This is one of the worst feelings i ever had

That you didn’t enjoy it means little to nothing in court. In most countries, the content of your harddsk, including your browser cache is your possession, regardless of your intent. Like a gun with your fingerprints in the shed is in your possession and will harm your defence. The law is not always ‘reasonable’, especially in the context of horrific material. If the police comes knocking on your door, your life is pretty much over, even if that nasty prosecutor doesn’t get you sent to jail, you may get a permanent record. Now, please, for your own good, destroy the harddisk.

Disclaimer: I Am Not A Lawyer.

Again Riven’s advice is sound. “You didn’t enjoy it” defense. “I didn’t enjoy having sex with a 4 month old”. What would you think if presented with that argument?

There is a difference between doing and watching it.
The worst thing you are making yourself guilty of by watching it is failure to aid performance.

Committing a crime is committing a crime in the eyes of the law. The “why” it was committed isn’t very important (unless people buy it, etc.). My point was the argument isn’t believable to a third party.

The intentions do not matter. But actually, it is not the same as if you would be someone behind that video.
Nobody will really arrest you watching these, unless you are really heavily consuming them or in an important position.

I just wanted to reinforce what Riven (and Roquen) are saying. Laws don’t always match intent. “Possession” in some cases can be sufficient to get you in trouble, even though you dropped it like a hot potato.

The only related case I know about involved a local (San Francisco Bay Area) popular talk show host, Bernie Ward, who’s career was destroyed. He was very critical of the Bush administration, and was taken off the air when child pornography was found on AOL servers (not his computer, but the AOL account used for emailing the photos to a sex-chat dominatrix) and he was indicted by a Federal Jury. His defence was that the material was “for research purposes” on a book about hypocrisy in America. This defence didn’t fly with either the general public or the jury. He ended up plea bargaining guilty to a single count of emailing files. Most probably this was not an act of political recrimination, and he was indeed guilty. I’m not a lawyer either, but I don’t find it hard to extrapolate from that example to any sort of witch hunt, and mere presence of certain types of files being legally incriminating.

[quote] the first thing i noticed is that people doesn’t react seriously to the problem, some even laughed
[/quote]
I agree, the lack of a serious response can be pretty upsetting on its own. I am reminded of a close woman friend who, as a child, was the victim of molestation from her uncle. She went to her mother with it and the mother’s response was to dismiss it as being “as common as weeds.” The only repercussion for the uncle was to try to avoid him as much as possible and never be alone with him again. Things like that can leave scars! (And he did go on to molest other victims.)

How could her own mother be so callous? My speculation was that she had also been a victim in her youth and received the same response when she reported the problem. Behaviors can be passed down for generations, with certain immoral acts rationalized or “swept under the rug” rather than confronted. At some point with these cycles of evil, people need to take a stand and stop them, rather than being cynical and allowing them to continue.

A couple other historical examples: slavery, pedophilia in the Church, a culture/mindset that blames women when they are raped…

[quote] i surely need someone to talk with about these things
[/quote]

[quote] it literally got into my mind from no where, it’s very chocking, i can’t find a stronger word to explain it.
[/quote]
“choking” or “shocking”?

[quote]the images that i saw are very very very disturbing for someone like me, and if they doesn’t go away, i will think about consulting a therapist
[/quote]
Absolutely, it makes sense to look into this further, it seems to me. There’s nothing to lose. I’d want to understand more about why and what in the world is being done about it. There are various people that can be consulted will have varying degrees of expertise. I’d try to find someone where the individual has direct training, knows the literature and appreciates the reality and seriousness.

oh yeah, everyone needs a friend to talk to. Even the most extreme introverts tend to have a few very close friends they talk to. It’s part of human nature to express feelings to work through them, that’s why therapist exist in the first place. :smiley: But, it sounds like you just have an distaste for this stuff combined with some sort of blood pressure problem that’s causing you to faint when you’re emotionally distressed, doubling the distress because you fainted and now everyone is freaking out around you.

