Megathread Jonathan Yaniv / Jessica Yaniv / @trustednerd / trustednerd.com / JY Knows It / JY British Columbia - General Discussion - No JY social media updates/discussion

[Allakazam223]

There is an underlying logic to it. The law (as written) interferes with the right to the accused's assumption of innocence:
(I spent a few minutes trying to break it down with links here, then I found an article with quotes from actual lawyers who are way more capable of this than I am).

“The Supreme Court of Canada affirmed that any law that requires an accused to be found guilty based on unreliable representations over the internet offends the constitution, particularly the presumption of innocence enshrined in s. 11(d)” of the Charter, said Mark Halfyard of Rusonik O'Connor Robbins Ross Gorham & Angelini LLP in Toronto, who acted for the respondent in the case.

“It is not enough that a person was acting reckless or negligent when they did not actually believe they were communicating with an underage child,” Halfyard told Legal Feeds by email. “In those cases, an accused would be entitled to an acquittal.”
From: Canadian Lawyer Magazine

SCC strikes down 'reasonable belief' requirement in Criminal Code for…

archived 23 Nov 2019 02:16:33 UTC

archive.ph

"...[T]he Criminal Code said that if someone told someone else they were underage, the law presumed the person believed it. The only exception was if there was evidence that the person didn’t believe it [italics mine]. Mr. Morrison said this violated his right to be presumed innocent. Before anyone can be found guilty of a crime, a judge or jury has to believe that the person is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. The right to be presumed innocent is violated whenever a law lets someone be found guilty even though there is a reasonable doubt. The law presumed Mr. Morrison believed “Mia” when she said she was 14, even though there could be other explanations."

"...[T]he judges at the Supreme Court agreed that the first point violated the right to be presumed innocent. Just because someone is told something online doesn’t mean they believe it. People don’t always tell the truth. Yet the law’s presumption meant that someone could be found guilty even if the judge or jury had a reasonable doubt about whether they believed the other person was underage. This violated the presumption of innocence."
From: Supreme Court of Canada-Case Dossiers

Supreme Court of Canada - 37687

archived 23 Nov 2019 02:25:02 UTC

archive.ph

What kind of sick doublethinking motherfucker wants to make it easier to target minors?

"I'm 14."
"Lol no way I don't believe you."

That makes the grooming okay? Or is it because of the wording of the law?

Asteroid when?

 

[Norman B. Normal]

The ultimate catch-22. You can prove he doesn't have a vagina, but to do so you have to see him naked.
Maybe if we segment the image into 100 smaller pieces and everyone takes a piece. Large enough that you can make out the partial image of a vagina but small enough that you don't get a sense of the whole.

Please, promise us you'll follow the best practices established by Scotland Yard and the British Army.

 

[lemmiwinks]

What kind of sick doublethinking motherfucker wants to make it easier to target minors?

"I'm 14."
"Lol no way I don't believe you."

That makes the grooming okay? Or is it because of the wording of the law?

Asteroid when?

The problem is kind of a logical dissonance. If you want to discuss and read about it, it has been gone over in the thread created for Yaniv-Centric legal discussion: https://kiwifarms.net/threads/canadian-law.59854/

We're not supposed to law-sperg in here anymore, (I forgot). I will now stop shitting up the thread.

 

[Spastic Colon]

What kind of sick doublethinking motherfucker wants to make it easier to target minors?

"I'm 14."
"Lol no way I don't believe you."

That makes the grooming okay? Or is it because of the wording of the law?

Asteroid when?

The case in question, the guy pointed to the terms and conditions that say you have to be 18 to join the site as proof that he thought the kid was really an adult. Now, how many underage kids create social media accounts or even access Porn hub when they know they aren't old enough to do it? It has to be a high number. But, that is enough to get the pedo off the hook. The law should be that if a person tells you that they are underage, you have to accept that as true. Whether you doubt it or not shouldn't matter. Whether they are lying or not shouldn't matter. You've been told they are underage and you should act accordingly. If you don't, you deserve to be punished.

 

[Sevenatenine]

The case in question, the guy pointed to the terms and conditions that say you have to be 18 to join the site as proof that he thought the kid was really an adult. Now, how many underage kids create social media accounts or even access Porn hub when they know they aren't old enough to do it? It has to be a high number. But, that is enough to get the pedo off the hook. The law should be that if a person tells you that they are underage, you have to accept that as true. Whether you doubt it or not shouldn't matter. Whether they are lying or not shouldn't matter. You've been told they are underage and you should act accordingly. If you don't, you deserve to be punished.

