Sex offenders and pedophiles at girl chat

'Sancho Panza' a pedophile at girl chat writes up a post for the pedophile sex offenders that IPhone has an application that tracks sex offenders:

iPhone app tracks sex offenders
Posted by Sancho Panza on Wednesday, July 29 2009 at 12:37:43pm
"All 50 states in the US require those convicted of sexual offences to sign a register so that their whereabouts can be tracked and monitored. The information is also freely available online. ThinAir Wireless, the developer of the Offender Locator application [iTunes link], has used this database to build the tool."

Another giant step in the naming and shaming industry.

America, land of freedom, unfortunately only for those who never made a mistake. The rest will suffer for the rest of their lives...

*smashes i pod against wall*

He is obviously upset that Apple wants to help keep children safe with Offender Locator.

Again more proof that these self proclaimed "child lovers" are in fact "child haters" who do not care for children in the least.

When lgsinmyheart wrote

Wait a sec, guys!!
Posted by lgsinmyheart on Wednesday, July 29 2009 at 05:46:56pm
In reply to iPhone app tracks sex offenders posted by Sancho Panza on Wednesday, July 29 2009 at 12:37:43pm

Wasn't this just what we needed in order to find each other, party together, and plan the Revolution??? Just a couple days ago Stanhntii asked how can we meet each other; Apple provided the answer!!!!

I wondered then just how many of these pedophiles at girl chat are sex offenders? Does it matter? I think so. After all we know that the longer they are out of prison the more likely they will offend again. They cannot be trusted in society at all.
Even if Sancho Panza is not a sex offender he wants to smash his phone-- because
he could be one next....?

I KNEW there was a reason I never supported mac NT
Posted by kissbyalice on Wednesday, July 29 2009 at 01:20:09pm
In reply to iPhone app tracks sex offenders posted by Sancho Panza on Wednesday, July 29 2009 at 12:37:43pm
NT

kissbyalice has serious emotional issues along with his pedophilia habit he has no thought to those little girls he love(d)s so much to keep them safe from child rapists.

And you filthy pedophiles wonder why society hates you?

Don't pick up the soap!

The Prison Rape Elimination Act of 2003 is aimed at curbing prison rape through a "zero-tolerance" policy, as well as through research and information gathering. The act called for developing national standards to prevent and detect incidents of sexual violence in prison, making data on prison rape more available to prison administrators as well as making corrections facilities more accountable for incidents of prison rape.

I suppose I'm going to have to speak out against this law.

I want it abolished.

I want it gone.

* No law will stop someone who wants to rape a prisoner.
* It does nothing to prevent prison rape.
* Falsely accused prison rapists are taking the focus off the real danger.
* Identifying prison rapists makes them targets of prison vigilantes.
* This law makes prisoners less safe.
* It lumps prison rapists in with other rapists.
* It's nothing more than a Salem witch hunt.
* It's too expensive and will cause the system to implode on itself.
* It's nothing but hysteria and fear-mongering.
* It's a draconian law.
* Most prisoners don't rape other prisoners.
* It's causing prisoners to fear other prisoners.
* It's creating professional prison victims.
* The government cannot keep your prisoners safe.
* Instead of focusing on their rape we should LET THEM HEAL!
* There IS life after prison rape.
* These resources could be better spent elsewhere such as on families of prison rapists.
* Eventually prison rapists are going to snap. Would you rather have a raped prisoner or a dead prisoner?
* While prison rape is despicable there are indeed things that are much worse in life. Most raped prisoners do not die or become permanently disfigured as a result.

After the comments made at the recent Reform Sex Offender Laws RSOL Nambla Conference in Boston I realized that most prisoners aren't actually harmed by being raped, and even if they are they eventually get over it. Some even learn to forgive their rapist. The whole "prison rape" issue is overhyped.

A small number of victims are scarred for life, but most are not. The “scarred for life” is way over hyped, even some who endured extreme abuse are able to move on and lead a normal life without significant scars, even forgiving their abusers.....

