Police: Wife screenshots child porn to frame husband
Garvin County authorities say an Oklahoma wife and her accomplice are facing hefty felony charges after taking more than 800 screenshots of child pornography to frame the husband before an upcoming child custody battle.
This is why most attempts to frame someone while child porn backfires— in most cases, whomever knowingly downloaded such material is guilty of the crime, and investigators have a way of finding this out.
Don’t commit a crime just to frame someone else with it or for any other reason!
*‘frame someone with’
The clever wife first picks a target living in the county with the nation’s highest payouts for wrongful convictions knowing that the prosecutors there will relentlessly prosecute no matter how flimsy the evidence. After the prosecutor admits he has no evidence after a 18 months, flimsy evidence can be submitted one workday before trial by a substitute judge against the order of the actual judge and there can be no objection by the defense because the substitute judge does not allow the defendant or the attorney into the courtroom to object! The clever wife will be coached by a friend of a prosecutor from another county in exchange for sex. She also uses “Attribute Magic” software to make the dates of the files appear to be before she met the target to fool the forensic experts into believing she could not have placed the files there. https://www.elwinsoft.com/attributemagic-pro.html No need to even use the dark web if you have the knowledge that Sally Mann won the right to publish nude pictures of her children. A Google search using the names of Sally Mann’s children is all you will need! As well, without the testimony of Lupe Fuentes to confirm her age for you in court, Legal images of “Little Lupe” can fool “expert witnesses” who will swear in court she must be a minor. https://avn.com/business/articles/legal/lupe-fuentes-saves-man-from-bogus-child-porn-charge-394003.html . Legal Images of children wearing swimsuits or dance attire can be made illegal by just adding text prescribed to make any legal image illegal by altering its intent. The Lexus Nexus legal program has the exact text the clever wife can use to make a photo that does not contain nudity instantly child pornography by searching “sexy sylphs” in Lexus Nexus.
Usually law enforcement does not bother to validate the wife’s claims and just has the husband sit in jail awaiting trial until he confesses to possessing the files. The wife can then rob that husband like the last two and no one ever suspects the wife no matter how many men she sends to prison. Anyone out there wishing to write a book or produce a non-fiction movie on this? Contact me!
Believable, that it happens all the time. Child custody is the worst. Experienced it twice. Once, I went to prison for 10 years. Second, my attorney and I shut them down with Felony perjury! Which should have been done the first time. If I knew then what I know now🤔
Slam her butt in prison…..bet she gets only a hand slap – but, if it were a male, then prison for a long time….so corrupt… Hope I’m wrong here, but betting not…
Dumb question, but does law enforcement do fake CP stings? I read and watched the segment and it has a few similarities to internet stings, or so it seems. I too think that the two should be threatened with or placed on the registry, mostly because I want their lawyer to argue how it’s cruel and unusual punishment.
Law enforcement (LE) not only does child porn (CP) stings, but participates in the distribution. This has been verified in federal court doucments since at least 1982 with the arrest of Catherine Stubblefield Wilson, whom the FBI asserted controlled about 80% of the CP market. (Remember it was all paper in those days.) Subsequently, LE has even taken over CP websites and run them, which necessitated distribution.
All of that has been done in violation of the law as no statutory exceptions exist for such activities by LE. In answer to your question, these are not “fake” CP stings. The CP distributed by LE is quite real.
@Ed C & BWJ,
To add to that a little bit…
LE compares this to physical drugs being obtained from a lawful arrest. For example, someone was arrested for Cocaine possession, say Crack cocaine. They are then able to use that crack cocaine that was seized for other drug related stings as props to make other arrests. The rationale being that they are not “creating” the illegal substance rather than “using” what was obtained from lawful arrest elsewhere.
I am by no means an expert in Law but it still sounds to me that those in Law Enforcement are distrubuting CP knowingly AND if the argument holds true from a Court setting, they are continiously re-victimizing as well.
While in federal prison, a friend did a detailed study on the subject using only the legal resources available there. The result was a well written, 80-page document complete with over 200 case citations.
His initial motivation was to investigate the possibility of raising a “selective prosecution” challenge in a habeas motion. Although as of 2017, he had found no one in law enforcement (LE) who had been prosecuted for infractions while operating in an official capacity, he eventually abandoned that idea for practical reasons. Still, this is a useful legal compendium.
The LE analogy with drugs is misleading. Congress has specifically carved out exceptions in the law for many LE activities, including drug enforcement. It has never made such an exception for child pornography. Although children are seen as being harmed with each viewing or distribution, LE will never be held to account because they are considered the “good guys” even when they themselves harm children.
You’re going beyond stings to describe the planting of evidence.
That’s not how most CP cases happen.
Almost all CP convictions involve the convict knowingly downloading and/or possessing images of child sexual exploitation, and accepting responsibility. That is reflected in court document after court document and appears likely to happen in this Oklahoma story as well.
Were we to stop all alleged government distribution of CP tomorrow, we would barely make a dent in the child pornography problem. And every time we blame the government for child pornography, we invite outsiders to conclude, “the sex offenders don’t want to accept responsibility.”
Let’s continue to fight for reasonable sentencing, treatment, and taking down this useless registry.