If you pass out when you see/witness violence you probably just have a predisposition to having a very negative reaction to blood/gore combined with blood pressure problems that are causing you to faint. My question though is, having known your extreme distaste for this kind of stuff; why did you go looking for such things on the internet? :confused:

Man. Think again. The vast majority of the world’s prison population is “small fish”. And a fair number probably thought they were safe because of that.

The internet provides free flow of information: You can come accross such sites just by clicking accidentally on a troll link, getting computer viruses, etc.
So you’re telling me that if my grandparents would get a virus that would bomb thier PC with such sites then the police would just appear one day in front of their house and arrest them? Drenius is right, so man, think again. :wink:

==> to all the replies about me can get in troubles because of these things, thank you but it can’t happened, like it literally can’t, beside that my country doesn’t have any strict internet law (we don’t have terrorist attacks like in Iraq, Syria or Afghanistan, but when these extremist attacks, they share their plan of facebook during the event lol ) i am 100% sure that none of these content is in my hard disk now, but i’ll keep in mind to not take this laptop with me when i leave the country, no one knows what could happens :stuck_out_tongue:
again, thank you for your concern but this isn’t the subject of this thread.

[quote]I agree, the lack of a serious response can be pretty upsetting on its own…A couple other historical examples: slavery, pedophilia in the Church, a culture/mindset that blames women when they are raped…
[/quote]
+1!! specially for the last example, last year in my country, two police officers raped a girl who was hanging out with her boyfriend late at night (they were in a club) the two officers handcuffed the guy and raped the girl, do you know what happened at first ?
the couple was accused by being in a “wrong situation” (they were kissing or whatever) and since this is a “Muslim” country (not anymore with the new constitution ;D ) the couple has to spent 6 months in jail, while the officers crimes was ignored but hopefully and thanx to the right media coverage the case has been changed completely, the couples are out and the 2 officers are going to spent a good time in prison together

[quote]“choking” or “shocking”?
[/quote]
lol shocking*

[quote]My question though is, having known your extreme distaste for this kind of stuff; why did you go looking for such things on the internet? :confused:
[/quote]
i mentioned above that people always start to imagine all sort of stuff when it comes to things that no one can prove if these are true or false, just like religions or myths and i am 100% sure that if i give you even a little hope that with an “x-thing” you can discover if this religion or myth is correct or not then you will definitely use it and hope that what you have in mind doesn’t change, that’s why i did it, i was hoping that this guy is just exaggerating like everyone else, so in the start (during the search) i the worst case that i was expecting is to find a forum to sell guns, but by coincidence (i don’t want to give full details) in a Reddit post that is supposed to solve a pure technical problem, some guy just posted a link to the hidden wiki and since you are studying psychiatry, you know that humans are too curious to walk back in such situations, like really imagine yourself in my place, you are so confident and sure about something and suddenly you find stuff that claims to prove the direct opposite and the only thing between you and certainty is a single click, what do you do ?

So there is that thread named “This is one of the worst feelings i ever had” in my recent unread posts. So I click on it and find a link to or a video of something… not named in this thread, but pretty bad, so bad it could get me into jail.

So, Riven, did you destroy your harddrive?

I agree with Panda, I don’t think this is getting you into trouble in any way, unless you do something that makes some politicians not like you :wink:

@matheus23: your reconstruction of events is inaccurate.

Doesn’t compare. You wouldn’t get an “adware” program for this kind of material by accident. I’d be shocked if an adware for this kind of stuff exists because that would be idiotic. Statistically 100% of adware is installed when a user is looking for illegal content, so if it does exist then grandma or grandpa is looking for some really fucked up shit. And yes if they would be legally responsible in most countries if this situation occurred and they did not inform the proper authorities. Minimally non-reporting witness up to part of a conspiracy. Conspiracy laws are typically become very wide in recent years.

WTF? Given the popularity of semi-realistic legal procedure being placed in series and such, you’d think you kids might have a reasonable-ish understand of law basics.

I’m 100% sure there are still traces. Even if you don’t think you’ve done anything illegal…run a 35-pass Gutmann on all of the empty space. It’ll only cost you some electricity.

Yeah, well, my thought was that you must have seen it / have it on your harddrive (cache) because you clicked on this topic without the media being cut off at that time.

