I need say I don't think he should go to prison for twenty years
random thoughts Send a noteboard - 26/02/2011 07:30:17 PM
Or even be tried as a sexual predator but I think what he did was appalling and if that is the only law they can hit him with I think that would be better then just letting it go. The two cases are somewhat similar because Blair wasn't doing the voice of the demon either. I think they are very different situations though I will just stick to the three biggest differences. You were never supposed to think that either the actress or the girl she was playing was the one saying those things. The things she was saying were meant to be shocking and vulgar not sexual. but the big was is Blair was never portrayed as being sexual while these girls were show giggling at his suggestions.
Besides people were pretty damn upset with The Exorcist when it came and thought it had gone to far. What it comes down to me as a father of a young girl is I know how furious I would be if my daughter was used and humiliated in such a way and I would want the law to go after him any way they can. He is not the victim.
Edit: Almost for got the age. Blair was 14, old enough to marry in some sates any these kids looked to be in first or second grade.
Besides people were pretty damn upset with The Exorcist when it came and thought it had gone to far. What it comes down to me as a father of a young girl is I know how furious I would be if my daughter was used and humiliated in such a way and I would want the law to go after him any way they can. He is not the victim.
Edit: Almost for got the age. Blair was 14, old enough to marry in some sates any these kids looked to be in first or second grade.
This message last edited by random thoughts on 26/02/2011 at 07:35:42 PM
musician jailed over youtube prank -- faces 20+years plus child porn charges
- 20/02/2011 07:55:33 AM
1252 Views
Mmmm, there is more to it . At first I was thinking it was much ado about nothing.
- 20/02/2011 03:31:51 PM
1054 Views
This explains what happened better and lets me feel a little mercy for the guy.
- 20/02/2011 03:59:41 PM
1146 Views
as stated, the children were never exposed to the "adult only" performance
- 20/02/2011 04:35:32 PM
803 Views
So I guess the moral of this story is think before you put things on the internet. *NM*
- 20/02/2011 06:10:32 PM
319 Views
His only mistake was not getting them to sign something, allowing to be posted on youtube
- 21/02/2011 01:51:30 AM
780 Views
kids don't have that right. The parents would have needed to sign. *NM*
- 21/02/2011 07:24:04 PM
337 Views
The lyrics were hilarious? The sample I read and posted had nothing funny in them...maybe you can
- 22/02/2011 12:35:05 AM
689 Views
Well ... from this parents perspective
- 21/02/2011 12:33:25 PM
785 Views
*NM*
For using the childrens' faces without permission he could be sued for monetary damages.
- 21/02/2011 01:50:19 PM
810 Views
Re: For using the childrens' faces without permission he could be sued for monetary damages.
- 21/02/2011 03:46:48 PM
794 Views
Tashmere's first reply above has a sample of the lyrics and how they were cut with the video. *NM*
- 21/02/2011 03:58:35 PM
302 Views
Agreed, that's really the only thing I can see that he can be sued for here. *NM*
- 25/02/2011 10:36:53 PM
296 Views
"Oh, I didn't actually abuse any of those kids."
- 21/02/2011 02:37:00 PM
729 Views
Agreed. But being an asshat is not a crime. *NM*
- 21/02/2011 05:02:59 PM
289 Views
no but using children to create sexually explicit material is
- 21/02/2011 07:36:32 PM
812 Views
Yes, this was disgusting, but since when does dirty lyrics = porn?
- 22/02/2011 04:18:05 PM
783 Views
The written word can be considered porn so why not song lyrics?
- 22/02/2011 05:04:37 PM
721 Views
It can?
- 23/02/2011 04:34:40 AM
793 Views
Yep
- 23/02/2011 05:04:49 AM
786 Views
Actually, obscenity is one of the most poorly defined concepts in US law.
- 26/02/2011 09:57:21 PM
868 Views
Am I the only one thinking of The Exorcist here?
- 25/02/2011 10:40:58 PM
851 Views
yes you are the only one thinking that
*NM*
- 25/02/2011 11:33:53 PM
284 Views
*NM*
- 25/02/2011 11:33:53 PM
284 Views
You gotta admit it doesn't get much worse than that in terms of exposing children to obscenity.
- 26/02/2011 12:13:46 AM
733 Views
I need say I don't think he should go to prison for twenty years
- 26/02/2011 07:30:17 PM
764 Views
Not sure if anyone else has asked this...
- 25/02/2011 01:19:08 PM
1038 Views
kids are video taped all the time at schools
- 25/02/2011 02:05:38 PM
689 Views
School staff is one thing, outside sources are another.
- 25/02/2011 02:56:20 PM
759 Views
most states run background checks and this guy may have had one run on him
- 25/02/2011 03:19:58 PM
763 Views
he got permission from the teacher and the kids' parents before the original filming session
- 25/02/2011 03:20:30 PM
760 Views
they probably didn't think he would it to make a "funny" video
- 26/02/2011 07:43:59 PM
868 Views
show one example the song was about sex with children and I might agree *NM*
- 26/02/2011 09:23:44 PM
330 Views
If you try hard enough you can believe whatever you want
- 26/02/2011 10:09:45 PM
771 Views
and if you're determined to railroad someone none of the facts matter
- 26/02/2011 11:36:42 PM
933 Views
If I put out a video that had you giggling as I sung about cumming on your face you would be fine?
- 27/02/2011 09:09:25 PM
706 Views
of course not, but the 1st amendment says you have the right
- 27/02/2011 11:02:42 PM
668 Views
the courts ruled a long time ago that the 1st amendment does not cover all speech
- 28/02/2011 10:58:38 PM
890 Views