Jump to content

Former Member bill barton


Recommended Posts

I did not issue an "apology" for Bill. I just pointed out that addicts are sick people and that we don't know what Bill actually did. That doesn't mean I'm defending him. These allegations trouble me as much as they do anyone. But they are still just allegations.

Earlier in the thread, we talked about how a defendant is innocent until proven guilty. Obviously a lot of people don't believe in that principle, but it's a cornerstone of our legal system.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 283
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I did not issue an "apology" for Bill. I just pointed out that addicts are sick people and that we don't know what Bill actually did. That doesn't mean I'm defending him. These allegations trouble me as much as they do anyone. But they are still just allegations.

Earlier in the thread, we talked about how a defendant is innocent until proven guilty. Obviously a lot of people don't believe in that principle, but it's a cornerstone of our legal system.

I believe in that principle. I think there's a difference between stating that principle and what has been posted in this thread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My point is merely: I don't want to read any statements any more that addiction is addiction is addiction.

It's simply not true. It's just not the same to be addicted to brandy, heroin, jazz or child pornography. No matter if you produce your own or not, those that come out of it alive will be marked for live, and no one has any right to do that. No one.

This is not saying Bill is guilty. It's the comparisons in this thread that bother me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Earlier in the thread, we talked about how a defendant is innocent until proven guilty. Obviously a lot of people don't believe in that principle, but it's a cornerstone of our legal system."

i do believe in that principle, it keeps innocent people out of jail etc... but i'm not your legal system and i guess the same is true of you; additionally, we know by now that "our" bill barton was involved in child porn and that "blackbart2010" uploaded to the "dreamboard" at least twice material that was compliant with that board's fierce rules (see the indictement if you haven't)... to me that proves beyond any reasonable doubt that bill is not innocent (and, yes, "proves" doesn't mean that a jury says he's guilty, that he's a monster or whatever); i know far too little to say how guilty he is, which punishment would be "fair" etc - but it's plainly absurd to tell me i should assume bill is innocent!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Earlier in the thread, we talked about how a defendant is innocent until proven guilty. Obviously a lot of people don't believe in that principle, but it's a cornerstone of our legal system."

i do believe in that principle, it keeps innocent people out of jail etc... but i'm not your legal system and i guess the same is true of you; additionally, we know by now that "our" bill barton was involved in child porn and that "blackbart2010" uploaded to the "dreamboard" at least twice material that was compliant with that board's fierce rules (see the indictement if you haven't)... to me that proves beyond any reasonable doubt that bill is not innocent (and, yes, "proves" doesn't mean that a jury says he's guilty, that he's a monster or whatever); i know far too little to say how guilty he is, which punishment would be "fair" etc - but it's plainly absurd to tell me i should assume bill is innocent!

there is the unlikely, but completely plausible possibility, that another individual might have used bill's computer.

i don't personally feel that to be the case here, but we should consider it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE: Possessing, viewing and trading child pornography are unsavory obsessions, but they are in an entirely different realm than producing it."

I take issue with that statement. The reason that all interactions with child porn are prosecuted is because the demand for the material drives the victimization of children. Even if the individual "only" uploaded child porn, the material was produced to satisfy that individual and like individuals. In the present case, the child porn upload/trade/distribute activities were significant; that means children were being cruelly victimized to produce this poison.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Earlier in the thread, we talked about how a defendant is innocent until proven guilty. Obviously a lot of people don't believe in that principle, but it's a cornerstone of our legal system."

i do believe in that principle, it keeps innocent people out of jail etc... but i'm not your legal system and i guess the same is true of you; additionally, we know by now that "our" bill barton was involved in child porn and that "blackbart2010" uploaded to the "dreamboard" at least twice material that was compliant with that board's fierce rules (see the indictement if you haven't)... to me that proves beyond any reasonable doubt that bill is not innocent (and, yes, "proves" doesn't mean that a jury says he's guilty, that he's a monster or whatever); i know far too little to say how guilty he is, which punishment would be "fair" etc - but it's plainly absurd to tell me i should assume bill is innocent!

there is the unlikely, but completely plausible possibility, that another individual might have used bill's computer.

i don't personally feel that to be the case here, but we should consider it.

A plausible possiblilty? Sounds pretty far-fetched. Not one of us here knows all the details and I know you have to consider all the evidence in total, but to me, that sounds like the kind of last ditch argument that a defense lawyer would throw out hoping to raise just a bit of doubt in jurors' minds.

Edited by John Tapscott
Link to comment
Share on other sites

as much as i understand why this thread is here, i want to voice my opinion that i am uncomfortable with its existence on the board. yes, there are interesting and important issues being discussed here and people are making measured, and respectful arguments. but there is now a 6 page thread on our board which is essentially about child pornography. it doesn't seem right that it's here. i know i'm not the most prolific nor the most respected/popular member here, but i'd just like to say out loud that i think this thread should be removed. and i, of course, understand why many here will feel it should be left open.

Edited by thedwork
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Possessing, viewing and trading child pornography are unsavory obsessions, but they are in an entirely different realm than producing it.

I suppose you'd separate actually committing the act and merely holding the camera as well...

And yeah, I would have much more sympathy for someone hooked on drugs than someone who rapes babies, or even just enjoys watching others do so. I guess I'm funny that way.

Edited by Jazzmoose
Link to comment
Share on other sites

as much as i understand why this thread is here, i want to voice my opinion that i am uncomfortable with its existence on the board. yes, there are interesting and important issues being discussed here and people are making measured, and respectful arguments. but there is now a 6 page thread on our board which is essentially about child pornography. it doesn't seem right that it's here. i know i'm not the most prolific nor the most respected/popular member here, but i'd just like to say out loud that i think this thread should be removed. and i, of course, understand why many here will feel it should be left open.

in fairness to our board members, i started this thread wondering if anyone had heard from bill barton, wondering if he was ok.

had i known where it would have led us, i would not have begun it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

These allegations trouble me as much as they do anyone. But they are still just allegations.

David, you posted the Facebook message in post #177. Bill requested a friend post on his Facebook account that he had fallen back into a child pornography addiction and subsequently been arrested for trafficking it. Don't you read that as Bill admitting guilt? Surely if it were not, he would have asked his friend not to post that, but an indignant refutation. No?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I understood from the indictment that those uploading files had produced new material, and that this was required, in order to stay in that particular online community.

No, the board's rules as described were that members had to regularly upload "new" material, in the sense of material that had not yet been uploaded to the board. Those who produced their own were given greater access to this vile stuff.

He had to know that he was not participating in a victimless community, at the very least. Innocent small children were having their lives ruined, as part of the online community he volunteered to be part of. He had to know that.

This, alas, is right, as is Leeway's post #212.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As addictions go, it doesn't get any worse than this. Call it a sickness if you will, but that's just a cop out. Many addictions only directly effect those who are addicted, some effect immediate family members, some, the victims of the crimes that are committed in their behalf, but this...this one preys on those who are least able to defend themselves and in a way that will almost certainly leave them scarred and dysfunctional for the balance of their lives. Sorry, but there's no sympathy here. Nothing I can imagine is any more disgusting, heinous or incomprehensible. Nothing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

on another eminent jazz discussion board, bill's name was changed the day we found out here and that's it (more accurately, he's still named bill but there's no barton anymore) - i very appreciate that you give us a place to come, jim, wouldn't want to be alone with this...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...