The question in my mind is what did he specifically admit to? None of us know to what he exactly admitted. For example, he may have taken innocent pics and his uncle may have sent them to porn sites. He may have some peripheral involvement, but not enough to be guilty of any crimes. IOW, we on this list do not know enough to make a reasonable judgement. We only know what Kevin has said, and he admits to having a bias as his children were allegedly photographed. Kevin has not provided enough specific information about what this man has allegedly done. Some of the statements Kevin has made is leading me to think that he is biased, prejudicial, mean-spirited, and irrational.
If we on this list are going to proffer opinions, then we need all the facts presented clearly and in an unbiased manner. IMO, we don't have all the facts, and those which we have are nothing more than hearsay presented by someone who admits to having a personal involvement in the case - IOW, not a disinterested party. That so many people on this list would want to take action against this guy frightens me. And lets be concerned about everyone's rights in this situation. Trial by an ill-informed internet mailing list does not seem to be in anybody's best interest. Shel > [Original Message] > From: Gary Sibio > >As others have pointed out, he is innocent until proven guilty. > >This is true even if he admits that he did it. He isn't working > >somewhere that children are at risk. You should probably > >assume that if you know who he is, then thestore owner does > >too. > > I disagree. If he admits to it, people need to be warned. This man is > dangerous. If he hadn't admitted it I would agree with the innocent > until proven guilty but, in this case, let's worry more about the > rights of the innocent children than his.
