🐮 Lolcow Todd Daugherty / N9OGL / Fox Smith / Doc Dot - Domestic terrorist, ham radio sperg, self-described hikikomori, confirmed pedophile

  • Thread starter Thread starter AJ 447
  • Start date Start date
  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
Let me explain it to you in more easier terms. it doesn't matter if the material was in plain view or not, if the warrant was a general warrant, they still can't use it. PERIOD! it called "fruits of poisoned tree" the material found under the warrant has to be suppressed and cannot be used it court. Without the evidence through the general warrant, they have no case, thus it has to be dismissed.
 
Nigger, you used to host cartoons on your website of little girls being tortured. You probably still do, I haven't clicked on anything belonging to you for years. I'm not talking about your aborted chan pages either, it was static html.
 
RACISM said:
Nigger, you used to host cartoons on your website of little girls being tortured. You probably still do, I haven't clicked on anything belonging to you for years. I'm not talking about your aborted chan pages either, it was static html.
Click to expand...
Cartoons are child porn either under US law (Ashcroft v Free Speech coalition) I don't really do hentai or any of that crap anymore and haven't in quite a long time.
 
N9OGL said:
Cartoons are child porn either under US law (Ashcroft v Free Speech coalition) I don't really do hentai or any of that crap anymore and haven't in quite a long time.
Click to expand...
What was that fucking picture about where it had a small girl skinned and then stretched over a urinal? Like wtf man? You should pop a bullet in your skull and make a brain slushie you fucking weirdo pedonigger.
 
That wasn't on my website, that was a website that required no login, and anyone can post as anyone, in fact it was replaced by the one the threat was made on. In other words, I didn't post it.
 
Like I said above, it was on your website, and it was a static html page. You're a lying nigger.
 
No it wasn't....it was a website called NIM Busters which was changed to Hate and Flame. I own neither one of those sites.
 
No.
It's likely archived actually, somewhere in the last 49 pages. If I cared enough I'd scan them to find it, but I don't really want to see that picture again.
>inb4 no u again
Nope, you're lying, kill yourself.
 
Don't worry Toad, I'm sure one of your many alogs will send mail to one of your fellow inmates and tell them all about you. Can't wait to read about it here.
 
N9OGL said:
Let me explain it to you in more easier terms. it doesn't matter if the material was in plain view or not, if the warrant was a general warrant, they still can't use it. PERIOD! it called "fruits of poisoned tree" the material found under the warrant has to be suppressed and cannot be used it court. Without the evidence through the general warrant, they have no case, thus it has to be dismissed.
Click to expand...

Then you have the worst public defender in the world to not have contested the warrant on your initial court appearance last year., letting you rot in jail for a month, then extending this for another year.

But as we have seen, your a chronic liar about everything.

Retarded N9OGL said:
what YOU think doesn't matter, it was law says.
Click to expand...

Well it must mean a lot to you what we think or you wouldn't keep posting here making yourself to be a maniac.
 
Trombonista said:
That sounds like it could be child porn.
Click to expand...
Not in Illinois it's not. Nudity, even as a child is not considered child porn. I again point to the court case I posted numerous times, where the state court even stated it. If it was child porn then people taking pictures of their toddlers taking a bath and posting online, who be guilty of it, and Google and other search engines would also be charged for distribution. The there is the pictures of nudist beach. Search engines also have images of young children on and at a nude beach completely nude, and again the user posting them, and the engines sharing would be liable.

there is an actual test called the Dost test to determine if something is child porn. The test comes from United States v Dost (1986) and Illinois uses that test.
 
N9OGL said:
. If it was child porn then people taking pictures of their toddlers taking a bath and posting online, who be guilty of it, and Google and other search engines would also be charged for distribution. The there is the pictures of nudist beach. Search engines also have images of young children on and at a nude beach completely nude, and again the user posting them, and the engines sharing would be liable.
Click to expand...
Todd knows all the tricks it seems. He certainly knows where to get pictures of naked children. Kill yourself Todd.
 
N9OGL said:
If it was child porn then people taking pictures of their toddlers taking a bath and posting online, who be guilty of it, and Google and other search engines would also be charged for distribution. The there is the pictures of nudist beach. Search engines also have images of young children on and at a nude beach completely nude, and again the user posting them, and the engines sharing would be liable.
Click to expand...
Break for Paul Weimer……
 
N9OGL said:
Cartoons are child porn either under US law (Ashcroft v Free Speech coalition) I don't really do hentai or any of that crap anymore and haven't in quite a long time.
Click to expand...

Except you have... June 10, 2023 WHY DO YOU LIE SO MUCH???

td child porn.png
gWVdJ8N.png


Space reserved below for Todd Daugherty to go off again.....
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom