17
   

Man's life Over, Cops Decide He Watched Child Porn in First Class

 
 
BillRM
 
  2  
Mon 5 Mar, 2012 07:43 pm
@firefly,
Kind of make sense to do a grab and run using a car however I still do not see how anyone would safety remove a child from the middle of a crowd park after drawing attention to himself.

Still can not find an example of someone walking into a park with kittens or puppies and trying to abduct a child let alone after drawing all kinds of attentions to himself and his kittens/puppies.

Will keep looking as I am sure someone at sometime try that approach in a low key manner but no luck yet in finding it.

firefly
 
  1  
Mon 5 Mar, 2012 07:44 pm
Quote:
What lurks in the mind of a child predator?
By MEGAN BURKE
The Recorder and Times

Dr. John Bradford is the acting clinical director of the forensic treatment unit at the Brockville Mental Health Centre. In short, after his many titles and prestigious awards, including being named a Member of the Order of Canada, Bradford is a forensic psychiatrist.

Bradford fell into forensic psychiatry by accident and became interested in people who are mentally ill who break the law. Over the years, he became interested in sexual deviations and has helped treat many people suffering from different types of pedophilia, from very mild to very serious.

The Recorder and Times spoke to Bradford about child predators, due to recent attempted events in the area, to learn what's going on in the minds of a predator, if there is a specific type of child they prefer and if there's any way to identify child predators.

Q. What's running through a child predator's mind?

A. They are people that have pedophilia, meaning they have some sexual interest in children, but they could go their whole lives without ever laying their hands on a child. This includes the people caught up in child Internet pornography, the ones viewing it, they have mild pedophilia. That's one group.

Even when you go further into pedophilia, the majority of people who may have sexually abused a child, it's really fondling and it's not that intrusive. But as you go up the scale and it becomes more intrusive, oral sex or some type of genital sex and certainly if there's any violence to it, it becomes less frequent, much rarer and more significant from a risk point of view for the general public.

If you look at people who molest children, 80 or 90 per cent of them are in sexual contact with children that they know or are acquainted with. There's a small percentage, maybe 10 to 15 per cent, that go after children that are strangers. The attempted child abduction comes into that group. They are a much higher risk group because they are a much smaller percentage.

When a child is abducted by a stranger, the risk is higher that serious physical harm could come to the child.

Q. Are these tendencies biochemical or attributed to upbringing?

A. They are definitely not attributed to upbringing. Whatever else it is, it's not that or it's not convincingly that.

If you look at the studies of people suffering from pedophilia, what you would see is about a third of them were sexually abused themselves, two thirds weren't. Being sexually abused as a child doesn't make you a pedophile but because a third of them have been abused, it contributes in some way.

I've spoken to hundreds if not thousands of people with pedophilia. What they describe is around about puberty when all of us become sexually aroused, and most people become attracted mostly to people of the opposite sex and roughly the same age, people with pedophilia go through the same process except they are not attracted to not male or female, opposite or same sex, but the age is the difference. They are attracted to prepubertal or peripubertal children and it's an automatic process, it just happens. We're not sure why it happens.

There's studies that show in the endocrine challenges to the brain there may be abnormal responses, there's a genetic study that shows genetic transmission that is not a typical one. Am I convinced that it is something that is genetic or biochemical? Yes I am. Can I say that for sure? No I can't. We need more research before we can be sure of what the cause is.

Q. Is it always a sexual urge?

A. No some people abduct children for other reasons. In the circumstance of a man coming up to a child and trying to get them into a car, that would be almost certainly someone who has pedophiliac urges. If approaching children who are strangers, my worry would be the sexual urge to do that would be strong. And if the sexual urge is strong I would worry that if they engage in sexual activity with the child it would be much more intrusive.

You then end up with the problem where in some instances they may kill a child to avoid detection, or some of them may be sadistic where physical violence or torture may be part of what turns them on sexually. These are rare events, fortunately, but when you have anything to do with a potential abduction of a child and it's with a stranger, that to me is a very strong red flag.

Q. Is there something that triggers pedophiles to act?

A. No not necessarily. In theory you could have somebody who's pedophiliac and might have violent sexual fantasies about children, and they could go their whole life never harming anybody.

There are some people who abduct, and the difference between the two is not that obvious. There are some things that are more obvious. Some tend to have personality problems. They may not be psychopathic but they may be on that particular pathway.

