John Grisham Supports Child Porn- Worst Apology Ever
Does John Grisham know how child porn is produced? He wants to lock up the people that molest little kids which is what the producers of the porn do, but thinks if they do molest the kids that it is ok to watch it online and nothing should happen. That is messed up. Later in the day yesterday an apology was released which you can tell was written by the publisher.
"Anyone who harms a child for profit or pleasure, or who in any way participates in child pornography—online or otherwise—should be punished to the fullest extent of the law.
My comments made two days ago during an interview with the British newspaper The Telegraph were in no way intended to show sympathy for those convicted of sex crimes, especially the sexual molestation of children. I can think of nothing more despicable.
I regret having made these comments, and apologize to all."
To me, it reads like a statement from a guy who was threatened by his publisher and who still believes in what he said in the interview. I don't think it is an apology. I also think they should check his browser history.
So with the next incest/rape reveal we should expect you to reveal the abuser, not the victim right? And then we'll see it all over the news after you've turned in your evidence?
ReplyDeleteWhen are we going to hear about Dan schnieder?
ReplyDeleteI agree, anyone that harms a child (or anyone) should be punished. Did I read on here that this might also be connected to a mental disorder or can be treated with therapy?
In ny cse he's an idiot. I'm sure his friend was doing research for a book when he got drunk and wanted to look at child porn like Mr. Peter Townshend so many years ago was doing reserch.
ReplyDeleteSome people just shouldn't speak.
ReplyDeleteWhat he said is disgusting and of course he apologized when it was affecting his bottom dollar. I for one haven't purchased one of his books in years bc they're all the same formula.
ReplyDeleteIdiot!!!! He must be naive to believe the story of his friend!
ReplyDeleteI always thought he sucked as a writer.
ReplyDeleteWhat a dirty bird....grind up his bones and feed 'em to the fish....
ReplyDelete"Later in the day yesterday an apology was released which you can tell was written by the publisher"
ReplyDeleteLike this guy doesn't know how to write.
Totally, @PinkCashmere.
ReplyDeleteHe has enough money from writing the same formulaic book over & over to bury any trail other people might leave.
I think to myself... if I had a ton of child porn on my computer, what sorta response would I have to a story like this? I think most of you, including "ENTY" should have YOUR browser history checked.
ReplyDeleteBut, but it's his best friend… Best friends should't go to jail because they dig the child porn!
ReplyDeleteWhat a frickin Idiot! Definitely raises a red flag for his outside hobbies.
Pedos should have their junk removed without anaesthetic and every bone in their bodies broken at the same time. Their supporters too
ReplyDeleteHas anyone else seen the viral regarding the pedo who raped his one year old? He got raped by 20 men, re stitched and done again 20 more times plus stabbed all over his back (while in prison btw) any thoughts on this? Personally the 20 inmates are just as bad but it shoulda been worse just sayin. Sorry (not sorry)
I should feel bad on some level but as a victim of molestation and someone who's daughter was groped, I also feel it wasn't enough. SORRY NOT SORRY
DeleteSorry to hear that hun sending love to you both xx
DeleteI don't buy for one minute that his friend clicked on it unintentionally and only did so once. Right. Sure. And he has a bridge for sale in Brooklyn.
ReplyDeleteThe issue here is what you consider "child porn".
ReplyDeleteI bet his friend (and most "child porn" viewers was watching a 17 yo (or 20, if in the US 21 is the underage), who has already banged more dudes than all my 40something coworkers altogether, who decided to make a sextape, being it for dough of for pleasure.
That is way different than watching a baby or some muhammad-aisha person younger than 12 who previously thought penises were some kind of lollipop.
I could give Grisham a little leeway if he had said his friend accidentally clicked a link on some child porn and was hit hard by the law, caught in a sting, for just one click.
ReplyDeleteI remember Pete Townsend said he was doing research on child porn, and he got caught in a sting.
Now do you believe Pete hey but what is you were legitimately doing research on child porn - if you are in law enforcement etc etc. But then I guess you find a way to do it without breaking the law I guess or do you really need to look at it to know what it is? Though I imagine police do collect the photos because they do search the photos for clues to try and identify the victims and the locations.
I thought how silly of course they don't charge someone for one click.
HOWEVER they had a legal expert on talk radio here and he said the police WILL charge you for one click and then the judge has not choice but to give you the same penalty for one accidental click as someone who has clicked on child porn many times and has it uploaded to their site BECAUSE here that is the way the law is written, there is no discretion, then you get your name on a sex offender's registry and you can never get a pardon for that particular offence so you can never wipe off your record and the legal expert said that was not fair that there was not some discretion.
It does not happen to me now because I have good firewalls and search engines have better filters etc but I remember looking up Chanel perfume and ending up on an adult porn site and couldn't get off of it without shutting off my computer.
Though presumably child porn sites don't try to be accessible unless it is a police sting???????
The other thing the legal expert said is that the definition of child pornography is very broad.
ReplyDeleteThink of the people who take the quintessential standard photos of the kids in the tub and having the photo developers calling the cops. Now of course photo developers are almost all instinct but you see what I mean. You get PC hysteria these days.
Anyone who defends child porn in ANY capacity is one sick f*ck.
ReplyDeleteIt's been a while since I paid money for one of his books, and it looks like I won't be doing that ever again.
ReplyDeleteOh please. He meant exactly what he said in the interview.
ReplyDeleteJezebel has this article about Grisham's friend who was caught with child porn on his computer.
ReplyDeletehttp://jezebel.com/the-case-against-john-grishams-child-porn-watching-frie-1647275519
Ok this really happened to a FOF of mine..He order "Over 18 Hot Boys" porn and his computer was seized as well as my friends and he was arrested. NOW, first of all it said "Over 18" and he never actually rec'd the tape. They eventually dropped the charges. However, my husband who doesn't really like him (I do) always thought where there is smoke there's fire. But it makes you wonder were those "boys" under age hence the sting? Just another point of view.
ReplyDeleteGrisham's still a crappy writer and a jerk.
If I thought for one second a friend of mine even contemplated watching child sexual abuse (it's not porn) online the police would be the least of their worries.
ReplyDeleteNot only would I personally fuck that scumbag up but I would also let every single person know what a scumbag they are.
How can he still be friendly with someone who wants to watch kids being raped and hurt?
Bird's of a feather flock together....
Not to defend Grisham but, I kind of agree with him. Time, energy and legal resources are wasted on arresting and trying people who LOOK at porn online and not the people who PRODUCE the smut. However, he really should have kept his mouth shut.
ReplyDeleteI don't think this will hurt his book sales. He has a huge following.
Why look at it in the first place if you aren't into it? People watching are just as bad as the people doing it so yes they should be arrested and tried. If you can get arrested for leaving the scene of an accident you should get arrested for watching child rape
DeleteIt's not even child porn, so I don't know why it's called that. It's child rape. These children are not consenting to having sex with adults. They are drugged and forced into it. It's just plain old sickening. The thought of it turns my stomach.
ReplyDelete@car54 Thanks for that link, very informative
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteBesides this being yet another pathetic middle aged male dumbass who probably can't score a 20'something ripe vaginal (next time ask Ho-Lohan she's always available) or needs to leverage "shock" statements to sell another book, the sad part is: this reveal hasn't registered with the mainstream public.
ReplyDeleteThey're too busy chowing down fast food junk, mega-watt king size pops and infusing their brain with trailer trash Hooker Boo-boo Duck Dynasty Gypsy tv episodes.
Hello @Jordan, I hope you are doing well.
ReplyDeleteAstounding that this is the first I have seen of it. Where is the public outrage?
ReplyDeleteThe viewer of the abuse SHOULD get a strict sentence; if it weren't for assholes who enjoy watching it, there would be no "market" for this garbage.
ReplyDeleteI am also really disturbed by the amount of pornography that does feature legally aged actors who are dressed to appear underage. Just scrolling through the channel guide on TV, you see it. What the eff is wrong with people?!
John Grisham is forever blacklisted in our home.
I still cant believe he wld say such a stupid thing, and believe that viewing child porn is not any problem. Asshole.
ReplyDelete@Tina thanks for the research.
ReplyDeleteBUT.
The district attorney will weigh all the evidence in a case before prosecuting. I don't think a DA would prosecute one click.
A judge only issues a sentence after a conviction. If a "one click" case actually is prosecuted, the DA may offer the defendant a deal to avoid trial, or the defendant may opt to go before a jury. The defendant has plead guilty OR be found guilty by a jury before a judge issues a sentence.
I really find it hard to believe that there ar ea lot of "one click" upstanding citizens doing years of prison time as I write this.
But I admit I could just be naive.
Why did he have to say white guy?
ReplyDeleteShould kept it zipped.
Ah ha read the story on what really went on with Grisham's friend, he downloaded photos so yeah that ain't no accident, oh I hit the save image by accident.
ReplyDeleteI don't see any dispute about that.
And I see that if you did stumble once accidentally for any reason on child porn, you report it immediately to the police or the cybercrime hotline or most cities have task forces on this.
And this is interesting, how many men are in fact looking at underage girls at what they consider adult porn sites. Things that make you go hmmmmm. Is is child porn if the girls are in fact underage or do you have to know or consider them to be underage when it is not say clear?
BUT FYI
Talk radio had on a computer expert today, he was talking about hackers, computer security and encryption. You can do it now but it takes a lot of work and knowledge, but the future computers are going to be set up to encrypt everything on your computer in such a way that only the top notch hackers will be able to do any damage to your computer but until then any hacker could upload child porn to your computer or iPhone and get you in a heap of trouble. However he also said that computer experts should be able to tell that this is what happened but did say people need to be aware of odd traffic patterns etc on their computers & smartphones.
And it makes sense if hackers can upload nude celebrity females photos from iCloud they can probably download them elsewhere.
I would tend to agree with you Prunella it does seem to me that you have to at least download that photo you "accidentally" clicked on which you are not going to do if it was a mistake. I cannot imagine Canada having a zero tolerance policy without allowing for the odd and rare exception. Having the tough penalties once convicted, well it is the only way to drive down demand so innocent children are not exploited to continue the supply.
ReplyDelete