Brooke Bennett, 12 years old Randolph VT #20

[marly56]

I found this report in the Guardian that contradicts what someone posted about snuff films being an urban legend.

British link to 'snuff' videos
published October 1, 2000

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Archive/Article/0,4273,4070446,00.html

I'm starting to think there's a possibility of "Russian type" as being a lot more violent then *advertiser censored* that's not classified as "Russian". I could be totally off base though.

where is the outrage? i hold the media responsible in the way these stories are reported. by the end of these detailed articles one reading it will feel so sad and helpless...where is the outrage from the media,the russian government, the parents?

 

[MoonFlwr]

Maybe psychiatrists have asked prosecutors to hold off on that so AR can get therapy?

Once they charge him with that, he could turn around & demand a speedy trial & that could be a nightmare for AR.


On the other hand, it might be better (for AR) if they could make a deal with him to drop those abuse charges completely IF he cooperates with the rest of the charges?

Actually, you may be right, that it may be better for AR if they were dropped. She would have to be part of a lengthy, sordid court case!
(But, on the other hand, that could possibly be part of the healing process, too!?)

 

[LI_Mom]

Here's an article dated today:
Russia and US child *advertiser censored*, the Buffalo News

http://www.buffalonews.com/339/story/182863.html

Ugh! Very informative article.


The numbers of those viewing paid or free child *advertiser censored* are so huge that the U.S. criminal justice system isn’t equipped to handle all the cases.

“The feds are essentially triaging,” said Grier Weeks, executive director of the North Carolina-based National Association to Protect Children. “They are so overwhelmed. They are barely investigating a token percentage. They simply can’t even begin to investigate [all] the cases. It’s like asking the Mayberry Police Department to police all of us.”

 

[Liz]

Strict laws don't seem to make of a difference when it comes to murder or other violent crimes. Is it reasonable to think it will impact CP??


Here's another interesting link:

http://www.out-law.com/page-6710


Almost half (47%) of the reported child abuse websites turned out to be commercial Pay-Per-View sites – 70% of which are hosted in Russia or the US. In fact, says the IWF, in 2005 40% of all child abuse content was traced to the US and 28% was found to be from Russia. Seventeen percent was traced to Asian countries and 13% to Europe.

If strict laws don't have an effect on crime, then why would we or any other country bother having any strict laws?

IF I'm not mistaken, the population of the U.S. is more than twice that of Russia's.

Just checked.
Russia's pop 2007 est - 141,377,752
The U.S. pop 2007 est- 301,139,947

Not trying to excuse that there is an over-abundance of child *advertiser censored* in the U.S. by any means, but I do believe we take child *advertiser censored* more seriously than Russia does.

 

[LI_Mom]

Actually, you may be right, that it may be better for AR if they were dropped. She would have to be part of a lengthy, sordid court case!
(But, on the other hand, that couldpossibly be part of the healing process, too!?)

But I'd think she would be better off with intensive therapy even BEFORE she had to face a trial.

At this point, who knows whether she would even testify against him effectively?

Once she's stronger & older... it might do her a world of good.... unless she simply prefers to move on with her life & not have to face him again.

 

[SeriouslySearching]

The United States, in fact, is the biggest host country, with Russia a distant second, the British study found, although many of the Web sites float back and forth between the two countries.

American officials say the United Kingdom numbers are somewhat inflated because of different definitions of child *advertiser censored*, but the Internet Watch Foundation said its definitions are now in line with the U.S. Regardless, the United States acknowledges the role its Internet industry serves in hosting worldwide child *advertiser censored*.

“It’s well-documented that the reason the U.S. servers are being used is the broadband width and the high capacity,” said Claude Davenport, a supervising agent with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement. “Some countries in Eastern Europe just don’t have the [computerized] infrastructure.” Just as upsetting to some Russians, however, are the large numbers of Americans purchasing the images.

“There are few consumers within Russia,” said Ponomarenko, the Moscow police official. “This material, which probably is produced in Russia, is oriented toward Western consumers. There is a demand for it over there. If there is no demand, there will be no production,” he said.

“There are a lot of people who use child *advertiser censored* in the U.S.,” added Rusakova.

Recent investigations bear that out. In one case, for example, authorities busted an Eastern European child *advertiser censored* operation, known as Regpay, and found up to half the company’s 90,000 customers were from the United States.

U.S. officials, recognizing the role America plays in the Russian problem, help Eastern European law enforcement stamp out production mills such as Regpay.

“We have a responsibility for combating and eradicating it,” said Marshall Heeger, a federal investigator with the American Embassy in Moscow.

Russia appreciates the U.S. assistance, but suggests America do a better job attacking the problem on its own ground as well.