Dr. Jerome Miller
Boston Conference 2009

Considering these new facts from the Nambla Conference of 2009, I propose we fight for the abolition of this useless, costly law that does More Harm than Good and spend that money in a better way, perhaps by providing economic support for true victims or education and support of prison rapists. One solution would be to support the prison rapist with positive reinforcement that what they did was not "bad", that it's their victims fault, that their victim should:

* be held accountable
* take responsibility
* forgive and forget

and the problem would be solved if only prison rape victims would do that. Most importantly we need to educate those who have been raped in prison to take responsibility for their own actions and stop picking up the soap.



Sex Offender Activists would be outraged if the public started advocating to abolish prison rape laws, yet when it comes to innocent children - this is the position they take.

* Every single argument I have made against this law is a statement they have made regarding sexually abused children.

To Catch a Big Mouth

Benjamin Radford is a self-proclaimed "critical thinker", "research journalist", editor of The Skeptical Enquirer and author of a couple of very strange books and articles. I say strange because in Media Mythmakers he attempts to prove

"the ways in which deception is used in various media to influence decision making and public policy"

While I know for a fact that media is sometimes deceptive I know something else as well, and that is the fact that Benjamin Radford is committing the same types of errors he's accusing the mainstream media of.

Radford's specialty is disproving things that cannot be disproven by using his so-called "critical thinking skills". The problem is: he forgot to use them.

Radford recently appeared on Americans Reality Check to promote his book and spread his propaganda. He believes the American people are lazy and incapable of thinking things through on their own. I find it strange that he believes news journalists influence the way people think while claiming they aren't doing their jobs if they don't tell them what to think.

Listen:

"Should you take aspirin daily to ward off a heart attack? Aspirin makers say yes. Others say that there isn't enough evidence that it's effective. Who do you believe? Presumably the journalist presenting a story will tell you-unless he or she is bound by agnostic objectivity, in which case you'll get both sides and a shrug."

I suppose I'm incapable of "thinking critically" because I fail to see why anyone would expect a journalist to analyze conflicting medical information and then tell people what the correct answer is....when he can't possibly know what the correct answer is. All he can really do is state his opinion and influence people - whether or not he's right.

Radford claims that since he's a "research journalist" he thoroughly researched his topic aware that what he wrote would be controversial. So I'm a little confused here as to how he came up with his conclusion that recidivism for sex offenders is very low. For a critical thinker he made the same mistake as so many pedophile activists do - taking the DOJ recidivism report at face value and failing to question or analyze the results.

Listen to Karl Hanson explain that 30 to 40% of registered sex offenders are caught with a new sex offense within 20 years:

Here Sarah Tofte of the Human Rights Watch explains how surprised she was to find that 25% of sex offenders recidivate:

And Mary and Kevin's own guest Dr. Fox - who they made sure to inform the audience was "an expert" in his field explains that the recidivism rate is approximately 22% over 15 years. Listen:

And here Dr. Fox explains the reason why the recidivism rate is actually higher than 22%:

Radford also holds tight to his belief that Megan's Law is ineffective. He bases this on the fact that he didn't find anything that said it was, and on his misinformed belief that the very premise of the law was faulty. He believes that Megan's family KNEW about the violent rapist living on their street, and yet none of the neighbors knew. It appears he didn't do his research. Nor did he read the Minnesota study regarding the effectiveness of Megan's Law (community notification). Which said:

"community notification reduced the risk of time to rearrest by 84 percent, reconviction by 89 percent, and reincarceration by 93 percent"

In addition to proliferating their misinterpretation of David Finkelhor's Internet Predator report, just like Cheryl Griffiths - he took this

"The publicity about online “predators” who prey on naive children using trickery and violence is largely inaccurate.

Most online sex offenders are adults who target teens and seduce victims into sexual relationships. They take time to develop the trust and confidence of victims, so that the youth see these relationships as romances or sexual adventures.

The youth most vulnerable to online sex offenders have histories of sexual or physical abuse, family problems, and tendencies to take risks both on- and offline."

to mean that either internet predators don't exist or that it's somehow acceptable to exploit minors - as long as you seduce them, groom them and aren't physically violent I suppose.

Benji dazzled the sex offenders with amazing feats of distorted critical thinking and factoid production. For example he believes that the sex offender registry does nothing to protect children, he bases this primarily on two things. One being the fact that most offenders are known to their victims and Two being the myth that sex offenders don't re-offend.

