NFL Fanhouse - Jeremy Green, NFL Analyst, Arrested on Child Porn Charge

[War Paint]

But I digress. And the law is the law. And child porn is child porn.

Hopefully, if guilty, Green gets what he deserves.

__________________

You make some really valid and logical points and nothing is worse than the case of a 19 boy being arrested for rape of his seventeen year old girl friend when she consented. The laws are screwed up, but in this case you had an adult male who take advantage of a minor. Pretty clear cut. The laws definately need to be adjusted and are not flexible. The other guys defense with an opening statement including a Winger video would be worthy of a Judge Joe Brown show but would be laughed out of any real court and he would no longer practice law.

lol... obviously if a lawyer used the Winger argument in court, it wouldn't go well. The Winger argument was used because I felt that I had to simplify things for some here. It's like some brains here have a hard time processing shades of gray.

So in regards to the Winger video, do you think it would have been a hit and as popular as it was in the 80's if the song was called "eight"?

Perhaps you protested a Winger concert in the 80's? Were you one of those guys who went to rock concerts telling everyone in line they were going to hell?

[NewCliche21]

Hey, like I told the other guy, where in my post did I say it wasn't bad? I cleary said it was wrong. My argument is that I find one more sinister than the other. But to answer your question, society has said 18 is the magic number, so 18 it is. However, some states have 16 as the age of consent so whatever.

As for the guy who you said was making jokes about child porn, I'll let him speak for himself on that. However, I didn't see him joking about it. He added a lol face, but I don't think he meant anything by it. He just sees shades of gray in regards this, as do I. Maybe if you quit being a message board drama queen like you are in political threads, you can clearly see that a 17 year old is past puberty, the 8 year old is not.

1) It's okay that you don't get it. Child porn is child porn; there is no difference in the law. No child deserves to be exploited. And if you think that an 18-year-old is not still considered to be a kid in the scheme of life, then you don't know very many 18-year-olds.

2) When he's laughing about something, then he thinks that he's funny. Might want to re-check your PSYC 100 notes for that nugget of information.

3) Just because you don't care doesn't mean that you're right, because you're not. And, just for your information since it's clearly lacking, puberty can start at age seven and the human brain does not stop developing until 25, with many women not starting their cycles before 20. So, if you want to keep showing your ignorance, then go ahead. You're just affirming my points.

I agree that it is not a laughing matter. And that child porn is child porn. The law is the law. The guilty should be punished.

But your slippery slope argument seemingly equating 17 with 9 and 3/4 is not the best tactic. If that logic is used, then 17 is much more easily equated with the arbitrary designator of "adulthood," 18. Which, I know, is not the way to go.

And in regards to your last statement, that is rather large, thick blanket to throw over the entire topic. While, yes, those cases are horribly despicable, that is not the definition of child porn. Child porn can also apply to 17 year old girls who sneak into Girls Gone Wild parties and trade their tits for beads and a t-shirt while signing a disclosure agreement. Say what you will, but I would not judge someone who unknowingly possessed nude images of a 17 year old girl who actively volunteered and received compensation for such images as severely as someone who rapes prepubescent children. Even if you align them on the same spectrum, they have to be at opposite ends.

But I digress. And the law is the law. And child porn is child porn.

Hopefully, if guilty, Green gets what he deserves.

I think that the videotaped rape of a toddler is a little more severe than a Girls Gone Wild tape, too. There certainly is a broad spectrum. However, it's a no-tolerance policy for me.

And your example of the seventeen-year-old is, unfortunately, the outlier in most child porn cases. Pre- or early-pubescent porn is the top draw in sex abuse investigations. What these children go through is unimaginable, and to insert humor into it is inexcusable.

[NewCliche21]

Wow, I don't even know where to begin with you. You obviously don't know how to use the quote function properly, so it's too tedious to go through your jumbled rant. It's okay. You've overstated an argument on the internet. It's very easy to do. Don't nerd rage over it. It's not my fault you only see things in extremes, in pure black and white.

