Skip to main content

      Many who consider themselves 'patriots' measure their fervor by their willingness to accept military service as a cost inherently associated with liberty and the American way.  I have a much more complicated view, but that is not the point of this essay.  Rather, as one who militantly supports the benefits that veterans receive for their time in uniform, I want to examine a specific instance of a veteran's downfall.  This case, one of many instances in which vets whom I know have received less than full backing from the society that put them in harm's way, may very likely represent a systematic problem, but it definitely indicates that our citizenry does not recognize the true 'price of freedom,' which is to say political participation at every level of the process by those who hope that the outcomes are fair and beneficent.

       My friend, 'Karl,' has ended up behind bars in Walton County, Georgia.  I've known him for eleven years: I know about his corny-as-Kansas origins, where his parents prospered; about his stint in Vietnam, where he lost most of his elbow and merited disability pay in perpetuity; about his Republican leanings and Horatio Alger faith, neither of which has prevented his descent into homelessness and barely keeping body and soul together; about his late-in-life loneliness, to alleviate which he sought my wordsmith skills to write a Match.com ad that specified 'over 40, please;" and about plenty more in addition.

Today, after eighteen days in solitary confinement, Walton County's D.A. pontificated that Karl represented an imminent threat to children everywhere and should remain in jail until trial, or at least, "until the FBI can search his computer" for more than the single instance of 'tight teen twat,' or something similar, that the officers found on his screen nearly three weeks ago.  Only a spirited appeal to a Veteran's Day dispensation, on the part of the attorney that Karl and his friends have retained, prevented the DA's wishes from coming to pass.

Nineteen days ago, since he didn't want to pay for a weekly extended stay room until the beginning of the week, he'd decided to spend the night in his car.  Before heading to the local park where he normally sleeps, he had ensconced himself in a Wendy's parking lot, after closing time, to check his e-mails and surf the web.  

As a lonely old fart, he frequents Match.com and similar virtual hang-outs.  To this I can attest, since I've helped him describe himself to possible paramours on a couple of occasions.  He maintains that, around midnight, a 'sea of pop-ups' flooded his screen, and, when he attempted to rid himself of them, he inadvertently opened some, which in turn activated others.  Then, he says, his Norton security program warned of some sort of invasion, so he parked this host of interloping virtual bandits at the bottom of his screen, for his brother, a computer wiz, to check in the morning.  

At this point, Monroe City and Walton County officers, who were observing him after a lingering Wendy's employee had called in a 'suspicious loiterer,' turned on their flashlights, confiscated his laptop and charged him with violating Georgia's relatively new 'child endangerment' statute, which basically says that any electronic engagement of 'tight teen twat'(TTT) is a felony punishable by one to twenty years in prison.  Apparently, exactly one of the screens that was open or parked on his system constituted TTT, an inference based on the fact that the authorities leveled only one charge against Karl, even though the law specifies that each download is a distinct criminal act, chargeable in its own right.

Karl has never gone to jail before, for anything, nor could the State's barrister provide a single instance of even a hint of sexually predatory behavior, toward children or otherwise.  Moreover, he consistently has denied any intention of engaging underage girls, TTT or otherwise, whether virtually or actually.  

Under these circumstances, the fierce resistance to a bail bond seems anomalous, unless the purpose of the law is something other than protecting children.  Clearly, my friend does not represent an obvious threat, especially inasmuch as the State can closely monitor his movements on the outside, which they will do with an ankle monitor while he is on bail.  Why might W. Kendall Winne, Jr., the DA, have anything other than the good of Georgia's youngsters in mind?

On one of the nights at 11:30 that several of us visited Karl during a thirty minute visitation window, I came upon a possible answer to that question.  Since only one person could address my bound and shackled friend through the plexiglass, on a phone from the 1970's that barely worked, I decided to pick up the link for a young fellow whose visitor had not shown up.

Michael, a boyish 25 year old, another veteran, is serving four years for what he called "one stupid decision on a computer on a Saturday night" a year and a half ago.  So he admits intentionally engaging TTT, though he had no record as a 'sex offender' prior to that, nor did he suggest that he had a predilection for young girls.  "There's plenty more just like me in here," he told me.  Thus, at least plausibly, District Attorney Winne justifies his existence, and obtains funding and political support, because he has identified a ready source of inmate fodder, at least a couple of whom are former soldiers.

I cannot prove this, at least not yet.  Nor do I care to demonstrate yet that the a substantial proportion of the 'sexual offender' business is a fraud and an attack on all expressions of sexuality that step outside the bounds of St. Augustine's views.  However, I will challenge those who say that they care for veterans; I will call on those who call themselves progressive.  When will we get rid of the laws that demonize our blameless friends and our innocent family members along with the rare miscreant?  So long as laws such as this remain on the books, any one of us is an inadvertent keystroke away from felony and hard prison time, though in the event, only the hapless and the poor, a substantial chunk of whom will be veterans, are likely to suffer the consequences.  Unless we intend to offer the 'good German' defense, we ought to make sure, starting today, that the litany of victimless crimes that clutter our statutes, are no longer on the books tomorrow.

Originally posted to SERMCAP on Wed Nov 11, 2009 at 12:05 PM PST.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Tip Jar (0+ / 0-)

    I bow to those who seek the truth; I flee from those who have 'found' it.

    by SERMCAP on Wed Nov 11, 2009 at 12:05:07 PM PST

  •  So to cut through to the point, are you saying (0+ / 0-)

    these vets were arrested for looking at normal porn sites on the internet with all females pictured 18 or older?

    Why is this illegal?

    •  No. (0+ / 0-)

      My friend was arrested because he was looking at his Match.com account, not a porn site, and a swarm of pop-ups opened that included different porn options that he didn't get rid of, for reasons explained in the diary.