However, he fails to realize that a sex offender registry was never about 'strangers'. It is the very fact that offenders ARE known to their victims which makes the registry such a valuable tool. Nobody could memorize every person on the registry to be able to know them if they saw them on the street, however, they can absolutely know NOT to bring these monsters into their home.

Radford believes that those on the registry were convicted of minor crimes - he knows this for a fact because --- people who commit bad crimes go to prison for long periods of time. Listen:

How does that compare to Michael Jacques who raped a 13 year old girl, then an 18 year old girl, negotiated a plea deal - had the first rape expunged from his record, served a miniscule sentence and convinced a judge to let him off supervision several years early because he was a "probation success story" - even though he was sexually assaulting a child at the time........and continued to for the next 5 years. Is Jacques an exception?

Or how about John Couey? Another registered sex offender who went on to kidnap a child from her bed then rape her repeatedly for days and then bury her alive. Is he an exception?

Joseph Duncan raped a 9 year old boy at gunpoint when he was only 15 years old and stated that he had committed 13 rapes by the time he was 16. He was sentenced as a juvenile and went on a few years later to do the same to other kids. This time he served 14 years of a 20 year sentence, got out and immediately molested a 6 year old boy. The judge let him out on bail. And we all know what happened then, don't we? He's responsible for the deaths of at least 7 people. Is Duncan an exception? He said he wasn't in his sex offender propaganda he wrote. The propaganda that mirrors exactly the rhetoric of the current sex offender activist groups. In fact, he wrote

The truth is that I am not an exception, I am the rule! Most sex offenders are just like me

What about Jim Freeman, the one-time leader of the largest pro-sex offender activist group on the internet. Was he an exception? Or Jon Schillaci, or Johnny Ray Lee, how about Corey Deen Saunders who raped a 6 year old in the library after a judge refused to civilly commit him? Are they exceptions?

Sex offender activists who talk out both sides of their mouth claim men like this should have never been released in the first place. They say this while demanding an end to civil confinement and long prison sentences. So how are these people exceptional to them? Because they know NOW what they were capable of? When do you think they reached that conclusion? Certainly not before they created more victims.

Sex offender coddlers frequently demand that we realize how easy it is to end up being labeled a sex offender. They say things like "It could happen to anybody". The truth is entirely different of course. You don't sexually assault someone, groom and molest a child, or join the "greatest group of pedos" by accident. It is not something that "happens to you". But we do know that people are sexually offended against every single day, those are the people that something "happened to", we can see obviously, how easy it is to be sexually assaulted or have your child abused by a freak.

"Is this a serious problem? I mean, come on, the average child is far more likely to be killed in a car accident on the freeway than to be molested by some sex offender, so put these things in perspective."

Perspective?

In 2007 there were 41,259 traffic fatalities - this includes adults and children.

Every 13 minutes someone dies in a car accident.

In 2007 there were 248,000 victims of rape, attempted rape or sexual assault. (This figure DOES NOT include victims 12 years old and younger)

34% of all victims of sexual assault reported to law enforcement were under the age of 12.

Every 2 minutes someone in the United States is sexually assaulted.....not including children.

Now besides the obvious things wrong with his statements, I would strongly suggest that Mr. Radford is out of his league. Police Chiefs and Supreme Court Justices do not make the law, they never have and they never will as long as America's system of government continues. There are three branches of government, the executive branch, the legislative branch and the judicial branch. They function within a system of checks and balances. The primary function of the Supreme Court is not to analyze studies and reports and then make a determination of which they believe. Their function is to interpret the constitution despite what this critical thinking idiot believes. How embarrassing.

Mr Radford needs to go back to disproving Big Foot, or ghosts and ghoulies and other pretend monsters because he very successfully stuck a big foot in a very big mouth. There are over 40 millions survivors of very real monsters in America today. The monsters DO exist, survivors have lived to tell about it and we applaud their strength and courage for speaking up....despite the constant barrage of blaming, mocking and denial from such shallow thinking fools as Benjamin Radford.

Who's Being the Face for That?