Studies that we've done on men who kill children show that they are aroused more by violence on children more than sexual attraction. In addition to that, they have high levels of either psychopathy or approaching psychopathy. They are a small and select group, fortunately.

Q. Do child predators have a specific type of child they prefer?

A. They would either be attracted to males or females. Contrary to belief, most children who end up being sexually abused by pedophiles are females rather than males, but the big difference would be what their orientation is, whether they are homosexual or heterosexual.

In terms of the age of the child it's mostly around puberty, generally speaking, so 10 to 14, that kind of age range. They would also be a more vulnerable group. It would be much harder to abduct a teenager.

Q. What will child predators do to lure a child?

A. Just about anything. They'd use something to attract the child to get them into a car or a van. Again it varies but sometimes they'd use an excuse like saying, Would you like to see my puppy.
Or sometimes it's forced, it varies. There's no easy way of knowing.

Q. Is there any way to identify child predators before they act?

A. It would be looking for a needle in a haystack. First of all we don't know what the prevalence of pedophilia is in the general population. We can guess more or less, but we don't know for sure because there's never been a study able to define it clearly.

We guess that it could be around four per cent or maybe as high as seven per cent. This would include the people who show sexual interest in children but never lay a hand on one. Out of that group of individuals, there would be the small very high risk dangerous group where they could potentially act out and engage in a child sexual homicide.

Profiling is a very inaccurate way of dealing with things. But when you have behaviour like somebody who is attempting to abduct a child, police and the general public have to be very vigilant because you might be dealing with one of these very rare circumstances.

Q. When one case comes out, do you find more predators or copycats come out?

A. That's in the literature, mostly police literature and certainly copycat stuff does occur. It's probably more common in suicides and murder suicides than anything to do with this type of behaviour, but yes in theory it's possible.

Q. From your experience do you find these urges treatable?

A. I've treated people who have committed sexually motivated homicide and again, small group, obviously. We've treated people who have had sexually sadistic, including homicidal thoughts, for children, not that they've done anything but they had the potential. They are mostly treated with medication and also cognitive treatment to change their thinking, and we followed them for a long period of time and continue treatment.

Q. If left untreated, are predators able to stop themselves?

A. Don't know. In theory, and if you look at criminological literature, there seems to be people who were highly sexually violent against women or children and then suddenly stop. They certainly appear to be in the literature accounts that seem to support the thesis, but do we really know? It's speculation, quite honestly.

It would be more likely that somebody, once they got going along this terrible path, that they'd probably continue. Again we're fortunate it's very rare.
http://www.recorder.ca/ArticleDisplay.aspx?e=3483517


"There's a small percentage, maybe 10 to 15 per cent, that go after children that are strangers. The attempted child abduction comes into that group. They are a much higher risk group because they are a much smaller percentage. "

They don't grab children, BillRM, they lure them--using things like kittens.

And, because you continue to deny that this sort of thing takes place, despite clear evidence that it does, your own behavior in the park looks all the more suspicious. No wonder that park employee came running up to you, with a frightened look on her face, and asked you to leave the park. She recognized the classic "animal lure" used by pedophiles when she saw it.

If you were really "innocent" you wouldn't be afraid to admit that pedophiles use such lures. It's your incessant denials regarding tactics used by pedophiles that are making you look even guiltier.
OmSigDAVID
 
  2  
Mon 5 Mar, 2012 07:47 pm
@BillRM,
BillRM wrote:
Kind of make sense to do a grab and run using a car
however I still do not see how anyone would safety remove a child
from the middle of a crowd park after drawing attention to himself.
That is among the reasons that I armed myself (albeit only with a .38 revolver)
when I was 8. After that, I felt serene.





David
0 Replies
 
BillRM
 
  2  
Mon 5 Mar, 2012 07:58 pm
@firefly,
Quote:
A. Just about anything. They'd use something to attract the child to get them into a car or a van. Again it varies but sometimes they'd use an excuse like saying, Would you like to see my puppy. Or sometimes it's forced, it varies. There's no easy way of knowing


A car park outside of a park ready to burn rubber I can see luring a child to with a kitten or puppy bur how in the hell does that relate to sitting in a middle of a park trying to find homes for kittens that are right there?

