My daughter's pediatrician got busted for kiddie porn

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Stark

Diamond Member
Jun 16, 2000
7,735
0
0
wow, an entire career down the drain for 10 .jpgs on a computer. Pretty dumb.

looking at pr0n... bad.
looking at kiddie pr0n... very bad.
looking at kiddie pr0n at work... suicidal.
 

SuperTool

Lifer
Jan 25, 2000
14,000
2
0
Originally posted by: MartyMcFly3
Like Deerslayer said, Computer Generated or not its still sick

Maybe so, but it's also still only a thought crime. There are no victims.
 

SuperTool

Lifer
Jan 25, 2000
14,000
2
0
Originally posted by: MartyMcFly3
Would you take your child to a pediatrician that looked at those SuperTool?

I don't have kids. But if I did, there would be a lot of people I wouldn't take them to. That doesn't mean that those people should be arrested for thought crimes.
 

fatkorean

Senior member
Dec 17, 2001
793
0
0
I would be freaked by this also had it been my daughters pediatrician...

But hat would happen if he is innocent? His practice would still be killed because of this. What recourse would he have? Move to a different state? Sue?

-fk
 

Orsorum

Lifer
Dec 26, 2001
27,631
5
81
Originally posted by: fatkorean
I would be freaked by this also had it been my daughters pediatrician...

But hat would happen if he is innocent? His practice would still be killed because of this. What recourse would he have? Move to a different state? Sue?

-fk

One of the reasons I considered taking a voice recorder with me when on duty. I've heard too many cases of false rape/sexual harassment accusations.

There is little to no recourse he has - if there was intent to defame with such accusations, he may have a case, otherwise he has nothing.
 

MikeO

Diamond Member
Jan 17, 2001
3,026
0
0

Criminal charges from computer generated pics? If "computer generated" means couple of young looking Poser models having sex.. then it's absolutely crazy. It's just a bunch of pixels, there is no victim, no children have been abused.

Sure it's still sick, he should never ever be allowed to work with children again, no I wouldn't take my own child to see him (if I had one), yes it's a good thing he was busted. But kiddie pr0n charges against him? IMO, that's fvcked.
 

LikeLinus

Lifer
Jul 25, 2001
11,518
670
126
Originally posted by: Lucky
On March 13, detectives reportedly found the computer-generated images at Moore?s East State Street office.



note the bolded words.

Also note "?There is nothing alleging any of his patients or local children were part of this,? said Rockford Deputy Police Chief Dominic Iasparro. "

"Iasparro also would not elaborate on why Moore?s arrest came six months after the discovery of the photographs. "

Just because a reporter says "computer generated" does not nessesarily mean "computer generated" the person writing the article could mean JPG images = computer generated imaging, not true photographs of children or digitally taken pictures of kids.

Before you morons sit here and protect this sicko, know the actual facts to the case and quit speculating.

This guy is a freaking sicko for having ANY form of images in any respect on ANY computer. Much less a computer that is in a pediatric office and around kids day to day.
 

Orsorum

Lifer
Dec 26, 2001
27,631
5
81
Originally posted by: LikeLinus
Originally posted by: Lucky
On March 13, detectives reportedly found the computer-generated images at Moore?s East State Street office.



note the bolded words.

Also note "?There is nothing alleging any of his patients or local children were part of this,? said Rockford Deputy Police Chief Dominic Iasparro. "

"Iasparro also would not elaborate on why Moore?s arrest came six months after the discovery of the photographs. "

Just because a reporter says "computer generated" does not nessesarily mean "computer generated" the person writing the article could mean JPG images = computer generated imaging, not true photographs of children or digitally taken pictures of kids.

Before you morons sit here and protect this sicko, know the actual facts to the case and quit speculating.

This guy is a freaking sicko for having ANY form of images in any respect on ANY computer. Much less a computer that is in a pediatric office and around kids day to day.

Why don't you know the actual facts before you start persecuting a man. Stop speculating, moron.
rolleye.gif
 

sillymofo

Banned
Aug 11, 2003
5,817
2
0
Originally posted by: SuperTool
Originally posted by: MartyMcFly3 Would you take your child to a pediatrician that looked at those SuperTool?
I don't have kids. But if I did, there would be a lot of people I wouldn't take them to. That doesn't mean that those people should be arrested for thought crimes.

this reminds me of a movie with tom cruise... something about precrime...
 

Savij

Diamond Member
Nov 12, 2001
4,233
0
71
So what are the chances that these 10 images are in his inbox as part of a "Check out these hot picx orgkljajein;endiojkje09342!!!!" email?
 

LikeLinus

Lifer
Jul 25, 2001
11,518
670
126
Originally posted by: Orsorum
Originally posted by: LikeLinus
Originally posted by: Lucky
On March 13, detectives reportedly found the computer-generated images at Moore?s East State Street office.



note the bolded words.

