- Joined
- Aug 23, 2018
Lolcow Todd Daugherty / N9OGL / Fox Smith / Doc Dot - Domestic terrorist, ham radio sperg, self-described hikikomori, confirmed pedophile
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2018
As soon as she gives me a copy, I will scan it and post it. She said she was going to give a copy.
- Joined
- Jan 7, 2021
As soon as she gives me a copy, I will scan it and post it. She said she was going to give a copy.
Enjoy prison, stalker.
Enjoy prison, stalker.
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2018
After reading the motion to suppress a number of times (and getting a little pissed off in the process) I have to figure out how much I am going to sue the police, the state and the FBI for.
Don't ask for a copy, currently I not allowed to send or post copies. But I do have a copy, it IS 98 pages long counting all of the attachments.
Don't ask for a copy, currently I not allowed to send or post copies. But I do have a copy, it IS 98 pages long counting all of the attachments.
- Joined
- Aug 23, 2018
Statute of limitations, qualified immunity, and you have no civil lawyer and that is just to start with. ...
That is, if the DA doesn't reject it.
Plus you're a pedophile and this never goes away.... Never, ever. Guilty or innocent, you are branded a pedo like cattle are branded.
So you can be pissed off all you want little man.
That is, if the DA doesn't reject it.
Plus you're a pedophile and this never goes away.... Never, ever. Guilty or innocent, you are branded a pedo like cattle are branded.
So you can be pissed off all you want little man.
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2018
1. there is statute of limitations, because this case ongoing.
2. they police don't get qualified immunity because:
a) They didn't have probable cause.
b) The warrant was general warrant
c) they (the state and FBI) intentionally left materials and facts out of both the affidavits and the warrants
d) the image the FBI found which we come to find out was a computer-generated image, not a real child was found after the original charges were dismissed and the warrant was quashed.
e) There IS no document or order that stated the police was allowed to maintain control over those 15 electronic devices.
f) The transcript from the 2018 case also has no statement from the police or the judge allowing the state to hold onto those 15 devices.
g) The state lied about the image, claiming it was an image of a real child, but it in fact according to FBI's own documents it was computer generated, and not real child.
2. they police don't get qualified immunity because:
a) They didn't have probable cause.
b) The warrant was general warrant
c) they (the state and FBI) intentionally left materials and facts out of both the affidavits and the warrants
d) the image the FBI found which we come to find out was a computer-generated image, not a real child was found after the original charges were dismissed and the warrant was quashed.
e) There IS no document or order that stated the police was allowed to maintain control over those 15 electronic devices.
f) The transcript from the 2018 case also has no statement from the police or the judge allowing the state to hold onto those 15 devices.
g) The state lied about the image, claiming it was an image of a real child, but it in fact according to FBI's own documents it was computer generated, and not real child.
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2014
So why did you have computed generated child porn on your computer again?
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2018
Computer - generated images are legal, not only are they legal, but it is also constitutional protected speech (see Ashcroft v Free Speech Coalition 2002) if you have an issue with that, take it up with the US Supreme Court.
- Joined
- Dec 12, 2022
You're a retard and your idiotic attempts at legal analysis are laughable. Why you continue to flap your mouth while the case is ongoing is beyond my comprehension.
- Joined
- Feb 20, 2017
Computer generated cp is illegal. There was already a case about that retard. Fuck off and die already.
- Joined
- Feb 20, 2017
Except in 2003 there wasn't AI making these images retard. I hope some nigger kills you in prison.
I've already shared this once, but I'll share it again
Don't talk about shit you don't understand you illiterate retarded sack of shit.
I've already shared this once, but I'll share it again
| 2024-08-09 | House | Public Act . . . . . . . . . 103-0825 |
| 2024-08-09 | House | Effective Date January 1, 2025 |
| 2024-08-09 | House | Governor Approved |
| 2024-06-24 | House | Sent to the Governor |
Don't talk about shit you don't understand you illiterate retarded sack of shit.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2018
Except in 2003 there wasn't AI making these images retard. I hope some nigger kills you in prison.
You don't have to have AI to create computer generated images there are programs like Daz3D, AutoDesk Maya, and few other that can make 3D computer generated characters and images.
The issue with the Illinois law is it just passed back in August and doesn't go into effect till next year, so it has yet to be challenged in court. The law may be unconstitutional because it also makes cartoons, painting and sculptures illegal. Something the US Supreme Court has said is not child porn. The other issue is that individuals do have the right to look at obscene material in the privacy of their home (Stanley v Georgia US Supreme Court 1969)
You don't have to have AI to create computer generated images there are programs like Daz3D, AutoDesk Maya, and few other that can make 3D computer generated characters and images.
The issue with the Illinois law is it just passed back in August and doesn't go into effect till next year, so it has yet to be challenged in court. The law may be unconstitutional because it also makes cartoons, painting and sculptures illegal. Something the US Supreme Court has said is not child porn. The other issue is that individuals do have the right to look at obscene material in the privacy of their home (Stanley v Georgia US Supreme Court 1969)
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2014
Okay, but why did you have computer genrated cp on your computer?