No cars within let see 200 yards or more from where I was sitting that day and that kind of a long run carrying an unwilling child on your back by a hundred or more other adults!!!!!


firefly
 
  1  
Mon 5 Mar, 2012 08:05 pm
@BillRM,
Quote:
No cars within let see 200 yards or more from where I was sitting that day and that kind of a long run carrying an unwilling child on your back by a hundred or more other adults!!!!!

As I said...and, since nothing sinks in with you, I'll say it again...

They don't grab children, BillRM, they lure them--using things like kittens. They get the child to go with them willingly. And they don't have to have a car or van, they can lure them to a house or apartment or just a secluded spot.

And, because you continue to deny that this sort of thing takes place, despite clear evidence that it does, your own behavior in the park looks all the more suspicious. No wonder that park employee came running up to you, with a frightened look on her face, and asked you to leave the park. She recognized the classic "animal lure" used by pedophiles when she saw it.

If you were really "innocent" you wouldn't be afraid to admit that pedophiles use such lures with strange children who are unknown to them. It's your incessant denials regarding the well-known tactics used by pedophiles that are making you look even guiltier--much guiltier.
firefly
 
  1  
Mon 5 Mar, 2012 08:25 pm
Quote:
Madison cop who solicited nude photos, sex from girls shouldn't get pension
February 18, 2012
By Star-Ledger Editorial Board

With apologies to the wife and children of Police Officer James Haspel, he doesn’t deserve to see a dime of the state pension he earned during his 26 years as a Madison cop.

Haspel was sentenced in December to six years in prison for soliciting nude photos — and even sex — from an online investigator he thought was a middle school-aged girl. As a result, a state board revoked his pension.

Haspel’s wife told the board her husband is an alcoholic and that stripping him of his pension wrongly penalizes his family for his crimes.

With respect to the family members who depended on Haspel’s pension, count them among his victims. Sadly, society can’t protect them from the action of their provider.

And make no mistake, this was a serious crime. Though he never made contact, this cop’s goal was to have sex with a child. He’s part of the same universe of pedophiles that traffics kiddie porn and lures kids into vans.

Though Haspel wasn’t accused of buying or possession child porn, he’s part of the same food chain. And what authorities who police the stomach-turning world of child exploitation will tell you is: It’s not just about the pictures.

Yes, sexualized photos and videos of children are vile. But those who buy child porn are the cash flow that pays for a sickening criminal culture of child abductions, sexual exploitation and, in extreme cases, slavery. The young girls and boys in the photos are stripped, molested and raped so that their photographs can be ogled on a suburban computer screen.

And once a photo is stored on a hard drive, it lives forever. It can be bought and sold and viewed again and again forever — revictimizing the victim every time the file is opened.

As he voted to revoke Haspel’s pension, state board member Vincent Foti rightly said: “His family is not my responsibility. He had a responsibility to think about his entire family before he did what he did.”

As a cop, Haspel had a greater responsibility to think about the young girls he was trolling on the internet and, by extension, the criminal culture of which he was now a part.

We can feel for Haspel’s family. They’re now his victims, too.
http://blog.nj.com/njv_editorial_page/2012/02/madison_cop_who_solicited_nude.html
BillRM
 
  2  
Mon 5 Mar, 2012 09:01 pm
@firefly,
Quote:
They don't grab children, BillRM, they lure them--using things like kittens. They get the child to go with them willingly. And they don't have to have a car or van, they can lure them to a house or apartment or just a secluded spot.


Ok let see I lure a child to go with me and do so in the middle of the park with a hundred or so adults around taking her or him by the hand and I guess my large cats carrier with the other hand and walk with this child for 200 plus yards to get out of the park.

This is after I had at least drawn dozens or more eyes on me by the way and no one would had question me or stop me or anything at all?

Off hand I do not think it would work and I do not think anyone would try it as it is insane.

Now parking a car or a van in a parking lot and trying to get kids over to it using kittens or puppies I could see but not from 200 plus yards into the park after going out of your way to draw attention to yourself.

You would be the worst child abductor in the history of child abductors and your first attempt would very likely be your last.

Sorry dear it does not make any kind of sense at any level.
BillRM
 
  2  
Mon 5 Mar, 2012 09:04 pm
@firefly,
Quote:
With respect to the family members who depended on Haspel’s pension, count them among his victims. Sadly, society can’t protect them from the action of their provider.