Take a couple of thieves for example. One stole 500 bucks out of a register when the clerk wasn't looking, but was caught on camera. The other robbed a clerk by gun point, and while threatening the clerks life, stole 5 k out of the safe. Obviously both are wrong. Obviously both broke the law. Obviously both have to face the judge. However, I don't see how a judge can give both guys the same sentence. One crime was clearly worse than the other. With your way of thinking, you'd give 25 years to life to both thieves.

Logic good. Emotional rants without thought..bad. Were you in the Taliban at one point?

You might want to stop attacking people personally. It doesn't compensate for your lack of a coherent, adult, or respected argument.

I'm wondering what your perspective would be if you had a seventeen-year-old son daughter who was forced to take pictures of him/herself (you do realize that the vast majority of child porn cases, across all ages, is against the child's will, right?) and sold to thousands of people all over the world. Something tells me that you wouldn't be posting what you're posting.

[Bubble Screen]

lol@ the Winger video slant.

[thebluefood]

The only man who will speak on Jeremy Green's behalf, I'm sure.

[War Paint]

1) It's okay that you don't get it. Child porn is child porn; there is no difference in the law. No child deserves to be exploited. And if you think that an 18-year-old is not still considered to be a kid in the scheme of life, then you don't know very many 18-year-olds.

Okay, so now you're saying 18 year olds and 8 year olds are pretty much the same. I guess I learned something. All 18 year old girls are immature kids. Do 18 year old girls still play with Barbie Dolls too? Has it occurred to you that some 18 year old girls might be more mature than some 25 year olds? I've seen some really dumb 25 year olds. I've seen 30 year olds act stupid before.

2) When he's laughing about something, then he thinks that he's funny. Might want to re-check your PSYC 100 notes for that nugget of information

First of all, I don't know the guy and I don't want to put words in his mouth. I just thought you were pretty unfair with him. You get dramatic, sling mud and hope some of it sticks. Well, if you want to try to play the Psy 101 card, look at this possibility. The subject of child porn is very dark and disturbing. Perhaps he used the lol face as a way to lessen the dark feel of the subject and created a slight comfort zone for himself when discussing it.

3) Just because you don't care doesn't mean that you're right, because you're not. And, just for your information since it's clearly lacking, puberty can start at age seven and the human brain does not stop developing until 25, with many women not starting their cycles before 20. So, if you want to keep showing your ignorance, then go ahead. You're just affirming my points.

Who said I didn't care? So let's see, you are now basically saying every girl is a naive dimwit until they hit 25? Girls are their most fertile between the ages of 18-24. Why would nature have girls become most fertile when as you said, they don't have enough brains to know what they're doing?

I think that the videotaped rape of a toddler is a little more severe than a Girls Gone Wild tape, too.

As do I. Wow. We finally agree on something.

[War Paint]

You might want to stop attacking people personally. It doesn't compensate for your lack of a coherent, adult, or respected argument.

I'm wondering what your perspective would be if you had a seventeen-year-old son daughter who was forced to take pictures of him/herself (you do realize that the vast majority of child porn cases, across all ages, is against the child's will, right?) and sold to thousands of people all over the world. Something tells me that you wouldn't be posting what you're posting.

NewCliche, can you do anything besides throw blanket statements? First of all, if I did have a 17 year old son or daughter, how would they be in the position to be forced to take nude pics of themselves? Were they kidnapped? Obviously if my son or daughter was kidnapped by a sex ring, I would do everything in my power to find him or her and try to destroy the sex ring.

What is the other possibility? Did my 17 year old run away from home and joined the porn industry while lying about her age so she could get paid? Yes, I would be devastated. However, she made a poor choice.

Did my 17 year old give nude photos of herself to her boyfriend, thinking that he would keep them private, but instead he posted them on the internet? Yes I would be upset. It would be a painful lesson for her.