Rape shield laws are a sad necessity - borne from the classic defense of putting the victim on trial. This defense attempts to suggest that the victim was somehow responsible for her rape. A tactic that has been successful in the past due to rape myths perpetuated in the community; the most rampant rape myth is victim blaming. Bublick (1999 p1433) describes it this way:

According to the defendants, she is forever doing the wrong thing when a man is trying to rape her. She does not run soon enough, or far enough or fast enough.

Most of the thinking world now recognize this antiquated notion as a pathetic attempt to justify the criminal's behavior. However, rape crisis centers continue to warn of the dangers of subscribing to these beliefs. The New South Wales Rape Crisis Centre describes the dangers as follows:

* Make the rapist's actions less risky
* Make it harder for the victim to find support or get the police to act
* Make it harder to prosecute the rapist
* Make it harder for the victim to recover.

Rapists benefit from these beliefs.

Thus, it would be disturbing for anyone to support these beliefs - but when it comes from a registered sex offender, it is even more frightening. Colby Orthman is a registered sex offender and son of sex offender activist Jacquelyn Horst.

Quite frankly it is impossible to understand Colby's story because each time either Jacquelyn or Colby relay it, it changes. What is known is that Colby served time and has to register as an offender due to a sexual picture found on a cell phone of Colby and a minor female. I will not speculate here as to which story they have relayed is the truth.

Recently Colby appeared on the podcast "Americans Reality Check" hosted by Mary Duval and Kevin Meier to discuss 'sexting' and its consequences. He shared his perception of his experiences and captured the hosts imaginations with wild accusations as to the content of his therapy sessions while in prison.

When pressed by the hosts to elaborate on this subject, Colby explained further:

The Burning Bed was based on the true story of Francine Hughes - the first woman in the United States to be found not guilty of murder due to battered woman syndrome. There was absolutely no sexual content in this movie - it was made for television in 1984. A synopsis of the movie

"Fawcett plays a small-town housewife and mother of three who's pushed to the brink by her husband's mental and physical torture. With no resources and no way out, this mom will take a shocking stand to save herself and her kids. Based on Faith McNulty's book, this story helped bring battered woman syndrome into the spotlight."


Now please listen again to what was said and by whom:

Dare I ask - WHO could find this film pornographic? What kind of sadistic person could find the torture of another person erotic? Moreover, how does posing for Playboy relate to an actress's ability to star in a movie about domestic abuse?

The only ostensible explanation to me is that they want to perpetuate the victim-blaming rape myth. Colby Orthman and everyone who agreed with him is suggesting that you should judge Farrah Fawcett in the same way that defense attorneys want you to judge the victim. They want you to buy into the myth that victims have to look and act a certain way - otherwise they can't be victims....or even portray their struggles.

Society often judges victims of rape in a way that would be considered completely unacceptable with a victim of any other type of violent assault (see The Rape of Mr Smith). As one author stated, it equates to suggesting that a hold-up victim 'asked for it' by carrying money in their pocket.

Would Colby, Kevin and Mary have felt that Fawcett couldn't "be the face" of a mugging victim? A murder victim? Of course not.

So why then is she disqualified from portraying a rape and abuse victim? These sex offenders/sympathizers are clearly tying Fawcett's portrayal of a victim to a behavior - the very foundation of victim blaming.

They are "being the face" for the perpetuation of rape myths. This is UNACCEPTABLE and not exactly the smartest position a sex offender could take - what it suggests to reasonable people is that you're on a registry/have a family member on a registry for a very good reason and we shouldn't let you/your family member off it any time soon.

On the Side of the Center

Ricky's mom - Mary aka Tikibug, Buggy, Hell's Bug, and HotRodAnimal requested that I write an article about her. I thought it was a little strange but hey, I've got no problem with it. What I DO have a problem with is her.

Mary pretends I have a problem with her because her son is a sex offender or because she speaks her mind. But it has nothing to do with her son, and she knows this. I've said if I were in her shoes I'd fight for my child too. Nor does it have anything to do with the fact that she IS speaking up. It has solely to do with what she's saying and the fact that she is actively promoting legalized adult/child sex.

Just the other night Derek made comments regarding "his side" of the issue of sex offender laws. He also made comments about people on the "other side" - his enemies - which he referred to as the Victim's Side. But isn't that one of the biggest problems within these RSO groups? They don't understand that there is not a "victim's side". Victims are the center of this issue.