LoL we only care about harming innocent children that are in CP videos!
0 Replies
 
firefly
 
  1  
Mon 5 Mar, 2012 09:17 pm
@BillRM,
The more you continue to discuss the incident in the part, when you used the kittens to attract the children, the worse you make yourself sound. And you did admit you used the kittens to attract children.

You're too dumb to realize that you keep digging yourself in deeper. You sound more and more suspect. Very much like all the pedophiles on the pedophile activist Web sites. You are echoing their thinking. You don't know when to shut up.

firefly
 
  1  
Mon 5 Mar, 2012 09:26 pm
In a little while, BillRM, with all of his denials, will probably sound as outrageous as this guy.
Quote:
Former LA City Commissioner Blames Fondness for Child Porn on Magic Tumors
By Caity Weaver
Feb 29, 2012

A former Los Angeles City Commissioner, 63-year old Al Abrams, made his first court appearance this afternoon to answer to charges of possessing and distributing child pornography even though he totally didn't do anything wrong. The real culprit was his split-personality, which, coincidentally, also manifests itself as 63-year old Al Abrams.

Abrams, who resigned from his position in August in the midst of the child pornography investigation, is accused of downloading and sharing hundreds of sexually explicit images of children on a website frequented by pedophiles. His pseudonym? The sprightly: BoyWonderUSA.

Abrams didn't exactly deny downloading and viewing the child porn, but he did state that he only did so as a result of experiences with a split personality, explaining, "It is what my split personality decided to do. That's what happens when you have tumors."

Ah, yes, the tumors.

Abrams claims his forays into the world of children's erotica were caused by a painful spine growth he has since had excised. As luck would have it, Abrams discovered this cause a mere four days after the FBI raided his home.

When asked if he believed he should face jail time for his actions (and he does—150 years if convicted on all counts), Abrams responded "No, why? I'm not a criminal."

To be fair, maybe only the bizarro-split personality version of Abrams should go to prison. That guy sounds awful.
http://gawker.com/5889481/former-la-city-commissioner-blames-fondness-for-child-porn-on-magic-tumors

firefly
 
  1  
Mon 5 Mar, 2012 09:35 pm
Quote:

Feds: Police captain had horrific child porn stash
JOHN CHRISTOFFERSEN
Associated Press
February 8, 2012

NEW HAVEN, Conn. (AP) — A former Granby police captain investigated child pornography while he secretly amassed one of the largest child porn collections in Connecticut, federal prosecutors say.

David Bourque was caught with more than 26,000 images and videos of child pornography on his computers that showed the sexual abuse of young boys, including infants and toddlers, prosecutors say in court filings Tuesday in preparation for Bourque's sentencing Friday.

"The defendant amassed an enormous collection of photographs and videos that document and memorialize the sexual abuse of children," they wrote. "All are extremely disturbing; some are especially horrific."

In addition, they claim, Bourque spoke to an FBI agent at a conference about infiltrating platforms pedophiles use.

Bourque pleaded guilty last year to receipt and distribution of child pornography. He faces 17 to 20 years in prison at his sentencing. His lawyer, Richard Brown, said Wednesday that he would respond in court to the prosecution's characterization of his client's behavior.

"We feel there is a lot of mitigating circumstances, but I prefer not to go into that prior to being in front of the judge," Brown said.

Brown filed his sentencing memo under seal. Prosecutors said in their papers that he claimed that others deposited unsolicited child porn on Bourque's computer without his knowledge, even though there was no evidence to support the claim and his chat logs show he knowingly downloaded rape videos.

Prosecutors said a psychologist hired by the defense concluded mental illness contributed to his crime, but another expert hired by the court found he did not have a significantly reduced mental capacity in regard to the crime.

Prosecutors also quoted Bourque as saying he was in line to become chief before his arrest.

Bourque resigned from the police department last year. Brown has said that Bourque accepted responsibility for his actions and sought treatment for mental health problems. He has said that Bourque never produced child pornography, never molested any children and didn't view all the images and videos on his computers.

"He's embarrassed by his conduct. He offers no excuse," Brown said last year. "He's seeking medical help to deal with his issues. And he certainly wants to apologize to those who worked with him, his loved ones and his friends. He feels strongly that he let them all down and he's going to work to correct the situation."

