TheMeuge writes: A Texas grand jury has declined to issue an indictment in a case that proves that common sense can still prevail. The father heard his daughters screams during a family event, he told police, and followed them to a secluded area, where he witnessed an employee of the family attempting to rape his 4-year-old daughter. Several witnesses decribed seeing the father beating the assailant's head against the pavement repeatedly. During the subsequent 911 call, the father's frantic voice can be heard: "I need an ambulance! This guy was raping my daughter, and I beat him up, and I don't know what to do!"
from the now-how-will-we-blackmail-people? dept.
bs0d3 writes "According to a recent ruling in New York state, from Senior Judge Carmen Beauchamp Ciparick, 'Merely viewing Web images of child pornography does not, absent other proof, constitute either possession or procurement within the meaning of our Penal Law. Rather, some affirmative act is required (printing, saving, downloading, etc.) to show that defendant in fact exercised dominion and control over the images that were on his screen.' Which means under New York state law, creating, and possessing child pornography is illegal; the lawmakers never specifically said that merely viewing it is a crime. The prosecution mentioned that the images were saved on his hard drive via the browser cache. However the court ruled that this was not the same as having a saved image. This means that people from New York state who click the wrong link by accident will no longer face serious jail time and a lifetime of registering as a sex offender. People will be able to report what they've found to the police who can then go after the source of the child porn, instead of someone who was merely browsing the internet."