Category Archives: pedophile tactics


Thought for The Day

abuse copy


Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Statutes about Child Pornography you may not be aware of

From: Counter Pedophilia Investigative Unit

Child Pornography
Fighting Child Pornography!
We need your help fighting child pornography.
“The First Amendment

Unlike pornographic images of adults, the First Amendment does not protect the possession or distribution of child pornography. Content that depicts children engaged in sexual conduct is “a category of material outside the protection of the First Amendment.” New York v. Ferber, 458 U.S. 747 1982. Do not display any questionable images of minors on your website.

Federal Statutes

Title 18 of the United States Code governs child pornography. See Chapter 110, Sexual Exploitation and Other Abuse of Children. 18 U.S.C. § 2256 defines “Child pornography” as:
“any visual depiction, including any photograph, film, video, picture, or computer or computer-generated image or picture, whether made or produced by electronic, mechanical, or other means, of sexually explicit conduct, where -

(A) the production of such visual depiction involves the use of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct;
(B) such visual depiction is, or appears to be, of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct;
(C) such visual depiction has been created, adapted, or modified to appear that an identifiable minor is engaging in sexually explicit conduct; or
(D) such visual depiction is advertised, promoted, presented, described, or distributed in such a manner that conveys the impression that the material is or contains a visual depiction of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct . . .”

Section 2256 clearly defines images of minors engaged in sexually explicit conduct as “Child Pornography.” It also, however, adds to that definition images that appear to depict a minor engaged in sexually explicit conduct, and images or advertisements that suggest images of minors engaged in sexually explicit conduct. Does that mean that adult websites that display sexually explicit images of legal-age models in pigtails with a lollipop, while surrounded by stuffed animals, can be prosecuted under Child Pornography laws? The short answer is yes. Future prosecutions will determine which direction the law is going.

If your adult website displays images that arguably appear to have minors engaged in sexually explicit conduct, make sure that you are prepared. You should have the proper legal forms that you need to comply with federal record keeping requirements, and you should have a lawyer who has already seen your adult website(s) and has some idea about what arguments he or she will make if you are prosecuted. You should also have plenty of money and a desire to make the headlines. Remember, if you are prosecuted for violating child pornography laws, a jury will decide whether the content on your adult website is child pornography. What do you think they’ll decide?

Sexually Explicit Conduct

18 U.S.C. § 2252 prohibits the production, transportation, or knowing receipt or distribution of any visual depiction “of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct.” For the purposes of Title 18, 18 U.S.C. § 2256 defines a “minor” as any person under the age of eighteen years, and “sexually explicit conduct” as actual or simulated:

“(A) sexual intercourse, including genital-genital, oral-genital, anal-genital, or oral-anal, whether between persons of the same or opposite sex;
(B) bestiality;
(C) masturbation;
(D) sadistic or masochistic abuse; or
(E) lascivious exhibition of the genitals or pubic area of any person”

“Sexual intercourse” and “bestiality” (sex with an animal) seem pretty clear – if your website displays images that a prosecutor believes involve minors engaged in sexual intercourse or bestiality, expect to be prosecuted. Which acts constitute “masturbation” or “sadistic or masochistic abuse” may be more difficult to define, because participants engaged in such activities tend to do so for a sexual purpose. Clearly a child could appear to be engaged in such activities without intending a sexual purpose. What a child intends by his or her actions is irrelevant, however, because Federal law prohibits “simulated” as well as actual acts. Many states also address this issue by prohibiting images of minors touching or displaying their bodies “for the purpose of sexual stimulation of the viewer.” (See, for example, California Penal Code §§ 311.3-312.7).

Section (E) prohibits images of “lascivious exhibition of the genitals or pubic area.” Courts that have interpreted this section have done so broadly – “as used in the child pornography statute, the ordinary meaning of the phrase “lascivious exhibition” means a depiction which displays or brings forth to view in order to attract notice to the genitals or pubic area of children, in order to excite lustfulness or sexual stimulation in the viewer.” See United States v Knox (1994). You may risk prosecution if your website displays images of minors depicted in a way that excites viewers.

United States v Knox

In Knox, a man who had previously been convicted of receiving child pornography through the mail ordered video tapes (by mail) of girls between the ages of ten and seventeen who, in the Court’s words, “were dancing or gyrating in a fashion not natural for their age.” The girls wore bikini bathing suits, leotards, or underwear – none of the girls in the videos was nude. The videos were set to music, and it appeared that someone off-camera was directing the girls. The photographer videotaped the girls dancing, and zoomed in on each girl’s pubic area for an extended period of time. Knox was prosecuted under United States Child Pornography laws.

Legal counsel for Knox argued that “lascivious exhibition of the genitals or pubic area” meant that the girls had to be nude – wearing clothing meant that that genitals and pubic area were clearly not exhibited. The Court disagreed and held that there was no nudity requirement in the statute: “the statutory term “lascivious exhibition of the genitals or pubic area,” as used in 18 U.S.C. § 2256(2)(E), does not contain any requirement that the child subject’s genitals or pubic area be fully or partially exposed or discernible through his or her opaque clothing.””


Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

“Benjamin Richards” and “Mario Plummer Richards” (alias)



The Altoona Police Department is asking parents whose children are active on social media sites to check the contacts and conversation history for the names of “Benjamin Richards” and “Mario Plummer Richards” (alias). Our investigation has revealed that Richards poses as a 16-year-old male juvenile and grooms juvenile victims by initiating contact with them by speaking about sports, skateboarding etc. The conversations then become more suggestive and sexual in nature over time.

