=1, courtesy of @Kadoober

Starcraft II (where email is given):https://us.battle.net/forums/en/sc2/topic/628236185?page=1, courtesy of @Kadoober

Movato: https://www.movoto.com/salt-lake-ci...KfppFbZhP5twe0-vBW2VMApPLQmGCYH0#popphotoview, courtesy of @gliving

Mattress: https://us.letgo.com/en/i/product_ad8c021c-34c6-498a-b5de-a47e1ec57147
Box Springs: Facebook Marketplace: Queen bed box spring - Furniture - Salt Lake City, Utah

Defunct domain names registered in 2014: Webmaster: Ayoola Ajayi in Logan, UT, courtesy of @Kadoober

Quick Dry Work Authorization:https://blackwaterbilling.com/webpages/upload/wo_file_04-12-2019_0242pm.pdf, courtesy of @Gardener1850

—-
ETA: Maybe this male victim idea is totally out there and maybe he meant bisexuality as far as females being bisexual...idk.

Whatever the case I think I’m done with the whole AA thing. Pass the brain bleach.

Who knows what else he’s done. And yes we do say this in every thread because well, it seems applicable most of the time.

This monster is a savage beast and I doubt anyone is really safe around him, young, old, male, female, whatever, moo.

The CP charges really add another extremely troubling layer imo.
 
Last edited:
  • #543
Let me cross check this in the CP resources section and see if there’s anything additional that is noteworthy...

“76-5a-3”
Child 🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬 Resources and Information

ETA:

18 U.S.C. § 2251- Sexual Exploitation of Children
(Production of child 🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬)
18 U.S.C. § 2251A- Selling and Buying of Children
18 U.S.C. § 2252- Certain activities relating to material involving the sexual exploitation of minors
(Possession, distribution and receipt of child 🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬)
18 U.S.C. § 2252A- certain activities relating to material constituting or containing child 🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬
18 U.S.C. § 2256- Definitions
18 U.S.C. § 2260- Production of sexually explicit depictions of a minor for importation into the United States

Images of child 🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬 are not protected under First Amendment rights, and are illegal contraband under federal law. Section 2256 of Title 18, United States Code, defines child 🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬 as any visual depiction of sexually explicit conduct involving a minor (someone under 18 years of age). Visual depictions include photographs, videos, digital or computer generated images indistinguishable from an actual minor, and images created, adapted, or modified, but appear to depict an identifiable, actual minor. Undeveloped film, undeveloped videotape, and electronically stored data that can be converted into a visual image of child 🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬 are also deemed illegal visual depictions under federal law.

Notably, the legal definition of sexually explicit conduct does not require that an image depict a child engaging in sexual activity. A picture of a naked child may constitute illegal child 🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬 if it is sufficiently sexually suggestive. Additionally, the age of consent for sexual activity in a given state is irrelevant; any depiction of a minor under 18 years of age engaging in sexually explicit conduct is illegal.

Federal law prohibits the production, distribution, reception, and possession of an image of child 🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬 using or affecting any means or facility of interstate or foreign commerce (See 18 U.S.C. § 2251; 18 U.S.C. § 2252; 18 U.S.C. § 2252A). Specifically, Section 2251 makes it illegal to persuade, induce, entice, or coerce a minor to engage in sexually explicit conduct for purposes of producing visual depictions of that conduct. Any individual who attempts or conspires to commit a child 🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬 offense is also subject to prosecution under federal law.

Federal jurisdiction is implicated if the child 🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬 offense occurred in interstate or foreign commerce. This includes, for example, using the U.S. Mails or common carriers to transport child 🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬 across state or international borders. Additionally, federal jurisdiction almost always applies when the Internet is used to commit a child 🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬 violation. Even if the child 🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬 image itself did not travel across state or international borders, federal law may be implicated if the materials, such as the computer used to download the image or the CD-ROM used to store the image, originated or previously traveled in interstate or foreign commerce.

In addition, Section 2251A of Title 18, United States Code, specifically prohibits any parent, legal guardian or other person in custody or control of a minor under the age of 18, to buy, sell, or transfer custody of that minor for purposes of producing child 🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬.

Lastly, Section 2260 of Title 18, United States Code, prohibits any persons outside of the United States to knowingly produce, receive, transport, ship, or distribute child 🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬 with intent to import or transmit the visual depiction into the United States.

Any violation of federal child 🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬 law is a serious crime, and convicted offenders face severe statutory penalties. For example, a first time offender convicted of producing child 🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬 under 18 U.S.C. § 2251, face fines and a statutory minimum of 15 years to 30 years maximum in prison. A first time offender convicted of transporting child 🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬 in interstate or foreign commerce under 18 U.S.C. § 2252, faces fines and a statutory minimum of 5 years to 20 years maximum in prison. Convicted offenders may face harsher penalties if the offender has prior convictions or if the child 🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬 offense occurred in aggravated situations defined as (i) the images are violent, sadistic, or masochistic in nature, (ii) the minor was sexually abused, or (iii) the offender has prior convictions for child sexual exploitation. In these circumstances, a convicted offender may face up to life imprisonment.

It is important to note that an offender can be prosecuted under state child 🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬 laws in addition to, or instead of, federal law.”




@PommyMommy , unless I’m cross eyed (which is entirely possible), I’m seeing the “meet up” link but not “meet me”...I thought he had that too?



—-
ETA: Maybe this male thing is totally out there and maybe he meant bisexuality as far as females being gay...idk.

Whatever the case I think I’m done with whole AA thing. Pass the brain bleach.

Who knows what else he’s done. And yes we do say this in every thread because well, it seems applicable most of the time.

