Observer (the real one) August 10, 2024 at 4:36 pm
If you were accused of such an infamous crime under similar circumstances, and you knew you had not done said crime, my guess is that you would be more concerned about overreach (whoever’s) than about pornography, of whatever stripe.
My comment below was directed at you but didn’t post under your comment but you should read it. Because there is certainly a way to prove they have the wrong person in a case like this. And, hold on to your seat here buddy, it doesn’t involve claiming a federal conspiracy and attacking the agency that caught you with these pics.
Why would investigators or any news outlet PUBLICLY ANNOUNCE execution of a bench warrant to search an individual’s home? Wouldn’t activities of this kind generally be kept on the down low unless law enforcement was already poised to take down a ring of criminals?
Why would anyone make an announcement that might alert potential third parties to get rid of evidence?
I don’t know Mr. May. I have no connection to the Freedom Caucus or any other political party for that matter.
As an objective observer, I’m trying to understand how announcing an investigation helps law enforcement and doesn’t provide a heads up to potential villains.
Unrelated, by heading straight to “triple-dipped in goat dung,” it seems Mr. Folks experienced a Schwartz/Flick moment. By bypassing singular and double dipping, Mr. Folks breached playground rules entirely.
Does RJ May like to watch people diddle kiddies? August 10, 2024 at 1:40 pm
Law enforcement agency didn’t announce or confirm the execution of the warrant. They rarely, if ever, do.
News outlet is free to publish whatever they want. News’ concern is not the arrest of the bad guys but in being first to report. As long as they have sufficient information to satisfy their internal standards with regard to reporting (assuming they have any), then it’s bombs away.
No. I have defended many of these cases. Can’t try them because all you sheep believe whatever the government spoon feeds you. Unless, of course, it’s one of your idols then all of the sudden you really care about due process.
But my clients aren’t the kind of people you would “know didn’t do it” and that is why this outrage is so perplexing. Who cares who is investigating if you didn’t do it? You will just show them you didn’t do it and clear it all up, right?
You can spout whatever you want but you don’t support accused possessors of child pornography. You just support this guy. Think about that.
“Who cares who is investigating if you didn’t do it?” OK first of all I don’t know anything about RJ May…didn’t even know his name until FITS ran their first article on this. But if you know even a little about the Cold War, you should know that the secret-squirrel types in both Godless Commie (TM) -aligned and Christian Western Capitalist (TM) -aligned governments had color revolution propagandist dirty trick/smear/frame jobs to take down their adversaries….and if the situation was desperate enough , they would just kill a guy and make it look like an accident. So, while I’m NOT saying that is what happened here – I have no clue- I am saying that the “you have nothing to fear if you didn’t do it” approach is pretty naïve and ignorant of how some types in power can play dirty. And the ability of these secret squirrel types in this day & age to plant something on someone’s computer is shockingly simple. So, it’s not “crazy sauce” for someone to speculate that this is a possibility. But on the other hand, there are people in this world who can lead their lives one way in public and then have some really,, really crazy stuff that they successfully keep from the word for decades until it suddenly spills out.
Only Communists and Heathens reject the Oxford Comma! :D
As a question for FITS, while obviously y’all chose to do so, does reporting a search warrant seem ethical?
The “fig leaf” of “the individual being investigated wasn’t charged, we were just looking for evidence of a heinous crime,” does seem a little thin.
I have no knowledge nor involvement in the case, but it seems like something y’all may want a formal ethical position on – and it might be interesting if you posted your ethical standards.
12 comments
Just to clarify, the concern here is not child pornography, but federal overreach?
That’s how these MAGA/Freedumb Caucus fucks rolls…
MAGA
If you were accused of such an infamous crime under similar circumstances, and you knew you had not done said crime, my guess is that you would be more concerned about overreach (whoever’s) than about pornography, of whatever stripe.
My comment below was directed at you but didn’t post under your comment but you should read it. Because there is certainly a way to prove they have the wrong person in a case like this. And, hold on to your seat here buddy, it doesn’t involve claiming a federal conspiracy and attacking the agency that caught you with these pics.
Why would investigators or any news outlet PUBLICLY ANNOUNCE execution of a bench warrant to search an individual’s home? Wouldn’t activities of this kind generally be kept on the down low unless law enforcement was already poised to take down a ring of criminals?
Why would anyone make an announcement that might alert potential third parties to get rid of evidence?
I don’t know Mr. May. I have no connection to the Freedom Caucus or any other political party for that matter.
As an objective observer, I’m trying to understand how announcing an investigation helps law enforcement and doesn’t provide a heads up to potential villains.
Unrelated, by heading straight to “triple-dipped in goat dung,” it seems Mr. Folks experienced a Schwartz/Flick moment. By bypassing singular and double dipping, Mr. Folks breached playground rules entirely.
Law enforcement agency didn’t announce or confirm the execution of the warrant. They rarely, if ever, do.
News outlet is free to publish whatever they want. News’ concern is not the arrest of the bad guys but in being first to report. As long as they have sufficient information to satisfy their internal standards with regard to reporting (assuming they have any), then it’s bombs away.
Ditto
John Birch Society. Not John Burch Society.
No. I have defended many of these cases. Can’t try them because all you sheep believe whatever the government spoon feeds you. Unless, of course, it’s one of your idols then all of the sudden you really care about due process.
But my clients aren’t the kind of people you would “know didn’t do it” and that is why this outrage is so perplexing. Who cares who is investigating if you didn’t do it? You will just show them you didn’t do it and clear it all up, right?
You can spout whatever you want but you don’t support accused possessors of child pornography. You just support this guy. Think about that.
“Who cares who is investigating if you didn’t do it?” OK first of all I don’t know anything about RJ May…didn’t even know his name until FITS ran their first article on this. But if you know even a little about the Cold War, you should know that the secret-squirrel types in both Godless Commie (TM) -aligned and Christian Western Capitalist (TM) -aligned governments had color revolution propagandist dirty trick/smear/frame jobs to take down their adversaries….and if the situation was desperate enough , they would just kill a guy and make it look like an accident. So, while I’m NOT saying that is what happened here – I have no clue- I am saying that the “you have nothing to fear if you didn’t do it” approach is pretty naïve and ignorant of how some types in power can play dirty. And the ability of these secret squirrel types in this day & age to plant something on someone’s computer is shockingly simple. So, it’s not “crazy sauce” for someone to speculate that this is a possibility. But on the other hand, there are people in this world who can lead their lives one way in public and then have some really,, really crazy stuff that they successfully keep from the word for decades until it suddenly spills out.
Only Communists and Heathens reject the Oxford Comma! :D
As a question for FITS, while obviously y’all chose to do so, does reporting a search warrant seem ethical?
The “fig leaf” of “the individual being investigated wasn’t charged, we were just looking for evidence of a heinous crime,” does seem a little thin.
I have no knowledge nor involvement in the case, but it seems like something y’all may want a formal ethical position on – and it might be interesting if you posted your ethical standards.