Richards has indicated that he is sexually attracted to boys between the ages of 10 and 16 years of age. In addition to luring children through social media the investigation has revealed that Richards frequents business locations in the area of 7th Avenue and 17th Street in addition to city pools and parks with hopes of observing juveniles in varying stages of undress for his own sexual gratification. Although Richards indicated that he prefers boys between 10 and 16 years of age he was in possession of child pornography depicting children as young as 3 years of age. All parents are encouraged to ascertain if their children have had contact or attempted contact with Richards in furtherance of our investigation.

If your child has had any questionable contact or conversation with Richards we are asking you contact Detective Corporal Nicole Douglas at 814-949-2517 or email her at

Richards is presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law.



Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Pediatric Nurse Charged With Molestation of 2-Month-Old Foster Baby in San Diego: FBI

Read more.

Michael Williams Lutts was arrested Aug. 26, 2014, on suspicion of sexually molesting a 2-month-old foster baby in his care. He is shown in a booking photo provided by the FBI.

A pediatric nurse in San Diego allegedly sexually molested a prematurely born 2-month-old foster infant in his care, taking graphic cellphone photos and videos of the abuse, the FBI announced Wednesday.
Michael Williams Lutts was arrested Aug. 26, 2014, on suspicion of sexually molesting a 2-month-old foster baby in his care. He is shown in a booking photo provided by the FBI.

Michael William Lutts, 50, was arrested Tuesday after a search of his home found several hundred child pornography images and videos on computers, hard drives and other media, FBI Special Agency Darrell Foxworth stated in a news release.

A cellphone seized during the search contained evidence of Lutts sexually molesting a 2-month old infant at his home on Tierra Baja Way beginning Aug. 4, the day the foster baby was placed in his custody, according to the FBI.

The graphic images, described in detail in a federal criminal complaint filed against Lutts Wednesday, showed repeated acts of molestation over several weeks “with the baby crying throughout one video.”

I am physically ill. Nepi-sexuals are the worst pedophiles!!!


Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

.onion sites – the hidden web where pedophiles hide

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
.onion Introduced: 2004
TLD type: Pseudo-domain-style host suffix
Status: Not in root, but used by Tor clients, servers, and proxies
Registry: Tor
Intended use: To designate a hidden service reachable via Tor
Actual use: Used by Tor users for services in which both the provider and the user are anonymous and difficult to trace
Registration restrictions: Addresses are “registered” automatically by Tor client when a hidden service is set up
Structure: Names are opaque strings generated from public keys
Documents: Tor design document
Dispute policies: N/A

.onion is a pseudo-top-level domain host suffix (similar in concept to such endings as .bitnet and .uucp used in earlier times) designating an anonymous hidden service reachable via the Tor network. Such addresses are not actual DNS names, and the .onion TLD is not in the Internet DNS root, but with the appropriate proxy software installed, Internet programs such as Web browsers can access sites with .onion addresses by sending the request through the network of Tor servers. The purpose of using such a system is to make both the information provider and the person accessing the information more difficult to trace, whether by one another, by an intermediate network host, or by an outsider.

Addresses in the .onion pseudo-TLD are opaque, non-mnemonic, 16-character alpha-semi-numeric hashes which are automatically generated based on a public key when a hidden service is configured. These 16-character hashes can be made up of any letter of the alphabet, and decimal digits beginning with 2 and ending with 7, thus representing an 80-bit number in base32.

The “onion” name refers to onion routing, the technique used by Tor to achieve a degree of anonymity.

WWW to .onion Gateways
See also: Tor2web

Proxies into the Tor network like Tor2web, and allow access to hidden services from non-Tor browsers and for search engines that are not Tor-aware. By using a gateway, users give up their own anonymity and trust the gateway to deliver the correct content. Both the gateway and the hidden service can fingerprint the browser, and access user IP address data. Some Proxies use caching techniques to provide a better page-loading[1] than the official TOR-Bundle.[2] To use a gateway, replace the domain suffix .onion of any hidden service by,[3][4] or[5]

.exit is a pseudo-top-level domain used by Tor users to indicate on the fly to the Tor software the preferred exit node that should be used while connecting to a service such as a web server, without having to edit the configuration file for Tor (torrc)

The syntax used with this domain is hostname + .exitnode + .exit, so that a user wanting to connect to through node tor26 would have to enter the URL

Example uses for this include accessing a site available only to addresses of a certain country or checking if a certain node is working.

Users can also type exitnode.exit alone to access the IP address of exitnode.

The .exit notation is disabled by default as of version[6]


Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Pedophile tactics

This is the modus operandi: pedophiles go online, meet and flatter targets, lie about their ages and/or identities, pretend to be young and/or wealthy and/or celebrities, gain children’s trust, and then abuse them by cajoling them, whether it’s by talking them into taking lewd selfies, creating Skype accounts and then convincing them to strip in front of a camera, sextorting them by threatening to tell parents or share images publicly, or even, in some cases, meeting in real life.

At this point, both Google and Facebook are paving the way for preteen customers. Parents, know who your child is talking to online!


Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Philippine police close-down another online ‘sextortion’ ring

One frightening new development in the child sex trade is the advent of online “cyber sex.” In this form of CSEC, children are expected to perform, alone or with another child, sex acts for customers online before a web-cam. Paying $56 or more a minute, customers type in their instructions on the computer and watch them being carried out via a web-cam.

Appalling. Depraved. There aren’t enough words to express my horror and disgust that selfish mutants would do this to children.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.