Bourque tried to avoid detection by installing sophisticated software on his computer, authorities said. And he used information gained as a police officer to assess the ability of other law enforcement officers to detect his criminal activity, prosecutors said.

"Incredibly, the defendant was actually investigating a child pornography case while he was simultaneously collecting child pornography during his time off," prosecutors wrote in the court papers.

Prosecutors say Bourque showed a "callous disregard" for the harm suffered by the children, telling his trading partners to "enjoy" themselves or "have fun" while viewing his collection.
http://www.greenwichtime.com/news/article/Feds-Police-captain-had-horrific-child-porn-stash-3152524.php#ixzz1oIuqaKBe
BillRM
 
  2  
Mon 5 Mar, 2012 09:42 pm
@firefly,
Quote:
The more you continue to discuss the incident in the part, when you used the kittens to attract the children, the worse you make yourself sound. And you did admit you used the kittens to attract children.

You're too dumb to realize that you keep digging yourself in deeper. You sound more and more suspect. Very much like all the pedophiles on the pedophile activist Web sites. You are echoing their thinking. You don't know when to shut up.


LOL any male sound suspect to your however a woman doing the very same thing for the same reasons would not be a bit suspect in your world view.

I was once more trying to find homes for kittens not lure kids anywhere and I was just or far more interested in attracting the parents as I was not going to hand a kitten over to a child without the parent permission.

You also had not yet told me how anyone could or would expect to be able to walk a strange child out of a park for over 200 yards after drawing that amount of attention to himself.

Seem a million and one better and safer and saner ways to go about child abduction if that was your goal.

In fact I had yet to be able to find one example on the internet of someone abducting a child from the middle of a park using an animal in that manner and it look like neither had you.

Oh and the more you try to sell the idea that my efforts to find homes for those kittens were a plot to abduct children the more silly you are appearing.

If anyone care I did end up placing two of the kittens by means of placing one hell of a lot of posters around the area including the park in question and one with the aid of a nice animal rescue person who allow me to show my kittens with hers at Petsmart on the weekends.

Kept the mother and one kitten that I bonded with as I needed to hand feed her for a time.

She would only eat out of my hand and when she did so she gave me very gentle love bits.

God I hated losing her when she was only two and a half years old.

firefly
 
  1  
Mon 5 Mar, 2012 09:52 pm
@BillRM,
Keep reminding people how you were suspected of being a pedophile in the park.

By the time you stop, the story will probably be all over the internet.

You can already Google your, "I get my child porn by trading with federal judges...". Just type in child porn and federal judges and your post will come up. The Feds may have already taken note. And wait until they find your posts about how to encrypt your computer. Rolling Eyes
BillRM
 
  2  
Mon 5 Mar, 2012 09:53 pm
@firefly,
Quote:
and he does—150 years if convicted on all counts), and he does—150 years if convicted on all counts),


Kind of a little over the top for having illegal files a 150 years!

Love the idea that you are likely to get more time having pictures of children being harm then harming children directly.

As in another in your postings 5 to 10 years for molesting nine repeat nine children and a good solid ten years for having video of children being molested.
0 Replies
 
BillRM
 
  2  
Mon 5 Mar, 2012 09:56 pm
@firefly,
Quote:
"Incredibly, the defendant was actually investigating a child pornography case while he was simultaneously collecting child pornography during his time off," prosecutors wrote in the court papers.


This war of CP with it harsh and costly punishments seems not to be working too well now does it.
BillRM
 
  2  
Mon 5 Mar, 2012 09:59 pm
@firefly,
Quote:
You can already Google your, "I get my child porn by trading with federal judges...". Just type in child porn and federal judges and your post will come up.


OK and that should concern me because of what reason?
firefly
 
  1  
Mon 5 Mar, 2012 10:01 pm
@BillRM,
Quote:
This war of CP with it harsh and costly punishments seems not to be working too well now does it.

They are catching these guys. And they are getting better and better at catching them. It's working each time they catch one.
BillRM
 
  2  
Mon 5 Mar, 2012 10:10 pm
@firefly,
Quote:
They are catching these guys. And they are getting better and better at catching them. It's working each time they catch one.


A tea spoon out of an ocean.

