Comments on: Police Blotter: Pedophile loses spat over 'girl love' site

The Internet's most famous pedophile loses his fight to overturn a court order banning him from posting photographs of minors on his Web site, even if they're taken at public events.

[Penguinisto]

Basically, the opinion is a drawn-out explanation of the concept of "model release". Good call.

PS: Those of us living in PDX detest the fool just as much as folks would in any other town. I'm betting that the only reason he likes "the vibe" is that we tend to have a far more diverse culture in which he can hide. I sincerely doubt that his opinions would be taken politely by anyone other than the local reporters when the asshat shows up on the news once in awhile trying to attention-*****.

/P

[ckurowic]

Diverse is a good way to put it. I've been there and its diverse and accepting as long as you fit in with everyone else. Bunch of hippy lemmings who shun cars.

[Seaspray0]

That last sentence says it all.... "The restraining order and judgment of permanent injunction are affirmed." Whatever the heck that's supposed to mean! The article would have been more interesting if it was less legalesse and more language that the average person uses.

[Grifter02]

His appeal was denied. What else could that statement possibly mean?

[declan00]

The article itself explains the situation. What you're talking about is an excerpt from the court opinion, which is (as you say) written in legalese. You don't need to read it to understand what's going on, but most people like to.

[vinnie1023]

Deconstructing legalese is always a little bit more difficult than it seems necessary (wouldn't it make more sense if we could all easily understand judge's opinions so that we could gauge how much they were going to affect our lives, if at all?) but if you take it slowly and re-read the confusing sections it'll start to make more sense. That's how I got through the Mass Media Law class I took a few years ago, anyway.

[MSSlayer]

Are you serious seaspray?

We all know you swim in the shallow end of the intelligence pool, but holy crap! It is not that complex.

[van_Zeller]

Much as it pains me, I desagree with the court. Of course they didn't side with the pedo. Who would?

[i8246i]

I have to agree here with van...as much as people don't like to side witha pedophile...it looks like his freedom of speech was slightly tred upon....

But you also have to think about the way the guy tred upon the rights of the families of the children he photographed for his website.....but I'm also torn as to how this guy was finally brought to court and forced to take down his website.

Some people have been accused of being a pedophile by simply smiling at a child or "looking creepy". The mob mentality of society is a very dangerous and infectious behavior, and while you might capture some real criminals, or turn away some people with devious intentions...you also create a negative attitude towards yourselves and your community.

In the end, I'm just hoping our justice system gave this man a fair trial. Its what I hope for any accused person, and its what I hope finally happens to this Blagojevich fellow, so we can move on with our lives and get our economy back in order.

[Baldur_of_Asgard]

It should be noted that Jack did not have to stop posting photographs of girls because of the restraining order and/or California law, because Jack no longer lives in California. Rather, he stopped posting those photographs because other pedophiles voiced their opinion that the girls who had been photographed might find the situation uncomfortable.

Of course, the new law does nothing to prevent Jack or others from publishing pictures online, as it only prohibits posting pictures of children for the purpose of committing a crime - which is something of an absurdity. Can anyone think of a single instance in which this has happened?

The major results of all this are that one person who has not committed any crimes has been effectively banned from California, a terrible legal precedent has been set in California, and Californians now have one more silly law on their books to distract them from the fact that their state is heavily in debt and totally dysfunctional.

[malcarada]

They should apply that law to all journalilsts harassing the children of famous people, which is much more harmful of what this man was doing.