Obviously when it comes to prepubescent children, there is no doubt that 100% of the prepubescent kids are put there against their will by a person who IMO is worthy of death.

Perhaps you didn't clearly read my first post in this thread where I said older men looking at 17 year old girls is wrong. I just feel that men looking at prepubescent is much more sinister. Both are bad. One is much worse IMO. I don't know how much more clearer I can be.

[NewCliche21]

War Paint, you know what? Fine, I give up. You win.

[SWFLSkins]

lol... obviously if a lawyer used the Winger argument in court, it wouldn't go well. The Winger argument was used because I felt that I had to simplify things for some here. It's like some brains here have a hard time processing shades of gray.

So in regards to the Winger video, do you think it would have been a hit and as popular as it was in the 80's if the song was called "eight"?

Perhaps you protested a Winger concert in the 80's? Were you one of those guys who went to rock concerts telling everyone in line they were going to hell?

The Winger argument, now there is case law in the making.

BTW, I love Rock, the classics. If I was at a Winger concert to tell people anything it was that they were stupid as hell. And you keep writing that as if it makes it somehow okay. You suffer from pretzel logic, away with you.

[SWFLSkins]

Logic good. Emotional rants without thought..bad. Were you in the Taliban at one point?

_______________________________________________

WarPaint, I suggest you apologize for that remark.

[jkypoo]

You make some really valid and logical points and nothing is worse than the case of a 19 boy being arrested for rape of his seventeen year old girl friend when she consented. The laws are screwed up, but in this case you had an adult male who take advantage of a minor. Pretty clear cut. The laws definately need to be adjusted and are not flexible. The other guys defense with an opening statement including a Winger video would be worthy of a Judge Joe Brown show but would be laughed out of any real court and he would no longer practice law.

To that point, I knew of (read: did not know personally) a guy who, when 17, got his 15 year old girlfriend pregnant. After he finished high school he got a job and was supporting them as she finished high school. Of course, they were still sharing a bed. As the story goes, he ended up sleeping with somebody else and they started having problems and broke up. So the mom pressed statutory rape charges and he got convicted. Went to prison. And is now a registered sex offender for the rest of his life. Because he slept with the mother of his child when he was over 18. I know this is horribly aside the entire matter at hand, but does present "gray" area in a manner that most have a hard time disregarding.

I have nothing to say about the whole Winger thing. Nothing.

And I'm definitely not defending Jeremy Green.

I think that the videotaped rape of a toddler is a little more severe than a Girls Gone Wild tape, too. There certainly is a broad spectrum. However, it's a no-tolerance policy for me.

And your example of the seventeen-year-old is, unfortunately, the outlier in most child porn cases. Pre- or early-pubescent porn is the top draw in sex abuse investigations. What these children go through is unimaginable, and to insert humor into it is inexcusable.

I used the GGW example as a hyperbole merely to prove the point that at some point, as with most laws or moral dictates, the waters muddy. Read my response just above for a less exaggerated and nonhypothetical example. I understand and agree with you about the rest. That other end of the spectrum makes me physical ill to consider the depravity that exists in the world. It is merely unfortunate that in order to protect the purely innocent we must, in some cases, prosecute the mostly or somewhat innocent. But given the current state of things, it is a necessary evil.

[Teller]

He was

who

they

thought he was

and they

let him off the hook

Not funny subject matter by any stretch, but this post is full of win.

[BillyKilmer]

Well it depends. Was he watching 17 year old girls or 8 year old boys? This stuff matters.

I join the chorus of naysayers We have these laws to protect our young people

[SWFLSkins]

I have nothing to say about the whole Winger thing. Nothing.

And I'm definitely not defending Jeremy Green.

I used the GGW example as a hyperbole merely to prove the point that at some point, as with most laws or moral dictates, the waters muddy. Read my response just above for a less exaggerated and nonhypothetical example.

