Man who wrote 'how-to' for pedophiles arrested

C

Cancel 2018. 3

<-- sched 2, MJ sched 1
Man who wrote 'how-to' for pedophiles arrested

The man behind a controversial book considered a "how-to" guide for pedophiles was arrested in Colorado, officials in Florida said Monday.

"You cannot engage or depict children in a harmful relationship," said Polk County, Florida, Sheriff Grady Judd as he described the Florida obscenity statute that officials used to charge Philip Greaves with distribution of obscene material depicting minors engaged in harmful conduct.

The self-published author was arrested in Pueblo, Colorado, on a Florida felony warrant after undercover detectives in Polk County purchased and received a copy of the book through the mail. He will have to be extradited to Florida to face charges.

http://www.cnn.com/2010/CRIME/12/20/florida.obscenity.arrest/index.html?hpt=T1

what a sick perv...i hope he gets convicted and they throw the key away

if someone uses his book to conduct pedophilia, he should get charged with that crime as well
 
The Constitution said:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Click to expand...

.
 
Here's a question: Did we arrest the dude who wrote the Anarchist's Cookbook that taught many terrorists to build bombs?
 
Damocles said:
Here's a question: Did we arrest the dude who wrote the Anarchist's Cookbook that taught many terrorists to build bombs?
Click to expand...

no (i have a copy) - however, it states in the foreword that a person should not try the various things unless they understood chemistry, like what coal extract you combine with nitroglycerin to make trinitrotoluene (TNT)

or how do you convert serpentine powder to black powder

or how to make nitroglycerin

if your knowledge of chemistry is weak or you forget certain facts, you are likely to blow yourself up :)
 
As much as I think the topic of the book is disgusting, I have to say that I do not agree with you Yurt.

The guy seems to be a sick pervert to me, as well, but I have not read the book. That opinion is only based upon the title of the book, so I have no real basis upon which to come up with it.

But, let us just say the man is a sick pervert. And let's just say that I agree the book never should have been written in the first place. If I believe in the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, it seems to me that I have to be willing to defend the rights of people that I do not like to say or write things that I do not agree with nor like.

The example of the book mentioned above giving instructions on how to build bombs is another example that I do not agree with yet support the author's right to write the book.

Should these books be burned? If so, what other books should be burned? Who makes the decision as to whether or not they should be burned?

It does go both ways as well. Remember a few years ago... heck, now that I think about it, RICO was signed under Clinton I believe, pro-choice activists were attempting to get members of Operation Rescue and other pro-life advocates arrested and charged with inciting the murders of abortionists.

Should information by Operation Rescue be burned? After all, many people think that information incites criminals to action as well.

My personal opinion is "burn the sick pervert's books", but then where will I turn when they come to burn my books? I understand that you said nothing at all about "burning books", but the theme of your OP seems to be that this pervert should never have been allowed to write what he did. Hopefully, this is still the land of the free. If the book is used by others to commit crimes, that is not the fault of the author of the book. If I buy a book entitled, "How to Sky Dive" and decide after reading the book once that I am an expert sky diver, I pack my own chute and then go sky diving, but the chute does not open, is that the fault of the author of the book?

And one more thing, in the hands of law enforcement, those books might just be used to solve a crime or two.

Immie
 
this 'arrest' is a farce. This community knows it can't ban the book because of the 1st Amendment, so they'll use 'obscenity' as their excuse to punish someone from another state for writing/publishing a book whose content they find unpleasant.
 
a book on how to make bombs legal or otherwise is wholly different from a book that on how to commit a horrific crime and get away with it. he is not writing a book about the ingredients for pedophilia, he is writing a book on how to molest children, even under the 13 i believe and how to evade capture. free speech is not limitless, you can't yell fire in a crowded theater nor can one limitless publish child pornography. in this case, imo, we need to consider the issue under obscenity analysis... the material IMO is patently offensive in light of community standards, and lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value...

there is nothing scientific about it, unlike the anarchist guide; there is no seriious literary value, it is written solely to help others get away with child rape/molestation, nothing artistic about pedophilia...and certainly nothing political
 
SmarterThanYou said:
this 'arrest' is a farce. This community knows it can't ban the book because of the 1st Amendment, so they'll use 'obscenity' as their excuse to punish someone from another state for writing/publishing a book whose content they find unpleasant.
Click to expand...

