# Shilo soldier faces child pornography charges



## The Bread Guy (22 Oct 2013)

Some reminders:
*1)  Under   Canada's Charter of Rights and Freedoms, "any person charged with an offence has the right .... to be presumed innocent until proven guilty according to law in a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal."*
2)  This case may attract attention from the media and public, which can lead to them showing up here looking for quotes etc. Be very careful of what you post - even though this isn't an official military site, people pay different attention to what those who self-identify as military have to say.  



> The Canadian Forces National Investigation Service (CFNIS), a unit within the Canadian Forces Military Police, charged a Canadian Armed Forces member with offences related to child pornography on October 22, 2013.
> 
> Bombardier Roger Sylvester, a 24-year-old Canadian Armed Forces member at Canadian Forces Base Shilo, Manitoba has been charged with:
> 
> ...


CFNIS info-machine, 22 Oct 13

More from CBC.ca and Sun Media.


----------



## Lightguns (23 Oct 2013)

Stupid comment..... deleted.


----------



## OldSolduer (23 Oct 2013)

Observing, no comment.


----------



## pbi (23 Oct 2013)

Respecting the good advice provided by milnews, I'm just commenting on how widespread this offence seems to be. 

I live on an otherwise quiet, "normal" suburban street in Kingston, in an older, well settled neighbourhood. Kids, dogs and nice gardens. And yet, in the few years that I have lived here, we have had two cases of child pornography charges on our street.  Even the Deputy Fire Chief of the city was on the front page a couple of years ago because he was facing charges. We have had several other well known cases around the city.

If it's like this in a city of 120,000 people, what's going on in Toronto or Vancouver?

Is this a product of our society (ie: easy to get it and to circulate it on the 'Net) or is it just that we are reporting more openly on something that has been going on for years?


----------



## The Bread Guy (23 Oct 2013)

pbi said:
			
		

> Is this a product of our society (ie: easy to get it and to circulate it on the 'Net) or is it just that we are reporting more openly on something that has been going on for years?


Some of it might be because of increasing sophisticated technology making it not only easier to distribute such material, but also gives police forces more tools to hunt it down with.   As an outside taxpaying observer, it certainly appears to a lay person like me that cops are spending more time and resources on these and other cyber crime.


----------



## Edward Campbell (23 Oct 2013)

If you think back 35 or even (in my case) 55 years, to when we were young men, you will recall that there was lots of pornography out there but it was _underground_ and (reasonably) hard to get at.

In the early 1990s I recall sitting in the audience when the then Industry Minister, John Manley, was talking to some of his executives. His topic was _e-commerce_ which was, then, a pretty new and exciting thing. He made one point about the current dollar value of e-commerce, already approaching $10 Billion while the field was still brand new. I remarked that the data I had read in preparation for his talk and the subsequent discussions had shown that the _adult entertainment_ field (pornography, really) was the largest single component of _e-commerce_ and that industry was, already, pioneering in the field, making it easier and, especially, safer to shop and buy on-line. That surprised many in the audience, but not the Minister, to his credit.

In the 21st century, in fact, pornography, of all kinds, sadly, is just another commodity.


----------



## Journeyman (23 Oct 2013)

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> ....you will recall that there was lots of pornography out there but it was _underground_ and (reasonably) hard to get at.


And it was so......._hairy_ back then.....or so I've read....somewhere....


----------



## pbi (23 Oct 2013)

Journeyman said:
			
		

> And it was so......._hairy_ back then.....or so I've read....somewhere....



Yes...and with black socks still on. And really, really, cheesy music.

What? Oh,no... just something I heard about.


----------



## captloadie (23 Oct 2013)

Now that all you need is a cellphone to make some high quality videos, combined with easy, anonymous internet access,  it shouldn't be surprising that there is in fact an increase in the _creation_ and distribution of child pornography. There probably isn't a large increase in the number of actual incidents involving children.  Child pornography is also a very broad term, ranging from the sickening acts involving very young children to consensual acts involving someone as old as 17.


----------



## Bzzliteyr (23 Oct 2013)

captloadie said:
			
		

> Now that all you need is a cellphone to make some high quality videos, combined with easy, anonymous internet access,  it shouldn't be surprising that there is in fact an increase in the _creation_ and distribution of child pornography. There probably isn't a large increase in the number of actual incidents involving children.  Child pornography is also a very broad term, ranging from the sickening acts involving very young children to consensual acts involving someone as old as 17.



This.  And I have heard (citation needed) of instances where some of the cached images from a questionable website visit were concluded to be "child pornography". Another example would be if you were to bulk download a ton of image files through a torrent or something and there was a bad one or two in there they are still in your possession, right? I agree the term has a broad spectrum.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (24 Oct 2013)

There was the case of the porn star that turned out to be a minor after the film was released, so anyone still holding a copy of that beta or VHS tape is in possession of what is technically kid porn. The Real nasty child porn would be easy to spot, but there is a gray line in there where someone that looks 17 could be 14. I see many young girls today that are 14 going on 20 and dress the part of a 20 year old, I still think the question of intent is important in these cases. My understanding is that in this case the number of images in question where in the thousands?


----------



## The_Falcon (24 Oct 2013)

Colin P said:
			
		

> There was the case of the porn star that turned out to be a minor after the film was released, so anyone still holding a copy of that beta or VHS tape is in possession of what is technically kid porn. The Real nasty child porn would be easy to spot, but there is a gray line in there where someone that looks 17 could be 14. I see many young girls today that are 14 going on 20 and dress the part of a 20 year old, I still think the question of intent is important in these cases. My understanding is that in this case the number of images in question where in the thousands?



Traci Lords is the person you are thinking of and she made dozens of movies while underage, and then an "anonymous" tipster reported the whole thing to the FBI after she made her one and only legal film (which she also happened to own the rights to as well).  She now does mainstream (well D-list type stuff mostly, she was in Zack and Miri make a Porno).  After her whole thing, the chances of a commercial operation, "accidentally"  having minors in their productions is pretty remote.  Producers etc. are required to keep pretty accurate records of all their models, the possibility of serious prison time (in the States anyways) is enough incentive for producers to verify their model's ages.  The only instance in the recent past (that I can think of) of producers "unknowingly" using minors, was an incident that came up with the Girl Gone Wild videos.  

In the case of accidently download something, or getting pictures in a large torrent file, I would suggest that if that happened, to contact the authorities (and a lawyer) right away, and follow their direction.  Doing that at least establishs that it was just an accident, and that you have no intention of keeping the stuff.  It also gives their techs a chance to track down, the parties who are truly culpable. 

As for why you hear about these charges more.  Well I think alot of it has to do with the fact that possession wasn't made illegal until 1994 (IIRC).  Producing and Distributing was made illegal in the 80s, before then it was legal basically.  If anyone here has an old collection of magazines from the 70's to early 80's I guarantee in the classifieds at the back of them you will see ads for commercial child porn ads and movies.  The change in law in 94, basically coincided with the emergence of the internet to the masses, and as with anything related to the government and technology, it can take years to play catch up.


----------



## The Bread Guy (24 Oct 2013)

Bzzliteyr said:
			
		

> And I have heard (citation needed) of instances where some of the cached images from a questionable website visit were concluded to be "child pornography".


Like this and this, for example?


----------



## Journeyman (24 Oct 2013)

I'm just surprised at how much expertise on kiddie porn there is here.


----------



## The_Falcon (24 Oct 2013)

Journeyman said:
			
		

> I'm just surprised at how much expertise on kiddie porn there is here.



I took police foundations in college. One of my instructors was an OPP Sgt who had worked in "Project P" for a few years.  The actual course he taught was public administration, but he did talk about his work and what he did quite a bit.


----------



## Journeyman (24 Oct 2013)

Hey, I wasn't pointing fingers at anyone in particular.....      >


----------



## The_Falcon (24 Oct 2013)

Journeyman said:
			
		

> Hey, I wasn't pointing fingers at anyone in particular.....      >



But I don't think it was a helpful insinuation though.  When people discuss the ways and means of other criminal activities such as gun running, drugs trafficking, terrorism etc, no one gives it a second thought why you would have an interest in that topic.  Start discussing child sex crimes/child pornography, and you get unhelpful/sarcastic remarks, questioning why and how, you would know anything at all about the topic.  And it is that sort of attitude that muddies the waters and allows people to get away with these crimes because merely trying to discuss it, gets you sideways glances.


----------



## Journeyman (24 Oct 2013)

I guess the QM is out of "humour"    :


----------



## Colin Parkinson (24 Oct 2013)

What has surprised me is how many people have been busted viewing child porn on government computers, really are they that unaware of what their department does for IT security and usage policies?


----------



## The Bread Guy (24 Oct 2013)

Colin P said:
			
		

> What has surprised me is how many people have been busted viewing child porn on government computers, really are they that unaware of what their department does for IT security and usage policies?


My question:   if someone can't get through to Facebook, YouTube or Scibd.com on firewalled systems, how the heck are they able to get through to sites like this?  It may be that the bad stuff is happening at home, but it doesn't seem that way in all cases.


----------



## The_Falcon (24 Oct 2013)

milnews.ca said:
			
		

> My question:   if someone can't get through to Facebook, YouTube or Scibd.com on firewalled systems, how the heck are they able to get through to sites like this?  It may be that the bad stuff is happening at home, but it doesn't seem that way in all cases.



My guess is they aren't accessing sites, so much as storing the files on the computers, so their significant other or anyone else doesn't accidently  find it on the family computer.  They probably don't realize that the IT folks can access files on their computer, particularly if they are saving the files on a personal virtual drive on a shared network.  IT person does an audit, for things like video files, mp3s and pictures that take up room on these shared drives (and usually violate the user agreements anyways) and voila, their illegal smut is discovered.


----------