The moral issues creating the demand for child *advertiser censored* in the United States must be addressed, said Pavel N. Gusev, editor-in-chief of a major Russian newspaper chain, who also serves on a panel studying Russia’s *advertiser censored* laws.

“I think you should make the nation more healthy. It’s a problem of the nation,” he said of the United States.

http://www.buffalonews.com/339/story/182863.html

 

[MoonFlwr]

But I'd think she would be better off with intensive therapy even BEFORE she had to face a trial.

At this point, who knows whether she would even testify against him effectively?

Once she's stronger & older... it might do her a world of good.... unless she simply prefers to move on with her life & not have to face him again.

*nod* !

Such a complicated mess she is in. Poor thing!

 

[DianeB]

I think one of the reasons there isn't more public outrage is because of the 'faceless' nature of these crimes.

The children who are victims must be protected. They're not named nor photographed in the news articles. If your average newspaper or internet news reader saw photos of the sweet little kids who are being horribly abused, the outcry would be huge.

We see them only when they are killed, by which time it's too late.

It's a terrible conundrum.

 

[LI_Mom]

If strict laws don't have an effect on crime, then why would we or any other country bother having any strict laws?

IF I'm not mistaken, the population of the U.S. is more than twice that of Russia's.

Just checked.
Russia's pop 2007 est - 141,377,752
The U.S. pop 2007 est- 301,139,947

Not trying to excuse that there is an over-abundance of child *advertiser censored* in the U.S. by any means, but I do believe we take child *advertiser censored* more seriously than Russia does.

Well we have strict laws because REASONABLE PEOPLE don't like to face severe punishments.

But it sure does seem that once people graduate to more violent crimes.... they're not considering what will happen IF they get caught.

So the strict laws punish people AFTER the fact but I just don't know how much of a deterrent they are.

As to Russia vs. the USA... they supply... WE buy. I have a feeling even if the Russian govt. spent 24/7/365 fighting the export of CP... the USA would simply find new suppliers.

So what's wrong with US.... how do we address this sick 'demand' for CP???

 

[LI_Mom]

I think one of the reasons there isn't more public outrage is because of the 'faceless' nature of these crimes.

The children who are victims must be protected. They're not named nor photographed in the news articles. If your average newspaper or internet news reader saw photos of the sweet little kids who are being horribly abused, the outcry would be huge.

We see them only when they are killed, by which time it's too late.

It's a terrible conundrum.

Or would people start to become overwhelmed with outrage & grief & tune it out?

I think if society identified families at risk & had meaningful programs to HELP these families before situations escalated, it would make a difference. Social workers are overworked & underpaid.... and they simply cannot deal effectively with ALL the families that need help.


But this would require a ton of money that the govt. isn't prepared to spend.

 

[Liz]

Well we have strict laws because REASONABLE PEOPLE don't like to face severe punishments.

But it sure does seem that once people graduate to more violent crimes.... they're not considering what will happen IF they get caught.

So the strict laws punish people AFTER the fact but I just don't know how much of a deterrent they are.

As to Russia vs. the USA... they supply... WE buy. I have a feeling even if the Russian govt. spent 24/7/365 fighting the export of CP... the USA would simply find new suppliers.

So what's wrong with US.... how do we address this sick 'demand' for CP???

That's why we need to call for extreme measures the first time perps are caught hurting a child. As you noticed with Jacques, they only get braver.
Apparently this was his 4th offense! 4th! Arghhhh! :banghead:

Yesterday I suggested beheadings and I'm dead serious! Both of 'em!

 

[DianeB]

From the link posted by Carrington:

Here in Russia, where possessing child *advertiser censored* is legal, no child is too far from the pornographer’s clutches.

Dmitry Burlak was just 13, hanging out with friends in front of an apartment building, when a dog bit his leg.

It wasn’t a particularly bad bite. It barely broke the skin.

Still, dog owner Valera Kovalev insisted the boys come back to his nearby apartment.

“He treated us to candies, chocolate and drinks,” Dmitry recalled. “And he asked us not to tell anything to our parents because he would have problems otherwise.”

Kovalev spent weeks luring the cute 13-year-old boy into his trap before slipping Dmitry and one of his friends, Misha, some kind of pills. After that, the boys agreed to pose nude for pictures that the 57-year-old man took and then sold and shared with the world.

That’s where the United States fits in.

No country has a bigger cyber network than the United States. And right now, it’s barely regulated. So it’s easy for child pornographers to rent space on American computer servers with no questions asked. And that’s what’s happening.