The reasonable person test does still apply. If the target repeatedly mentions childish things (parents permission, homework, etc.) there may be a case that the person ought reasonably have known they were underage.

 

[John southern]

What the fuck. How is it ok to be targetting minors for grooming, as long as you aren't completely convinced they are a minor?!

The problem is there is no actual victim in these cases. The police are going on fishing expeditions
trying to push people into planning an actual crime instead of role-playing fantasy between adults.

The cops just keep pushing and pushing until the person says the wrong thing and wham, they charge in and arrest them.

Back in the early days of the Internet, it was the police and other agencies that quickly became the largest source
of Child porn online because they were so eager to catch people downloading and sharing it that they cornered the market.


That's why there are Entrapment laws, to keep over eager Police departments desperate to get their arrest rates up
from spiraling out of control and becoming the very bad guys are are meant to protect us from.

 

[Fliddaroonie]

From what I can tell, it looks like he shouldn't be able to walk. His cerebellum looks screwed up completely It's too small and shaped strangely. Personally, I doubt he has a brain tumor, even if he did, that would be the least of his worries. It's probably a congenital problem.

He doesn't have a tumour. There's fuck all evidence of one in there. I know this is PLing so feel free to give me the arsepounding I deserve, but I have seen enough MRIs of brain scans showing tumours to know: there's fuck all shred of a clue of one in there.

The police are the ones who decide whether or not to charge someone in Canada.

Nuh-uh, it's The Crown who decide to press charges or not, not individuals or The Police. That's why cases in Court are always The Crown vs The defendant. Pedantic, I know but it's not the same as the US where a person who's the victim of a crime who decides to press charges. Charges are presented to the Court on behalf of The Crown

 

[John southern]

He doesn't have a tumour. There's fuck all evidence of one in there. I know this is PLing so feel free to give me the arsepounding I deserve, but I have seen enough MRIs of brain scans showing tumours to know: there's fuck all shred of a clue of one in there.

He's an Ashkenazi Jew.

They have all kinds of fucked up issues, including higher then normal rates of mental illness because of inbreeding
Even Jewish comedians have made careers out of making jokes about it.

Israel even did studies about it because the rates of mental illness was going through the roof there because
of the high numbers of Ashkenazi 's moving there.

 

[3119967d0c]

He's an Ashkenazi Jew.

They have all kinds of fucked up issues, including higher then normal rates of mental illness because of inbreeding
Even Jewish comedians have made careers out of making jokes about it.

Israel even did studies about it because the rates of mental illness was going through the roof there because
of the high numbers of Ashkenazi 's moving there.

A lot of congenital conditions that have developed due to their cousin and uncle-niece inbreeding do occur more commonly in the Ashkenazim- Tay-Sachs, cystic fibrosis, and torsion dystonia for a start.

Brain tumors, however, are not on that list, nor would a predisposition to developing brain tumors be sufficient to diagnose one without medical evidence of such.

 

[Norman B. Normal]

The problem is there is no actual victim in these cases.

We literally do have a victim now. Her name is Mandy, she is 15 years old, and she lives in Edmonton, AB. And a lot of us are kind of losing our shit trying to figure out how to prevent Yaniv from making the trip from Vancouver to Edmonton, and, at the very least, damaging her psychologically in a way she might never fully recover from.

 

[Sevenatenine]

We literally do have a victim now. Her name is Mandy, she is 15 years old, and she lives in Edmonton, AB. And a lot of us are kind of losing our shit trying to figure out how to prevent Yaniv from making the trip from Vancouver to Edmonton, and, at the very least, damaging her psychologically in a way she might never fully recover from.

A casual observer might remind concerned parties that two police departments operate around Edmonton. The RCMP have open files on Yaniv, and a zealous cybercrime division.

The Edmonton City Police are autonomous. If a person had credible evidence.

 

[Dorothy's Handbasket]

He's an Ashkenazi Jew.

They have all kinds of fucked up issues...

Is being "gender dyspeptic" one of those fucked up issues?

Cause there's this thread on Twitter and I can't make it English.

 

[John southern]

We literally do have a victim now. Her name is Mandy, she is 15 years old, and she lives in Edmonton, AB. And a lot of us are kind of losing our shit trying to figure out how to prevent Yaniv from making the trip from Vancouver to Edmonton, and, at the very least, damaging her psychologically in a way she might never fully recover from.

If you have good information that can be verified she is a real person and not some imaginary friend Yaniv made up or a setup by someone targeting him, contact the Langley police
and had it over to them.

You can contact child protection groups in Edmonton as well.

 

[Me_el_wante_V2.0]

What kind of sick doublethinking motherfucker wants to make it easier to target minors?