Not only is sincere concern for victims blatantly missing in these groups but they routinely mock them, blame them, demean them and even deny their existence. Mary, who has said some of the most appalling things about victims that I've ever heard - fails to even raise an eyebrow from the people who follow her. The rest of us catch our breath in utter shock - but Mary's cohorts seem to not even notice- and why should they? They've been indoctrinated into the language of blame gaming. And Mary? She's been indoctrinated into the language of pedophiles.

A pedophile apologist is just as dangerous as a pedophile. But I believe Mary is more than that. I believe she's a pedophile activist as well. What else could you call it? On the one hand Mary says most child sexual abuse is committed by the child's parents. Then she says ONLY parents can protect children! Then she agrees with a schizophrenic multiple child rapist that the government has no right to set an age of consent - it should be up to the parents to decide their child is old enough for sexual activity or not. Who is going to protect children from those parents who exploit their own children? Or marry pedophile baby rapers and bring them into their homes to live with their children? Is it Marshall Burns of the RSOL who spoke of having sex with 13 year old boys in Boston in the late 1970's and says he's completely without remorse? He educated Mary. See.... even parents shouldn't have a say in when their child has sex because - they might teach them repressive morality. Thus:

Children should be defined as persons under the age of puberty.

Support broad sex education for children, and empower them to make their own decisions and stand up for their rights

Mary agreed. She put her name to the statement. She put her face to it. She put her voice to it. She did this because she's a woman completely lacking in integrity, honor, honesty, humility, intelligence and compassion. Except where sexual abusers are concerned.

Mary says she's "no dumb duck" and calls anyone who disagrees with her ignorant and yet - she fails to realize that you can train even a monkey to perform tricks the same way you can train a trashy hick to memorize pedo myths.

At the 1978 Boston Conference to form Nambla Dr. Richard Pillard said:

"Men and boys who love each other are engaging in a social experiment."

In 1998 Nambla members wrote a petition called "A call to safeguard our children and our liberties". Top signatory was Dr. Richard Pillard.

In 2007 the same petition was recycled and renamed An Urgent Call to Support the Well-being of Children and the Rights of Us All aka Reform Sex Offender Laws Campaign or RSOL. The top signatory was Dr. Richard Pillard. All references to Nambla and "boylovers" were removed and information about the sex offender registry was added. The rest is identical.

Now in 2009, Dr. Richard Pillard is the introductory speaker for the new and improved Boston Conference held this weekend.

You see, Nambla discovered 30 years ago that people were never going to accept a group of pedophile activists who wanted to have sex with their little boys.

They changed their name in 1997 and tried to claim it was "to safeguard children". That campaign quickly died, probably aided along by the rabid support of Dennis Bejin, Nambla Steering Committee member known as "Diaper Boy" and implicated in the Jeffrey Curley wrongful death lawsuit.

But in 2007, they realized the time was ripe. New sex offender restrictions were popping up everywhere - how better to get what you wanted than to have women who were NOT pedophiles themselves promote your agenda?

Listen:

Look:

Listen:

You think Mary doesn't know? Of course she knows. She admitted she knows, not only that she has stated there should be no age of consent laws. There should be no registry, no residency restrictions, no GPS monitoring, no civil commitment, no polygraph exams on supervision. She has stated that victims and their parents should be "held accountable" while referring to the offender as "just a baby". She calls child pornography a victimless crime and says maybe it helps someone not molest children. She says a woman who won't allow her child to be alone with a bus driver is hysterical and to parents whose children have been abused as negligent. She says no law will stop someone from committing a crime.........therefore what? Anarchy.

Mary is a joke. She has bashed John Walsh, Mark Lunsford and other parents of murdered children, not just the laws they've supported but on a personal basis. She has referred to victims as "snot-nosed teary-eyed victims", she's cold, she's heartless, she's despicable and she's offensive to anyone except abusers and enablers.

She recently had Ron Book on her podcast to talk about the situation of sex offenders living under the Julia Tuttle Causeway in Miami. She referred to it as a "coup" and implored everyone to be on their best behavior because she was "literally representing 700,000 people". I wonder how many of those people WANT Mary Duval the ignorant, trailer trash supporter of adult/child sex speaking on their behalf? Let's look at how that turned out. All the RSO's in the chat room were calling Mr. Book "a hater" and "filled with anger" while saying things like this:

[9:05:59 PM] IWillNotObey am i the only one in here hoping his car crashes head on into a semi while hes on this show?