So you don't find a book that gives step by step instructions on how to "groom" a young child, for sexual explotation, isn't obscene?? :palm:
It does explain a lot about you. :whoa:
 
Yurt said:
a book on how to make bombs legal or otherwise is wholly different from a book that on how to commit a horrific crime and get away with it. he is not writing a book about the ingredients for pedophilia, he is writing a book on how to molest children, even under the 13 i believe and how to evade capture. free speech is not limitless, you can't yell fire in a crowded theater nor can one limitless publish child pornography. in this case, imo, we need to consider the issue under obscenity analysis... the material IMO is patently offensive in light of community standards, and lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value...

there is nothing scientific about it, unlike the anarchist guide; there is no seriious literary value, it is written solely to help others get away with child rape/molestation, nothing artistic about pedophilia...and certainly nothing political
Click to expand...

As much as I agree with you in regards to this being obscene, there is a heck of a lot of obscenity on the internet. Should we shut down the internet as well? Maybe that is more drastic than what you state. Maybe we should simply go after all the porn providers on the internet? Arrest them and throw them in jail right alongside the dope dealers and this pervert.

Yes, I expect the book may very well be obscene. I choose not to read it. To "turn the channel" so to speak since I am not interested in the information. Yes, anyone caught putting any of those "How to's" to practice should be strung up and castrated to start with... but, when I think of the government arresting someone for writing a book I am concerned as to where that will lead.

Obscenity is in the eye of the beholder. Yes, IMHO, this is obscenity. Some people claim the Song of Solomon is obscene. Shall we burn it as well?

Immie
 
Immanuel said:
As much as I agree with you in regards to this being obscene, there is a heck of a lot of obscenity on the internet. Should we shut down the internet as well? Maybe that is more drastic than what you state. Maybe we should simply go after all the porn providers on the internet? Arrest them and throw them in jail right alongside the dope dealers and this pervert.

Yes, I expect the book may very well be obscene. I choose not to read it. To "turn the channel" so to speak since I am not interested in the information. Yes, anyone caught putting any of those "How to's" to practice should be strung up and castrated to start with... but, when I think of the government arresting someone for writing a book I am concerned as to where that will lead.

Obscenity is in the eye of the beholder. Yes, IMHO, this is obscenity. Some people claim the Song of Solomon is obscene. Shall we burn it as well?

Immie
Click to expand...

with regards to comparing this to pornography, i don't believe the comparison is valid. porn between two consenting adults is not illegal, nor is it endangering children. if it does, then scotus tells us that it is no longer protected speech, see the cases about child porn and whether certain depictions are protected speech.
 
Yurt said:
with regards to comparing this to pornography, i don't believe the comparison is valid. porn between two consenting adults is not illegal, nor is it endangering children. if it does, then scotus tells us that it is no longer protected speech, see the cases about child porn and whether certain depictions are protected speech.
Click to expand...

Understood.

Since I have not read the book in question, I cannot comment upon how far it actually goes.

According to this article there are two stories about sex with minors.

http://www.newschief.com/article/20...olk-orders-arrest-of-author-of-pedophile-book

At a press conference Monday morning, Sheriff Grady Judd said the book contains two graphic stories depicting an adult engaged in sex acts with children, specifically describing sex acts with a 9-year-old boy and a 13-year-old boy, purportedly told from the child's point of view.
Click to expand...

It appears that the Polk County Sheriff has a vendetta against Philip Greeves II. As far as I am concerned, that doesn't bother me, until the next vendetta is against the pro-life movement or something else important to me.

Immie
 
Congress may pass valid laws to protect children from abuse, and it has. E.g., 18 U.S.C. § 2241 2251. The prospect of crime, however, by itself does not justify laws suppressing protected speech. See Kingsley Int’l Pictures Corp. v. Regents of Univ. of N. Y., 360 U.S. 684, 689 (1959) (“Among free men, the deterrents ordinarily to be applied to prevent crime are education and punishment for violations of the law, not abridgment of the rights of free speech”) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted)). It is also well established that speech may not be prohibited because it concerns subjects offending our sensibilities. See FCC v. Pacifica Foundation, 438 U.S. 726, 745 (1978) (“[T]he fact that society may find speech offensive is not a sufficient reason for suppressing it”); see also Reno v. American Civil Liberties Union, 521 U.S. 844, 874 (1997) (“In evaluating the free speech rights of adults, we have made it perfectly clear that ‘exual expression which is indecent but not obscene is protected by the First Amendment’ ”) (quoting Sable Communications of Cal., Inc. v. FCC, 492 U.S. 115, 126 (1989); Carey v. Population Services Int’l, 431 U.S. 678, 701 (1977) (“[T]he fact that protected speech may be offensive to some does not justify its suppression”).