"I'm 14."
"Lol no way I don't believe you."

That makes the grooming okay? Or is it because of the wording of the law?

Asteroid when?

I don't think it makes it easier, just saying that you didn't believe it wouldn't be enough for an acquittal. While it is the state/crown that must prove your guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, your defence must be to offer evidence that pokes holes in the prosecution's argument to create that reasonable doubt, so you would have to give more reason than that alone to show why you didn't believe the person was a minor. I obviously am not a legal kiwi, so hopefully someone else knows, but where I am you would possibly be able to establish the necessary intent to groom a child (sorry I don't know what the crime is called in Canada) if you honestly believed you were doing that even if the person you were talking to wasn't a minor, assuming all the other legal requirements were met. Plus, presumptions of guilt are not a good thing, cos they take away all the power from the person who is legally innocent, and that means that everyone's rights get fucked with, regardless of whether you actually committed the crime you are accused of or not.

What I do wonder is what happens if JY got catfished and the evidence was obtained by hacking the persons account. Would it be admissible? I hope so.

Also, here is what happens with the pressing charges thing in B.C. - police recommends them, the crown approves them or decides not to prosecute. If the crown decides- not to, you can appeal the decision - https://dialalaw.peopleslawschool.ca/charging-someone-with-a-criminal-offence/

Anyway I hope this doesn't count as legalsperging (I suspect it does and so I apologise for crapping all over the thread)

Eta - thanks @lemmiwinks for clarifying on the whole reporting to the police thing, that makes way more sense than what I was thinking

 

[John southern]

Is being "gender dyspeptic" one of those fucked up issues?

Cause there's this thread on Twitter and I can't make it English.

Just search "Ashkenazi " + "Mental illness" and "Genetic disorders".
You'll see all the sources are from Jewish publications.

Woody Allen made a career out of the "Neurotic jew" shtick, Larry David does it as well.

Muslims, particularly Pakistani's have the same issue because of first cousin marriages.

 

[KiwiFuzz]

I just went to check out r/NeovaginaDisasters as I wasn't aware of that sub. Color me surprised when I discovered it was banned early this morning. Nothing is sacred.

Just imagine a bunch of cocktail weenies arranged to look like the centerpiece at an adult film gala and you'll get the idea.

 

[Spastic Colon]

The problem is there is no actual victim in these cases. The police are going on fishing expeditions
trying to push people into planning an actual crime instead of role-playing fantasy between adults.

The cops just keep pushing and pushing until the person says the wrong thing and wham, they charge in and arrest them.

Back in the early days of the Internet, it was the police and other agencies that quickly became the largest source
of Child porn online because they were so eager to catch people downloading and sharing it that they cornered the market.


That's why there are Entrapment laws, to keep over eager Police departments desperate to get their arrest rates up
from spiraling out of control and becoming the very bad guys are are meant to protect us from.

First of all, anyone doing a role-playing fantasy of fucking a kid is still a pedo. Come on. Who thinks that the idea of fucking a kid is a turn on? Sure, you might be a step up from someone trying to talk to an actual underage kid, but for how long? Once the thrill of role play is gone or is no longer enough to scratch that itch, you will generally escalate. Pedos have the highest rate of recidivism, so they have very little impulse control. That is what makes them so dangerous and why really we need the death penalty for it.

As far as police doing stings, they aren't going into forums where no pedo activities are going on and trying to lure people in. And, I don't know about you, but if someone was pretending to be a kid and was flirting with me, I'd put a stop to that and I'd tell the kid how dangerous what they are doing is. The only people who have an excuse for falling for that are actual speds. If you are re.tarded, I could see that being a defense. If you aren't though, there is no scenario that I can think of where a cop can "trap" you by pretending to be underage and getting you to talk dirty to them. None.

Honestly, I can't tell if you just hate cops that much or you are secretly a pedo.

 

[JaneThough]

Does the Handy Dart go to Edmonton?

 

[Allakazam223]

Does the Handy Dart go to Edmonton?

Between JY not reporting syncope (fainting) to ICBC, and MY apparently being fully willing to help (Beauty Pagent thread, twitter reply involving a pagent) JY, they would probably drive over.

 

[Sevenatenine]

Does the Handy Dart go to Edmonton?

Not even for JY.

Now, him deciding to drive would be quite exciting. It's a very bad idea to be driving the Coquihala in November while engaging deeply with your own image for livestream purposes. You have to pay attention through the passes. Black ice, sudden storms, logging trucks...quite treacherous.

He's a puffy Vancouverite, he probably doesn't even have ice tires, and there's no way he has a set of chains. Or the ability to put them on.