Russia produces the child *advertiser censored*, and Web servers in the United States host the disgusting images so anyone — with Americans being the single biggest market — can see them for a price. In fact, nearly two-thirds of all commercial child *advertiser censored* on the Internet — including images produced in Russia — is transmitted to the world through Web servers owned and operated in the United States, one study found.

The Digital Millenium Copyright Act protects ISP's from prosecution of copyright violations as long as it takes down the infringing content once it has been notified.

Is there a similar legal protection in place for websites that host child *advertiser censored*? I'm not in favor of Big Brother overseeing the internet, but I think a US-based internet provider should be held accountable if it is found to be hosting child *advertiser censored*.

 

[DianeB]

Or would people start to become overwhelmed with outrage & grief & tune it out?

You're right - there could be a danger of compassion fatigue.

 

[LI_Mom]

From the link posted by Carrington:



The Digital Millenium Copyright Act protects ISP's from prosecution of copyright violations as long as it takes down the infringing content once it has been notified.

Is there a similar legal protection in place for websites that host child *advertiser censored*? I'm not in favor of Big Brother overseeing the internet, but I think a US-based internet provider should be held accountable if it is found to be hosting child *advertiser censored*.

I think most CP is probably traded privately.... you contact a person & buy/sell/trade.

The ISP really doesn't have any idea WHAT people are sending each other.... until AFTER they send it.

 

[LI_Mom]

One more problem..... if we can't agree on the age of consent... how do we effectively regulate CP?

https://www.inhope.org/en/hotlines/facts.html

INHOPE Members

One of the major difficulties in the fight for child protection, and against child trafficking and child *advertiser censored* is the international, multi-jurisdiction nature of the crime.


Age of Consent

Each country has its own definition of what the age of consent to sexual activity is which, in some cases, is different from the Age used in Child *advertiser censored* Legislation.

 

[SeriouslySearching]

It mentioned in the article I posted earlier that Russia raised their age of consent to 16 years old four years ago. Before then it was 14 years old.

I think the internet should fall under international law concerning cp. Let them determine the universal age of consent.

 

[Aleph]

In the Gagnon affidavit, RG admitted to having 5 years worth of "Russian" type child *advertiser censored*.

If anyone please explain what that means ("Russian type"), I'd really appreciate it!

And how much is "5 years' worth" of *advertiser censored*? (And, conversely, can time also be measured in *advertiser censored*?)

I am probably the only one, but every time I read that sentence from the affidavit I just shake my head. It must be the English major in me, but it seems absurd.

 

[Aleph]

Thanks for your input. I supposed that could be a possibility. It still doesn't really satisfy my curiousity though. In the affadavit, it specifically said "Russian type child *advertiser censored*". I would like to know what differentiates the 'type'.

I think it's RG's way of saying, "The victims are white, but they're not American." Just my guess.

 

[Carrington]

I think R Gagnon was trying to say it was "Legal" because it was Russian.

 

[LaLaw2000]

They have to have some proof the safe and contents existed, don't they? I would have to assume this is why no charges yet.

Well, you do not lie to the FBI without consequenses. I would imagine that KG had given a taped statement to the FBI and signed one as well. This guy has to have some sort of deal, IMO. Plus, he would have to stick to his initial story I would think. I tend to think that if there ever was a safe, it was an empty safe emptied by KG or even RG before he left.
The FBI knows through phone records that KG did get a call from RG. What cannot be determined is what the conversation consisted of. I would think that the FBI could charge KG with Obstruction of Justice if they wanted to due to his statement alone. May be a weak case, but you can indite a ham sandwich as the saying goes. KG knows very well that he has really messed up. Charge him - drag him through court if nothing else.

I have read all of the articles posted today, even those in the posts. It seems that LE and the FBI have been doing all they could to reduce the amount of CP. There is going to have to be longer sentences and harsher punishments. These slimeballs should get a straight 25 years at hard labor without the possibility of parole for just looking at CP. On the second offense, LWOP. Anyone molesting or sexually abusing a child should get LWOP. Then if you murder a child, the DP.

I am sick and tired of this happening to our children! I have written to the lawmakers in my state. I hope everyone will continue to insist that the laws change and longer sentences be imposed.

Brooke Bennett was murdered because a parole officer and a judge decided Jacques was no longer a threat. You do not let an RSO off probation SEVEN years early! WHY can't the parole boards and the Judges see that this type of slime cannot be rehabilitated? We see it - why can't they?

I will get off of my soap box now. I am just so angry still that Brooke did not get to celebrate her 13th birthday, will never have a Sweet Sixteen Party, will never have the chance to marry and have children of her own. At least we know that Brooke is flying with the angels tonight, and that the person that murdered her is in jail awaiting trial that better end with justice for Brooke!