As a general principle, the First Amendment bars the government from dictating what we see or read or speak or hear. The freedom of speech has its limits; it does not embrace certain categories of speech, including defamation, incitement, obscenity, and pornography produced with real children. See Simon & Schuster, Inc. v. Members of N. Y. State Crime Victims Bd., 502 U.S. 105, 127 (1991) (Kennedy, J., concurring). While these categories may be prohibited without violating the First Amendment, none of them includes the speech prohibited by the CPPA. In his dissent from the opinion of the Court of Appeals, Judge Ferguson recognized this to be the law and proposed that virtual child pornography should be regarded as an additional category of unprotected speech. See 198 F.3d, at 1101. It would be necessary for us to take this step to uphold the statute.

...

To preserve these freedoms, and to protect speech for its own sake, the Court’s First Amendment cases draw vital distinctions between words and deeds, between ideas and conduct. See Kingsley Int’l Pictures Corp., 360 U.S., at 689; see also Bartnicki v. Vopper, 532 U.S. 514, 529 (2001) (“The normal method of deterring unlawful conduct is to impose an appropriate punishment on the person who engages in it”). The government may not prohibit speech because it increases the chance an unlawful act will be committed “at some indefinite future time.” Hess v. Indiana, 414 U.S. 105, 108 (1973) (per curiam). The government may suppress speech for advocating the use of force or a violation of law only if “such advocacy is directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action.” Brandenburg v. Ohio, 395 U.S. 444, 447 (1969) (per curiam). There is here no attempt, incitement, solicitation, or conspiracy. The Government has shown no more than a remote connection between speech that might encourage thoughts or impulses and any resulting child abuse. Without a significantly stronger, more direct connection, the Government may not prohibit speech on the ground that it may encourage pedophiles to engage in illegal conduct.
Click to expand...


http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/00-795.ZO.html

this case might be a first impression for the court, i don't know of any other case similiar to this one where there apparently are no images, rather, words that describe actual acts with children. additinoally, i wonder if this book could be considered such advocacy [that] is directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action
 
SmarterThanYou said:
yes you are, yes they do. that doesn't change anything constitutionally. you should try and really learn it sometime instead of staying on your knees in front of your boys in blue.
Click to expand...

HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA

Now STY has to resort to making it appear that I posted something, when the truth is; it is now obvious that the only reason the militia keeps him around, is because he's fun to laugh at and he gives good blow jobs. :good4u:
 
Immanuel said:
As much as I agree with you in regards to this being obscene, there is a heck of a lot of obscenity on the internet. Should we shut down the internet as well? Maybe that is more drastic than what you state. Maybe we should simply go after all the porn providers on the internet? Arrest them and throw them in jail right alongside the dope dealers and this pervert.

Yes, I expect the book may very well be obscene. I choose not to read it. To "turn the channel" so to speak since I am not interested in the information. Yes, anyone caught putting any of those "How to's" to practice should be strung up and castrated to start with... but, when I think of the government arresting someone for writing a book I am concerned as to where that will lead.

Obscenity is in the eye of the beholder. Yes, IMHO, this is obscenity. Some people claim the Song of Solomon is obscene. Shall we burn it as well?

Immie
Click to expand...

Obscenity re: adults is way different from obscenity involving defenseless children.
 
This case fails under Brandenburg as it is currently viewed. Certainly puts to the test peoples views of free speech though.
 
christiefan915 said:
Obscenity re: adults is way different from obscenity involving defenseless children.
Click to expand...

I have no argument against you here.

I think my hang-up here is the way the sheriff in my neighboring county is going after this guy. It seems like he is campaigning for political office as opposed to prosecuting the law. If he were simply prosecuting the law, I would not have so much of a problem with this. Hey, you break the law then you do the time. But, I swear this sheriff seems to be campaigning for Attorney General of the U.S. at the moment.

It appears, that it can be said that this book verges (remember I have not actually read the book) on child porn which is a crime. And if it does, then fine prosecute him, but damnit don't seek to further your political career while doing so.

Immie
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top