Never thought you were defending Green, and you make sense in many regards. However the GGW argument fails because again the liability falls on those adults making money off of minors. Taxes and failure to document age is what got Joe from GGW convicted. BTW, I have nothing against young legal age girls doing whatever they want. I think it is in most cases a choice they may regret.

And I agree if those adults prove that the minors posed as adults and used fake id's, then they were smart enough to know better. There are many cases though where nearly legal minors were manipulated by the adults into doing things via money, drugs or even love.

No updates as of yet, he is no longer working at ESPN though.

_________________________________________________

Jeremy Green admitted to police he is a “cocaine user” after he was arrested by Bristol, Conn., Police on Thursday and charged with first-degree possession of child pornography, possession of narcotics and possession of drug paraphanalia, according to a report in the Bristol Press.

Green was arrested at the Holiday Inn Express in nearby Southington and appeared in court today for arraignment. The arrest warrant has been sealed for 14 days, per the report, and prosecutor Ronald Dearstyne said, “This is a very serious case, and in my opinion a good case.”

Green allegedly possess more than 50 images of child pornography because that is the minimum threshold for a first degree charge in Connecticut.

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news?slug=nfp-20100709_jeremy_green_told_police_he_is_a_cocaine_user

[SWFLSkins]

War Paint, I am still awaiting your apology. I expect you to publically apologize for your comment. Be a human and admit it was wrong. I don't want it PM'd, I want and expect it here in this thread.

I will not accept the Taliban comment as rational and will excuse the comment after an apology. You do not know the sacrifices made to allow that comment to be allowable under law in the first place.

[War Paint]

War Paint, I am still awaiting your apology. I expect you to publically apologize for your comment. Be a human and admit it was wrong. I don't want it PM'd, I want and expect it here in this thread.

I will not accept the Taliban comment as rational and will excuse the comment after an apology. You do not know the sacrifices made to allow that comment to be allowable under law in the first place.

Well, if you are waiting for an apology from me, you'll be waiting a long time. Is Taliban the "T" word now?

You've twisted my words. Because I said one crime is worse than the other (notice that throughout this thread, I've clearly said BOTH are wrong) YOU said this:

So go school yard all you want, but stay off the children, and 17 is in fact a child. Even if they don't know that.

With your quote, you pretty much implied that I'm some school yard dude. You should apologize for that. However, I don't care or want an apology from you because I'm not a cry baby. The way you're acting, you pretty much have shown that you are acting like a drama queen, or a drama king, if that makes you feel better.

In regards to the Taliban comment, I "asked" if you were in the Taliban in a "flippant" manner. I never accused you are said you were in the Taliban. Grow up.

[Big Blue Joe]

So go school yard all you want, but stay off the children, and 17 is in fact a child. Even if they don't know that.

That's not actually true. In several states it's perfectly legal for an adult to have sex with a 17-year old. For instance, if LT's prostitute had been 17, it only would have been an embarrassment to him instead of a crime. You know, besides the whole prostitution thing.

[jaydogg3eb]

First off, I would like to apologize for my statement regarding 17 girls and 8 year old boys. I understand that child porn is child porn, but I FIRMLY believe there is a difference between 17 year old girls who voluntarily take nude photos and make money and 8 year old kids who have no idea what is going on.

It's the same argument that prosecuting attorneys make when they try to convince a jury that a 17 year old kid knew what he was doing when he killed someone. While I understand that saying it jokingly was not the best way to go, I'm just saying it's the point I was trying to make.

[Big Blue Joe]

Child porn is really funny.

Let's make some Holocaust jokes next.

:doh:

I've heard countless jokes about Michael Jackson and(NSFW) Catholic priests on the late night shows over the years. Not to mention, the(again NSFW) Hitler- angry Cowboys fan Youtube videos. Almost anything can be made into a joke. For instance, here is Chris Rock making some hilarious ones about racism, including the genocide of the American Indians (totally NSFW):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xTEjiFEaIy8

[SWFLSkins]

Well, if you are waiting for an apology from me, you'll be waiting a long time. Is Taliban the "T" word now?