Also note "?There is nothing alleging any of his patients or local children were part of this,? said Rockford Deputy Police Chief Dominic Iasparro. "

"Iasparro also would not elaborate on why Moore?s arrest came six months after the discovery of the photographs. "

Just because a reporter says "computer generated" does not nessesarily mean "computer generated" the person writing the article could mean JPG images = computer generated imaging, not true photographs of children or digitally taken pictures of kids.

Before you morons sit here and protect this sicko, know the actual facts to the case and quit speculating.

This guy is a freaking sicko for having ANY form of images in any respect on ANY computer. Much less a computer that is in a pediatric office and around kids day to day.

Why don't you know the actual facts before you start persecuting a man. Stop speculating, moron.
rolleye.gif

It's not speculation when a detective has found said images on his personal computer and an arrest has been made. Stop being an idiot.
rolleye.gif


Additionally to the other persons question of "email". It says "Moore?s arrest came six months after the discovery of the photographs. "

Obviously there is more to the story, but they can't release all the details.
 

Orsorum

Lifer
Dec 26, 2001
27,631
5
81
Originally posted by: LikeLinus
Originally posted by: Orsorum
Originally posted by: LikeLinus
Originally posted by: Lucky
On March 13, detectives reportedly found the computer-generated images at Moore?s East State Street office.



note the bolded words.

Also note "?There is nothing alleging any of his patients or local children were part of this,? said Rockford Deputy Police Chief Dominic Iasparro. "

"Iasparro also would not elaborate on why Moore?s arrest came six months after the discovery of the photographs. "

Just because a reporter says "computer generated" does not nessesarily mean "computer generated" the person writing the article could mean JPG images = computer generated imaging, not true photographs of children or digitally taken pictures of kids.

Before you morons sit here and protect this sicko, know the actual facts to the case and quit speculating.

This guy is a freaking sicko for having ANY form of images in any respect on ANY computer. Much less a computer that is in a pediatric office and around kids day to day.

Why don't you know the actual facts before you start persecuting a man. Stop speculating, moron.
rolleye.gif

It's not speculation when a detective has found said images on his personal computer and an arrest has been made. Stop being an idiot.
rolleye.gif

Since we know that once someone is arrested, he's guilty.
 

LikeLinus

Lifer
Jul 25, 2001
11,518
670
126
Orsorum - read the details of the case. Pictures were actually found 6 months ago. They were still on his computer. It's obvious a patient or collegue is the one who complained. He's also not defended his these "allegations".
 

EyeMWing

Banned
Jun 13, 2003
15,670
1
0
Charges won't stick if these are indeed computer generated images. I remember doing research into this one boring night. Computer generated children are not children.

And the fact that there were only 10 offensive images also tends to suggest that he was a victim of downloading pr0n on Kazaa and not being speedy with the delete key.

Still, find a new pediatrician. Doctors should be asexual.
 

Savij

Diamond Member
Nov 12, 2001
4,233
0
71
Originally posted by: LikeLinus
...They were still on his computer. It's obvious a patient or collegue is the one who complained. He's also not defended his these "allegations".

Where do you get that information from? I didn't see it anywhere in the article.
 

LikeLinus

Lifer
Jul 25, 2001
11,518
670
126
Originally posted by: Savij
Originally posted by: LikeLinus
...They were still on his computer. It's obvious a patient or collegue is the one who complained. He's also not defended his these "allegations".

Where do you get that information from? I didn't see it anywhere in the article.

"The 10 counts against Dr. Burton E. Moore, 57, a practicing physician at all three area hospitals, stem from a citizen complaint and a subsequent Rockford Police Department investigation that began in January."

Now using LOGICAL thinking, who else would be able to see the images on his PC. It is probably either

A. A patient
B. A Colleague

Otherwise it could have been a friend who he told that complained to police or something else. Also noticing that the pictures were found 6 months ago and he was not initially arrested (it began in January) leads one to believe they found something else out or had other complaints. They could have also been watching his Internet usage or things along those lines.
 

Lucky

Lifer
Nov 26, 2000
13,126
3
0
Originally posted by: LikeLinus
Originally posted by: Lucky
On March 13, detectives reportedly found the computer-generated images at Moore?s East State Street office.



note the bolded words.

Also note "?There is nothing alleging any of his patients or local children were part of this,? said Rockford Deputy Police Chief Dominic Iasparro. "

"Iasparro also would not elaborate on why Moore?s arrest came six months after the discovery of the photographs. "

Just because a reporter says "computer generated" does not nessesarily mean "computer generated" the person writing the article could mean JPG images = computer generated imaging, not true photographs of children or digitally taken pictures of kids.

Before you morons sit here and protect this sicko, know the actual facts to the case and quit speculating.

This guy is a freaking sicko for having ANY form of images in any respect on ANY computer. Much less a computer that is in a pediatric office and around kids day to day.



I think you speculated far, far more in that post than my post which you were responding to.