      The young fellow looked at a 'TTT' site once and is now serving four years in jail.  I'll go on record as saying that such a sentence, for such a 'crime,' which in a large majority of cases involves no actual 'teens' or other children, is, at best, criminally insane.

      I'm hoping to excite some dialog on that point.  It's an attack of sexuality generally, in my estimation, and we shouldn't put up with it unless we want a Nazi outcome for the USA to match the Kinder/Kirche/Kuche 'purity' of the fascists in Germany and their counterparts under Mussolini.

      I bow to those who seek the truth; I flee from those who have 'found' it.

      by SERMCAP on Wed Nov 11, 2009 at 12:21:23 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  18 and 19 are legal and STILL considered Teen... (0+ / 0-)

        SO why is it illegal is what I want to know. WHy would they be sentenced to ANYTHING for looking at legal porn sites?

        •  Even his attorney... (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          ElRay

          ...hasn't seen anything other the charges themselves.  From the language of OCGA 16-12-100.2, I infer that one of the pop-ups that opened on Karl's screen was an 'underaged' site, and that this is the basis for the charge against him.

          Yet another obscenity in the law is that, by criminalizing the presence of a screen, the presumption of innocence goes out the window.  He's presumed guilty until he can 'prove' he didn't intend to open it.

          I bow to those who seek the truth; I flee from those who have 'found' it.

          by SERMCAP on Wed Nov 11, 2009 at 12:30:27 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

  •  And what's with the "Tight Teen Twat" (0+ / 0-)

    Isn't that a little...I mean...are there no other ways to describe what they viewed.."legal age porn" or something rather than this crude acronym?

    I may be missing something, but that's kind of crude...or do they Officially refer to it as that? I can't believe they would.

    •  Crude? (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      RosyFinch

      Excuse me, but the idea of my apparently innocent friend sitting in solitary confinement for three weeks is the only obscenity going on here.  The idea that virtual expressions of 'kiddy porn,' without a demonstration of actual childrens' involvement, should constitute a major felony and a lifelong 'sex offender' label is what is crude and unacceptable here.

      Or that's my view anyway.  Thanks all the same.

      I bow to those who seek the truth; I flee from those who have 'found' it.

      by SERMCAP on Wed Nov 11, 2009 at 12:24:09 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  But I am agreeing with you... (0+ / 0-)

        I just was wondering if "Tight Teen Twat" was a REAL official term or just something made up to describe these sites...

        Don't get your teen panties in a twist. Ha.

        •  No, and it is a little crude. (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          ElRay

          I apologize.  It's so insane, I've been about to bust open with the idea that even Republicans aren't safe from the Criminal Prison Complex anymore, and I can't seem to get the point across that this is a travesty and all.  Keep me posted, anyhow, if you find any research or other ideas about this issue.

          I bow to those who seek the truth; I flee from those who have 'found' it.

          by SERMCAP on Wed Nov 11, 2009 at 12:32:15 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

  •  Contact the Electronic Frontier Foundation (0+ / 0-)

    There is malicious software circulating on the Net that takes over your computer and pops up porn and illegal software sites on your screen. It is quite sophisticated and difficult to remove, as it includes literal counter-measures that escalate as attempts to eradicate it increase.

    This is well known among computer security experts - and most computer geeks in general. I've had to remove some of these rootkit worms from clients and even family members who still use Windows (Macs are largely immune to rootkit attacks of this sort since the core of their operating system is Unix-based).

    Accusing the victim of malware of being a perpetrator is not unusual, although this seems particularly harsh.

    EFF will probably be able to help you, or at least refer you to a tech-savvy attorney who will.

    http://www.eff.org/

    One day posterity will remember, this strange era, these strange times, when ordinary common honesty was called courage. -- Yevgeny Yevtushenko

    by RandomActsOfReason on Wed Nov 11, 2009 at 01:12:05 PM PST

    •  thanks so much (0+ / 0-)

      that sounds like useful advice. We'll see what they let us know

      I bow to those who seek the truth; I flee from those who have 'found' it.

      by SERMCAP on Wed Nov 11, 2009 at 03:01:56 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  You might also want to read this article (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Prof Haley

        Internet Virus Frames Users for Child Porn

        Windows-only virus "can visit as many as 40 child porn sites per minute".

        Of course, the article is on HuffPo, so the credibility is highly suspect and there is probably a great deal of hyperbole involved, but this "virus" (more likely a worm) sounds like just a variation on the malicious rootkit worms that have been popping up unwanted windows (including ones that say "Warning: virus detected: click here to disinfect", which of course just goes out to a malware site and downloads further shit).

        One day posterity will remember, this strange era, these strange times, when ordinary common honesty was called courage. -- Yevgeny Yevtushenko

        by RandomActsOfReason on Wed Nov 11, 2009 at 11:09:58 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  My friend is out... (0+ / 0-)

          ...he's ready, I think, to kiss the GOP good-bye for eternity, and he wept when I shared the resources that you sent to me.  "Exactly," he said, when I described their contents.

          What gets me about the entire situation, even if a particular instance such as this is not a conspiracy, is that the system works conspiratorially to screw people over and leave them, unless they have significant resources, without any recourse other than prison and peonage.

          That it is systemic, systematic, and intentional seems obvious.  That we permit it to happen is execrable at best.  As one of my cohorts in Savannah, a sharecropper's daughter who has taken on Jack Kingston several times, including in a run for Congress, has said again and again, "The time has come to take a stand."  And as Michael Moore ended his most recent film, "Folks, I'm gettin' tired of waiting."

          You are a treasure; thank you.

          I bow to those who seek the truth; I flee from those who have 'found' it.

          by SERMCAP on Thu Nov 12, 2009 at 09:02:58 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site