[9:12:22 PM] ladybear yes he is a professional victim and is making his daughter one too

[9:12:50 PM] Sex Offender Issues F U RON!!!!!!!

[9:22:50 PM] The Fallen One thanks y'all but i want a piece of ronnies ass

[9:38:15 PM] CRASH101 This guy is nothing more than a vindictive hate filled politician !

[10:10:57 PM] Sex Offender Issues Someone needs to give him another A--hole.

[10:15:21 PM] CRASH101 He is so full of HATE ! what a coward you are RON !

[10:15:33 PM] CRASH101 I want to punch this fuck in the face !

[10:17:05 PM] The Fallen One i'd punch him in the face if he was here then chokeslam him

[11:18:36 PM] Sex Offender Issues If I would've said what Mary did, I would not have appologized

[11:29:36 PM] ladybear IMO he has made his daughter into his poster victim and he willnot allow her to ehal

Listen:

Mary didn't get that at all. Lauren and people like Lauren are the center. Without recognition of the center Mary will remain as "clueless" as she was in those statements she made. Mary doesn't comprehend what's going on.

Listen:

In other words - you can talk about people however you want just don't get caught at it, and when you do lie about it. "I was just angry after the meeting" despite the fact that she ranted about her for two weeks straight. At least now she's ceased bashing Lauren and turned her venom to Ron. I have a feeling he can handle that little insignificant bug. Someone who has said the things she's said about victims and then DARES to say this:

"And if you can't show respect, then don't ask for none"

HT Jacey

The End

We finally get to put the case of Jim Freeman - proud member of the "greatest group of pedos" and executive director of Sohopeful - the largest group of proud sex offender supporters - to rest.

His life sentence we previously spoke about was just the beginning for this great pedophile sex offender leader. Let's see how it breaks down:

Count 1- Engaging in a Child Exploitation Enterprise - Guilty - Sentence: Life in prison

Count 2 - Conspiracy to Advertise the Exchange of Child Pornography, Knowingly Transporting and Shipping Child Pornography in Interstate and Foreign Commerce via the Computer, Possession of Child Pornography Shipped or Transported in Interstate Commerce, Receipt and Attempted Receipt of Child Pornography and Obstruction of Justice

AND

Count 6 - Advertising the Exchange of Child Pornography - Guilty - 600 months

Count 18 - Knowingly Transporting and Shipping Child Pornography in Interstate and Foreign Commerce via the Computer

AND

Count 29 - Receipt and Attempted Receipt of Child Pornography - Guilty - 480 months

Count 40 - Obstruction of Justice - Guilty 240 months

Wow! 20 years just for using encryption!! Interesting that Jim's former partner Tom Madison once had a full encryption tutorial on his website. I wonder what these people have been teaching each other?

But whether Jim learned his techniques from Tom or taught them to Tom, the end for Jim came today - and with a bang. What he did will haunt him for the rest of his life. As it should. I believe we'll be seeing more and more of these good decisions and as more victims receive restitution perhaps even more victims will step up and demand theirs as well.

Senior U.S. District Judge Lacey A. Collier issued a judgment ordering Freeman to pay restitution in the amount of $3,263,758

This restitution judgment is one of the first of its kind in the United States. At the hearing, Assistant U.S. Attorney David L. Goldberg presented the testimony of a forensic pediatrician and a psychologist in order to inform the court of the long-lasting trauma that child pornography has upon the victims whose images are taken. Judge Collier noted, "Each and every individual who possesses and downloads these images victimizes these children." Though Freeman had previously been sentenced to life in prison, he has assets from which the restitution judgment can be obtained.

This case was brought as part of Project Safe Childhood, a nationwide initiative to combat the growing epidemic of child sexual exploitation and abuse, launched in May 2006 by the Department of Justice. Led by U.S. Attorneys' Offices and the Criminal Division's Child Exploitation and Obscenity Section (CEOS), Project Safe Childhood marshals federal, state and local resources to better locate, apprehend and prosecute individuals who exploit children via the Internet, as well as to identify and rescue victims. For more information about Project Safe Childhood, please visit www.projectsafechildhood.gov.