What do you mean by semi-realistic legal procedure?

I just find it hard to believe, that (hypothetically) someone, who clicked on a link from a friend that shows such media, is arrested, even though he didn’t even know what was behind that link and it was not his intention to watch something like that at all.

I don’t think that possession alone makes you guilty.

He meant theater (simulated lawsuits)

Said hypothetically person comes upon evidence of a crime. Most modernish legal systems will require that a citizen that comes on such must report it the to proper authorities. This is reasonable. To not do so will committing a crime. Depending on the legal system in question such person can be consider to be part of a conspiracy by their act. Thus can be guilty of aiding on on-going criminal enterprise and therefore can have legal liability of all actions the original authors perform afterwards. Again reasonably since they knew of the original act and by non-action allow for future actions. It would be hard to argue: I didn’t think they’d do anything like that again! How shocking!!??

Let’s change topics. Let’s say I bought a lotto ticket and won a modest amount of 10K (USD or Euros). I’m approached by someone who wants to buy the ticket off of me for 11K. Hey I don’t have to pay taxes and get more! I’m in!! They’re buying it as a present for so they . If I do, I’m committing an illegal act. Most likely the purpose is money laundering. Now let’s say that the really business behind was drugs and the group in question has committed at least one murder. I’m legally liable (again in most modernish systems) for acts performed by this enterprise: selling drugs, murder, tax evasion. Even though I had no way of know any of these events have occurred or are on-going. By commit my illegal act I become part on an ongoing criminal conspiracy.

Ok. You kids are saying the probability isn’t very high that the hypothetically person(s) will be arrested and tried. You are correct. So the question becomes: what’s your risk tolerance? Ignore the potential for a very long time in a very bad place because the probabilities are low? My risk tolerance here is about zero. Low probability events happen all the time. I’ve no interest in being a side-bar article in a newspaper or the subject of some short documentary. Thanks all the same.

Okay thanks Roquen for clearing some things up for me.

And no, I know that semi-realistic simulated lawsuits are semi-realistic.
Also, I only know one of them off the top of my head right now and it’s years ago that I saw that one.
(Though I’m not sure we’re talking about the same trash :smiley: )

So yeah your examples make sense, and yep, I’m by no means a lawyer and definitely not educated in that way.

So why is your advice to “destroy the harddrive”, instead of “destroy the harddrive and report it to proper authorities”?

Since OP had no trouble finding the material in question it’s highly likely that some policing authority is aware of it’s existence. So I’m not too worried about the “doing the right thing” side of it. Contacting the authorities might lead to nothing or a series of very long and not-too-fun interviews. So my view is be an egoist and protect yourself.

Things like this show the dark side of privacy that hardly ever comes up in discussions about the topic. Yeah, privacy is good and important in many ways, allowing you to experiment, develop intimate relationships and protecting you from surveillance by government entities. However, privacy is also bad in some ways, when it is protection for domestic violence, all forms of abuse and crime.

I have mixed feelings about things like the Tor project. Yeah it enables activists and journalists to escape surveillance by opressive regimes. But it also enables criminals and people who are sick in the head to communicate, coordinate, exchange materials etcetera through the dark net. There was a time in which I wished that the internet was all like the (theoretically optimal) Tor network: 100% anonimity for everyone. However, these days I think that in many ways anonimity is not such a great thing. See e.g. dark net, anonymous comments on many sites, haters, trolls, etcetera. Maybe the solution for the privacy issue is not a technical one (like Tor) but a political and legal one: we need a government that strikes a good balance between respecting and protecting privacy, and limiting privacy where it is needed.

My 2c…

==> Visiting this may put you in dangers Vs no it wont :

moSFlvxnbgk

but then there is :

[quote]Since OP had no trouble finding the material in question it’s highly likely that some policing authority is aware of it’s existence.
[/quote]
My guess is that “the powerful” are aware of everything there (that is for sure) but i believe that they have all the means to stop these things from happening but they don’t cause they want to give their enemies the illusion of being 100% protected and stop them when they need to, i really don’t believe that this “Tor project” is made by “the people”.