🐮 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
N9OGL said:
There is thing called expectation of privacy.
Click to expand...
And when you post your retarded pedo bullshit on the Internet you just sacrificed that.

Sorry, dumbfuck. It's just reality. You're just too stupid to understand it.

Contemplate suicide.
N9OGL said:
just an idea
Click to expand...
Lmao cope harder. You're the one facing serious slammer time, not us. I mean bitch and complain and cope and whine all you like, but you're the one who is going to be sucking big black dicks behind bars.
 
The issue is it was one image, and under federal law that's not enough. Under federal law a person has have more then just one image. Because a person may have download it in a file and was unaware of it or it could of been put on their computer without his knowledge, if their computer is on line 24/7 . Show me case where a person has gone to jail for one image. Because there is none. Under federal law a person has to have more three. If they have more then three then their a collector.
 
N9OGL said:
The issue is it was one image, and under federal law that's not enough.
Click to expand...
The issue is that normal people don't have cp on their computer, regardless if it's "just one image." Funny how this only happens to creeps huh?

The issue is that normal people don't write stories about little girls being raped nor do they post cartoon cp.

The issue is that everyone knows you're a fucking pedophile.
 
Broadside said:
The issue is that normal people don't have cp on their computer, regardless if it's "just one image." Funny how this only happens to creeps huh?

The issue is that normal people don't write stories about little girls being raped nor do they post cartoon cp.

The issue is that everyone knows you're a fucking pedophile.
Click to expand...
Actually, there are cases of people who have their computers hacked and it that material put on it, or they were downloading file thinking it was one thing and it turned out to be child porn. that does happen more than you think. I like I said I don't know where that image came from, and it was in form a PDF file. it could have been a document I had download wanting to read later.
 
N9OGL said:
Actually, there are cases of people who have their computers hacked and it that material put on it, or they were downloading file thinking it was one thing and it turned out to be child porn. that does happen more than you think. I like I said I don't know where that image came from, and it was in form a PDF file. it could have been a document I had download wanting to read later.
Click to expand...
Yes Todd and maybe we'd be inclined to believe you if you didn't have a history of writing about, and posting images of, child porn.
 
There are no issues. Todd Daugherty of Taylorville, IL is a child pornographer who is sexually attracted to children.

That is an absolute fact and not debatable.

I could be wrong but some States treat lolicon as CSAM if you possess CSAM. It would also throw the whole, "It was planted!!!!!!1!!!!!" shit right out the window.
Click to expand...

They know the name and age of the victim in Daugherty's case.
 
Last edited:
N9OGL said:
Actually, there are cases of people who have their computers hacked and it that material put on it, or they were downloading file thinking it was one thing and it turned out to be child porn. that does happen more than you think. I like I said I don't know where that image came from, and it was in form a PDF file. it could have been a document I had download wanting to read later.
Click to expand...
What file was it in?
 
N9OGL said:
Don't know, all I know is it's was a PDF file.
Click to expand...

Mr. Daugherty once again is caught in a flat out lie. Proof below. he not only knows the name of the file, but what child pornography series it comes from.. Oh, this comes from his own shitty website (archive.is link).

todd daugherty lyinng about file name - Copy.png



"On June 15th, 2018 Forensic Examiner (FE) O’Sullivan got physical image of CSAM (Child Sexual Abuse Material) under the file name 32824279etl.jpg (the State police report states its 32824279etl.pdf). It was later determined that this material was from a series called Mdew. (NOTE: The 32824279etl.jpg is not the name of the file. The file name is created through the “toolkit” called “ETL” so what the real name of the file is unknown.) FE O’Sullivan also found on the computer thousands of Virtual child porn as well.
 
So who's telling the truth? the FBI or the State of Illinois? FBI claims it was a jpg, while the state of Illinois claims it was a PDF? As for "toolkit" making the file, that is just an assumption on my part and has yet to be proven, because no files in Discovery have yet to show it that the file was changed.

The State was only supposed to search the computers instead they seized them, with all the information on them, that can be proven. They were only supposed to seize three files on the computer.
 
N9OGL said:
So who's telling the truth? the FBI or the State of Illinois? FBI claims it was a jpg, while the state of Illinois claims it was a PDF? As for "toolkit" making the file, that is just an assumption on my part and has yet to be proven, because no files in Discovery have yet to show it that the file was changed.

The State was only supposed to search the computers instead they seized them, with all the information on them, that can be proven. They were only supposed to seize three files on the computer.
Click to expand...
You still haven't answered what was so interesting in the pdf that you downloaded it to look at later. The answer is child pornography.
 
N9OGL said:
So who's telling the truth? the FBI or the State of Illinois? FBI claims it was a jpg, while the state of Illinois claims it was a PDF? As for "toolkit" making the file, that is just an assumption on my part and has yet to be proven, because no files in Discovery have yet to show it that the file was changed.

The State was only supposed to search the computers instead they seized them, with all the information on them, that can be proven. They were only supposed to seize three files on the computer.
Click to expand...
I love the "B-but virtual child porn is legal!" bit on your website. You know most people don't distinguish nor care and that virtual cp STILL MAKES YOU A FUCKING PEDOPHILE
 
N9OGL said:
The issue is it was one image, and under federal law that's not enough. Under federal law a person has have more then just one image.
Click to expand...
"I only did the one murder so it should be okay." Quit digging you stupid faggot.
N9OGL said:
So who's telling the truth? the FBI or the State of Illinois? FBI claims it was a jpg, while the state of Illinois claims it was a PDF?
Click to expand...
"My child porn is actually a PDF-file like I am!"

Shut up faggot.
 
break these cuffs said:
You still haven't answered what was so interesting in the pdf that you downloaded it to look at later. The answer is child pornography.
Click to expand...
Nope at the time I was download various things including scientific papers, papers dealing with electronics, court cases, FTL project (because I'm interested in space travel) and public domain books.

AnOminous said:
"I only did the one murder so it should be okay." Quit digging you stupid faggot.

"My child porn is actually a PDF-file like I am!"

Shut up faggot.
Click to expand...
murder and images are two different things and you can't compare them. murder is more heinous than one images the person has never viewed.
 
N9OGL said:
murder and images are two different things and you can't compare them. murder is more heinous than one images the person has never viewed.
Click to expand...
I studied criminal law, and the shit you are spewing out on your keyboard of only "one image" "warrant doesn't have permission to view images" are the absolute dumbest defenses I have ever read. One image, a dozen, fictional or real, it does not matter. It is illegal, bottom line. Warrants, include looking for imagery, and searching your entire computer to look for that particular image, since that is what the police are after. It can be a PDF file, a jpg, a link, if it is found in YOUR possession, you WILL get punished for it.
Oh, I am sorry, you are rather slow so let me word this post as simple as I can so you can have a better understanding:
If I were you, I would heavily consider suicide as an option. You are not going to see freedom, especially with the word vomit you call an excuse. Good luck Todd
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom