11–20 of 170 posts
We should not forget that illicit images are easily 'found' in convenient places to get people put behind bars. I don't really blame this journalist for suspecting the illicit images claim may not be as true as it appears.
It's already suspect that they left out that key fact. It's extra suspect when it turns out they had personal connections to the accused.
We should not forget that illicit images are easily 'found' in convenient places to get people put behind bars. I don't really blame this journalist for suspecting the illicit images claim may not be as true as it appears.
We should not forget that illicit images are easily 'found' in convenient places to get people put behind bars. I don't really blame this journalist for suspecting the illicit images claim may not be as true as it appears.
I know what you're referring to but don't think this is one of those cases. The affidavit is very thorough about what was found. Starts on page 3. https://www.justice.gov/opa/press-release/file/1566416/downl...
They have him "on tape" IMing multiple other suspects, talking extremely graphically about pedophilia, and exchanging images and video of same.
News that cares this much about sensationalizing isn't news. While I'm entirely for unfettered protection of free speech, free speech doesn't include the right to lie, at least not in a professional capacity. Perhaps we need to start punishing intentionally deceptive reporting by not allowing these people to call themselves journalists and / or not allowing these sources of information to call themselves news.
We should not forget that illicit images are easily 'found' in convenient places to get people put behind bars. I don't really blame this journalist for suspecting the illicit images claim may not be as true as it appears.
We should not forget that illicit images are easily 'found' in convenient places to get people put behind bars. I don't really blame this journalist for suspecting the illicit images claim may not be as true as it appears.
We should not forget that illicit images are easily 'found' in convenient places to get people put behind bars. I don't really blame this journalist for suspecting the illicit images claim may not be as true as it appears.
We should not forget that illicit images are easily 'found' in convenient places to get people put behind bars. I don't really blame this journalist for suspecting the illicit images claim may not be as true as it appears.
> the investigation into James Gordon Meek, 53, of Arlington, was initiated from an investigative lead sent by Dropbox and ultimately received by the FBI Washington Field Office’s Child Exploitation and Human Trafficking Task Force.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> the investigation into James Gordon Meek, 53, of Arlington, was initiated from an investigative lead sent by Dropbox and ultimately received by the FBI Washington Field Office’s Child Exploitation and Human Trafficking Task Force.
The problem with stating stuff like this is it can be used as an example of how deep the conspiracy goes rather than a refutation.
News that cares this much about sensationalizing isn't news. While I'm entirely for unfettered protection of free speech, free speech doesn't include the right to lie, at least not in a professional capacity. Perhaps we need to start punishing intentionally deceptive reporting by not allowing these people to call themselves journalists and / or not allowing these sources of information to call themselves news.