- Joined
- Dec 12, 2022
You know most people would deny the very existence of such materials, not constantly defend their presence & their legality.
You're a fat retarded pedo and will go to jail.
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2018
Like I said before, I don't know where it came from.
I think you are missing the fact that the police and FBI lied, claiming it was a real child. Not computer generated one. The state up to now, has argued that it was real child (not fake one) which we know now was a fake (computer-generated)
again...
1. there is no statute of limitations, because this case ongoing.
2. they police don't get qualified immunity because:
a) They didn't have probable cause. The didn't have probable cause for a search warrant, let alone one to arrest me. Because there was no link between me and my computers and the post that was made.
b) The warrant was general warrant. it lacks particularity, and it doesn't state what files were to be seized and for what crime.
c) they (the state and FBI) intentionally left materials and facts out of both the affidavits and the warrants.
d) the image the FBI found which we come to find out was a computer-generated image, not a real child was found after the original charges were dismissed and the warrant was quashed. The warrant was quashed and the charges were dismissed, but the police went ahead and handed the 15 electronic devices over to the FBI. The FBI knew the charges were dropped and that had no warrant at all.
e) There IS no document or order that stated the police was allowed to maintain control over those 15 electronic devices. The charges were dropped, and warrant quashed they had no right to those computers, because they had no warrant.
f) The transcript from the 2018 case also has no statement from the police or the judge allowing the state to hold onto those 15 devices.
g) The state lied about the image, claiming it was an image of a real child, but it in fact according to FBI's own documents it was computer generated, and not real child.
how much should I sue them for.... I still think 60 million or at lease 30 million.
I think you are missing the fact that the police and FBI lied, claiming it was a real child. Not computer generated one. The state up to now, has argued that it was real child (not fake one) which we know now was a fake (computer-generated)
again...
1. there is no statute of limitations, because this case ongoing.
2. they police don't get qualified immunity because:
a) They didn't have probable cause. The didn't have probable cause for a search warrant, let alone one to arrest me. Because there was no link between me and my computers and the post that was made.
b) The warrant was general warrant. it lacks particularity, and it doesn't state what files were to be seized and for what crime.
c) they (the state and FBI) intentionally left materials and facts out of both the affidavits and the warrants.
d) the image the FBI found which we come to find out was a computer-generated image, not a real child was found after the original charges were dismissed and the warrant was quashed. The warrant was quashed and the charges were dismissed, but the police went ahead and handed the 15 electronic devices over to the FBI. The FBI knew the charges were dropped and that had no warrant at all.
e) There IS no document or order that stated the police was allowed to maintain control over those 15 electronic devices. The charges were dropped, and warrant quashed they had no right to those computers, because they had no warrant.
f) The transcript from the 2018 case also has no statement from the police or the judge allowing the state to hold onto those 15 devices.
g) The state lied about the image, claiming it was an image of a real child, but it in fact according to FBI's own documents it was computer generated, and not real child.
how much should I sue them for.... I still think 60 million or at lease 30 million.
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2014
You should sue them for a lifetime supply of anal lube. You won't get it but you're gonna need it chomo.
- Joined
- Aug 23, 2018
pedo said:
Your time line doesn't add up so I assume you are just making this up because your lawyer wouldn't be dumb enough to enter a false statement which would make the entire motion to squash mute. Here is why.
pedo said:
So if the charges
---------------
No such thing as "ongoing" when it comes to the Statute of Limitations. An example of that would be say I broke my leg at Walmart in 2004, and it's bothering me in 2024, I can't sue even though the pain is still "ongoing". The date to begin a lawsuit happens at the day of the event. I kept telling you back in 2020 that your statute of limitations for the 2018 stuff was expiring and to go out and hire a lawyer, but you know everything. Too bad.
You been saying this same this for over 15 years now (scroll through back pages to see Toad endlessly) threatening to file lawsuits, never once having filed a thing.
The fact and your lawyer told you that the cases from 2018 and 2015 were never dismissed with prejudice. And even if the 2022 case is dropped, it will be a Nolle Presqui
By the way, your Statute of Limitations for the child porn charge expired 2 days ago Sept 14, 2022 which would make Sept 14, 2024 the latest to begin to file a lawsuit. Blame your public defender for dragging it out this long. Not that you had a case to begin with for a lawsuit.
And you certainly aren't suing for $60,000,000.00 - people on death row for 30 years on evidence intentionally buried on purpose get far less.
So NO TOAD
Oh, and how can be generated computer porn when they have a date of birth of the victim involved? You even published the DOB here and were just bragging a few days ago that the child was over 18 now.
Your story is beginning to fall apart due to the lies. EDIT: The actual document showing it was a real victim and her age. How can computerized child porn have a Date of Birth??
Last edited by a moderator:
- Joined
- Feb 20, 2017
Do Illinois prisons allow for gifts to be sent? Niggers that take care of this pedo will deserve a reward.