This monster is a savage beast and I doubt anyone is really safe around him, young, old, male, female, whatever, moo.

The CP charges really add another extremely troubling layer imo.
Well if memory serves I recall reading that a few of the images showcased a young girl and boy engaging in acts as well as the others involving a young girl and an adult man. So there appears to have been a young boy in at least a few of the pictures if I read the original charging explanation correctly.
 
  • #544
Well if memory serves I recall reading that a few of the images showcased a young girl and boy engaging in acts as well as the others involving a young girl and an adult man. So there appears to have been a young boy in at least a few of the pictures if I read the original charging explanation correctly.

Hmmmm...
 
  • #545
Here is the section I am referring to. I apologize for the size of the text as I am pulling this from a public document and it is small.
***WARNING - GRAPHIC***
 

Attachments

  • KL12A.png
    KL12A.png
    10.4 KB · Views: 81
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #546
Has he left any children in the path of his “abuse”? Ugh.

Imo this isn’t something you download/distribute unless you’re reaaaallly interested it. Even if you’re “making money” off it. Moo.

Sick.
 
  • #547
Has he left any children in the path of his “abuse”? Ugh.

Imo this isn’t something you download unless you’re reaaaallly interested it. Even if you’re “making money” off it. Moo.

Sick.
Speculation: Opinions on this differ from person to person at moment as the data is limited but I personally believe he was making it.
 
  • #548
The situation may appear more openly toxic now, because women are speaking out in increasing numbers and their abusers try to defend their own behavior by attacking the women's. But the silencing then, the pressure not to rock the boat or let anyone know damaging things had been done to you by social peers or authority figures, the internalizing by women of the need to self-police and self-blame instead of understanding that forced intimacy is assault and assault is always a crime, was absolutely suffocating.

Truer words about the whole #MeToo movement have never been spoken. I'll add that some men are livid that women are speaking out. The vitriol toward outspoken females explodes on social media. These males obviously think some sort of unspoken social contract has been broken.

You know what? Predatory men are 100% correct to think their privileges are under attack. Their raptorial behavior only survives if the victims remain silent, when they don't - the men lose the "rape-y privilege."
 
  • #549
There’s something about this, the “biting”, that reminds me of another killer/case, but I can’t put my figure on it right now.
Bundy?
 
  • #550
Speculation: Opinions on this differ from person to person at moment as the data is limited but I personally believe he was making it.

Serious, serious business.

If so, Mspionage (great name btw), how might he have actually gone about it? Grrr, I can’t explain what I’m asking, I think I’m asking if and how he could have had direct access to children. Yes we know he had the air bnb there...

This inspires another thought, which is “birds of a feather”, specifically as related to CP. Often these guys “congregate”, for lack of a better term..bring kids over..I guess what I’m getting at is if this is the case, he may have had “associates” or “alliances”, which may or may not be evident by his cell / computer records. I would think one might use a burner phone for such activities, but we know this guy was a dope with his phone at the park...we do of course know about the dark web.

Shudder.

ETA:
O/T I just saw something the other day. It was an interview with an LE who works the cyber CP side...his eyes, they seemed to have a hardness that said “oh the awful things I’ve seen...”
 
Last edited:
  • #551
Well if memory serves I recall reading that a few of the images showcased a young girl and boy engaging in acts as well as the others involving a young girl and an adult man. So there appears to have been a young boy in at least a few of the pictures if I read the original charging explanation correctly.
One image. MOO
 
  • #552
One image. MOO
I can show them all if you want. I just didn't want to as it is disturbing and may upset some people. I can definitely show it all though if you/others wish. I will just place a trigger warning first.
 
  • #553
I can show them all if you want. I just didn't want to as it is disturbing and may upset some people. I can definitely show it all though if you/others wish. I will just place a trigger warning first.

Show the images?? No, please don’t. Thanks for asking. :(
 
  • #554
I can show them all if you want. I just didn't want to as it is disturbing and may upset some people. I can definitely show it all though if you/others wish. I will just place a trigger warning first.
No images, please. Thank you.....moo
 
  • #555
I can show them all if you want. I just didn't want to as it is disturbing and may upset some people. I can definitely show it all though if you/others wish. I will just place a trigger warning first.
There is one image of a young girl and a boy. The others that involve males are adult males. MOO
 
  • #556
There is one image of a young girl and a boy. The others that involve males are adult males. MOO

Dear God, surely they didn’t release those images? As I said I missed a lot of that discussion...those were available via public record or what? :eek:
 
  • #557
Why would she have lied?
If she wanted 15 minutes of fame, she could have said anything.

I agree with you; but then again, I didn't say/speculate it myself. At least a handful of WebSleuthers on prior threads seemed to think it. So I can't say/guess why they would think such a thing in the context.
 
  • #558
Dear God, surely they didn’t release those images? As I said I missed a lot of that discussion...those were available via public record or what? :eek:
No, I think the OP meant show the rest of the charges that involve males. MOO
 
  • #559
  • #560
Dear God, surely they didn’t release those images? As I said I missed a lot of that discussion...those were available via public record or what? :eek:

No. The images were verbally described in an exhibit (?) or similar, to one of the documents provided by FOIA, where people (paraphrase) were saying "for God's sake whatever you do, don't look at the full version and read the description of the perversions".
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Staff online

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
114
Guests online
2,539
Total visitors
2,653

Forum statistics

Threads
632,727
Messages
18,630,993
Members
243,274
Latest member
WickedGlow
Back
Top