--Logic good. Emotional rants without thought..bad. Were you in the Taliban at one point?

_______________________________________________________

War Paint this is fully what I expected, you fail. You fail as a man. I would be perfectly able to admit a mistake had one been made. That is called being a grown up. I am a man so I gave you the chance to admit your error.

NObody, NOBODY suggests that I was in the Taliban that knows me well. You, Internet slouch can do it without consideration and knowledge of exactly what that means. Go look in the mirror and give that some that some thought, if you can get your mind around it.

--Or come back with some dumb sarcastic remark that makes you look more foolish than you already have if that is possible.

And yes arguing with an idiot is idiotic, so goodbye.

[SWFLSkins]

Is Taliban the "T" word now?

[NewCliche21]

I've heard countless jokes about Michael Jackson and(NSFW) Catholic priests on the late night shows over the years. Not to mention, the(again NSFW) Hitler- angry Cowboys fan Youtube videos. Almost anything can be made into a joke. For instance, here is Chris Rock making some hilarious ones about racism, including the genocide of the American Indians (totally NSFW):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xTEjiFEaIy8

Come on, man. Don't tell me that you're missing the point of that post.

I know that those jokes are made, and none of them should be. Of course, I think that jokes about child porn are worse than most. Sorry, but I've interacted with a child at a point in my life, and imagining those things being done to a child is never, ever funny.

But, if that's where you get your jollies, then have fun. You have my pity.

[SWFLSkins]

First off, I would like to apologize for my statement regarding 17 girls and 8 year old boys. I understand that child porn is child porn, but I FIRMLY believe there is a difference between 17 year old girls who voluntarily take nude photos and make money and 8 year old kids who have no idea what is going on.

It's the same argument that prosecuting attorneys make when they try to convince a jury that a 17 year old kid knew what he was doing when he killed someone. While I understand that saying it jokingly was not the best way to go, I'm just saying it's the point I was trying to make.

Quite big of you to apologize really. That being consider what you have written.

And think about most of the posts in this thread as well. As in most of child abuse cases the focus seems to fall on the victim and not the offender. Like what did they do wrong? Happens in rape cases as well. Now your not to blame for that, this seems to be the norm for the majority of society.

We are talking about an adult male at 38 who should have known better, whether the child at whatever age is old enough to know better themselves really is inconsequential. And in fact in this thead we have argued the age debate to death and yet nobody here knows exactly what child porn the acused was actually charged with having.

[NewCliche21]

Quite big of you to apologize really. That being consider what you have written.

And think about most of the posts in this thread as well. As in most of child abuse cases the focus seems to fall on the victim and not the offender. Like what did they do wrong? Happens in rape cases as well. Now your not to blame for that, this seems to be the norm for the majority of society.

We are talking about an adult male at 38 who should have known better, whether the child at whatever age is old enough to know better themselves really is inconsequential. And in fact in this thead we have argued the age debate to death and yet nobody here knows exactly what child porn the acused was actually charged with having.

Fully agreed.

It is natural for people to want to defend sexual offenders; it's a defense mechanism. People don't want to believe that it's real, so they find a way to excuse it. They come off as supporting something that hits them so hard that they can't comprehend it. Funny how that works, but dangerous.

I love your last point. We're so busy arguing over the age difference that we miss the entire incident, thus my above point.

And people say that psychology is a bunch of bull . . .

[Seabee1973]

That's not actually true. In several states it's perfectly legal for an adult to have sex with a 17-year old. For instance, if LT's prostitute had been 17, it only would have been an embarrassment to him instead of a crime. You know, besides the whole prostitution thing.

Some states its even lower than that. Hawaii used to be 15 dont know if it still is or not. some other states go 16 15 range but use the cant be over a certain age or more than 2 years older