"I want to be regarded as low risk"

Gary Anderson or "Gareth" sure does get around. He changed his name legally from Simeon Hope and uses the nicks CapNemo, KidsPower, and luv_lauren99 (among others)

Gary is a pedophile. He likes little girls and he likes little boys too. He says his "age of attraction" is 8 or 9, and 7-12 for boys.

Of course Gary is also a convicted sex offender. A repeat sex offender.

Gary was a teacher working with children when he was convicted in 2000 for distributing child pornography and possession of greater than 51,000 images. After serving only 18 months in prison he joined pedophile groups and returned triumphantly to his previous activities. But, less than two years after his release he was convicted AGAIN for the same thing.

"Yesterday, he was jailed for 18 months and banned from ever working with children or keeping a computer with Internet access. He was also ordered to serve an extended licence, once released, of four-and-a-half years, to be controlled by the probation service and receive treatment."

Did he keep a computer? Or was he using someone elses? Just as soon he got out there he was again posting all over pedophile message boards. BoyChat, GirlChat, BoyMoment and of course he joined Sosen too.

He talked about his treatment program in very mocking terms. Not only did he not need therapy dammit! But he wasn't going to cooperate with it either.

"My strategy is to tell these lovely, caring people what they like to hear. My real thoughts I keep to myself and for here. I want to be regarded as low risk, so that I can lead a more normal life."

"My feeling about this kind of therapy is that it just puts huge powers into the hands of prejudiced, ignorant fools. Instead of someone being given a limited punishment and then allowed to restart their life, we must wait until they say we are ready. That can be years or never."

Sex Offender Treatment is really gonna help this guy isn't it? While he was in prison he wrote letters to John Hodgson aka taf-kat who roams around the net stealing photos of peoples children from their photo albums for masturbation purposes and just another GirlChat pervert multi-convicted child porn freak who kept the twittering pedophiles apprised of their missing in action hero by posting Gary's letters on GirlChat. Gary wrote:

"I am on licence until December 2008 (yes, '08). The judge laid into me at my sentencing, as these morons do, and said that he expected that I will never again be allowed access to the Net. Well..."

Gary claimed the women in his life all knew what he was and what he did:

"I've had two partners who knew all about my attraction to children (mainly 7-12yo). The first was my wife, who gradually became aware over years as I told her more. She was generally accepting, even when she knew I was downloading CP, but left me instantly when I was arrested for that.

Teh second is my current partner. She doesn't like it, but knew about it from the start, as she visited me in prison. She just thinks men are all pervs anyway."

In addition to communicating with pedophile message boards while still in prison Gary has been on those pedo boards and sex offender boards any time he wasn't in prison. In fact, he's still an active member and had his own comments edited by GirlChat when requesting links to "child modeling photos" just a few months ago. But Gary didn't just have child pornography, distribute child pornography and rant and rave about legalizing child pornography (what the sex offender advocacy groups refer to as a "victimless crime") and legalized adult/child sex (no age of consent laws). NO. He wrote stories too. Graphic stories. The kind of stories Ricky's Mom says helps prevent child sexual abuse.

"My intention from the outset was to at least attempt to fuck her, though I knew it wouldn't be easy with a child so young. But it was the day after her seventh birthday and I wanted her to experience it."

"I wondered what her dad would think if he saw us now: his naked seven-year-old daughter sitting by his couch with her vulva reddened and wet with fucking, and her loving partner, a grown man five times her age sat next to her"

I know what you're thinking but that's not graphic. I left the graphic parts out.

Gary wrote:

"It's an excellent article, and a brave stand to take these days. However, it is not a defence of childloving, merely a defence of our legal rights. Commendable, but there is much further to go. I don't just want my legal rights to defend myself, I want my sexuality made legal."

Yes of course. That's what all childhaters want. From BoyChat and GirlChat to the groups who want the same thing but call it something else like Reform Sex Offender Laws Campaign and Sosen. Abolish age of consent laws.... that will solve the problem of child sexual abuse......it would no longer be illegal to groom, manipulate and molest children. And after all, "the government has no right to interfere."

Does it?