An given how must very open CP trading seems to be occurring they do not need to be good to catch people.
0 Replies
 
firefly
 
  1  
Mon 5 Mar, 2012 10:22 pm
@BillRM,
Quote:
OK and that should concern me because of what reason?

You admitted to having, and trading, child porn. "I get my child porn by trading..". And that confession is out there now.

Who makes such statements--even in jest? And you have no sense of humor.

You think because you said you traded with federal judges that no one would take the statement seriously? Ya gotta be kidding. Look at all the people in law enforcement they are arresting all the time for child porn. I don't doubt there may be judges involved too.

The big shots they arrest are continually surprising. This one is jaw-dropping--right up there with a federal judge in terms of the surprise factor--given that ICE is a main agency spearheading child pornography investigations--and he's even from the same state you live in. Did you trade child porn with him too?
Quote:
South Florida ICE official arrested on child porn charges
September 28, 2011

The head of Immigration and Customs Enforcement for south Florida has been arrested on child pornography charges, the Department of Justice said Wednesday.

Anthony Mangione, 50, of Parkland, Florida, was charged in a three-count indictment unsealed Wednesday with transportation of child pornography, receipt of child pornography and possession of child pornography, authorities said in a statement.

"According to the indictment, between March 2010 and September 2010, Mangione allegedly transported and received visual depictions of minors engaging in sexually explicit conduct," the statement said. "The indictment also alleges that Mangione possessed electronically stored messages that contained additional images of child pornography during the same time period."

Mangione was arrested Tuesday by FBI agents and made an initial appearance Wednesday in federal court in West Palm Beach, Florida.

During the appearance, Mangione pleaded not guilty to the charges, according to CNN affiliate WPTV. Both the prosecution and the defense requested he undergo a psychological evaluation, and the judge approved that request.

"The government has concerns that given the magnitude of the charges, that he might melt down," defense attorney David Howard told WPTV. "So there is ... real concern, and it's going to be addressed."

Mangione, a 27-year law enforcement veteran, wore a gray jumpsuit with "federal prisoner" on the back in court Wednesday, and his hands and feet were shackled, WPTV said. He made no statement during the hearing.

He was being held in the Broward County, Florida, jail, according to jail records.A law enforcement official who asked not to be identified because he was not authorized to speak to the media said Mangione has been on leave from his job at ICE. WPTV reported he was placed on paid administrative leave in April amid a federal investigation into four images on his home computer he allegedly received via e-mail.

According to its website, ICE targets and investigates child pornographers, child sex tourists and facilitators and human smugglers and traffickers of minors, among others. The agency developed Operation Predator, which it describes as "an initiative to identify, investigate and arrest child predators and sexual offenders."

If convicted, Mangione faces up to 20 years in prison, the Department of Justice said. He also faces a term of supervised release from five years to life following his prison sentence and he will be required to register as a sex offender.

Asked about the Mangione case on Wednesday at a news conference on another matter, ICE director John Morton said his agency cooperated fully with the investigation, but he declined to comment further.

The case is being investigated by the Broward County Sheriff's Office and the FBI, the Department of Justice said. Broward County referred questions to federal authorities, and the FBI referred them to the Department of Justice.
http://articles.cnn.com/2011-09-28/justice/justice_florida-ice-arrest_1_wptv-arrest-child-predators-mangione-case?_s=PM:JUSTICE

Just because you said, "I get my child porn by trading with federal judges..." doesn't mean your admission won't be taken seriously.


BillRM
 
  2  
Mon 5 Mar, 2012 10:25 pm
@firefly,
Quote:
You can already Google your, "I get my child porn by trading with federal judges...". Just type in child porn and federal judges and your post will come up


You lied to me as I check the first five pages of results and none of my posting was there.

By the way the first page was full of judges complaining about how harsh the guideline happen to be.

Quote:
The Feds may have already taken note. And wait until they find your posts about how to encrypt your computer


Again so what as it is yet not illegal to think that some of our laws are over the top and it is not yet illegal to used computer encrypting either.

As a free citizen in a mostly free country that obey the laws why should I care what anyone in the FBI thinks or does not think about little old me Firefly?

Do you think that they are going back to the Hoover days of breaking the laws themselves to go after citizens who they do not care for Firefly?
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

T'Pring is Dead - Discussion by Brandon9000
Another Calif. shooting spree: 4 dead - Discussion by Lustig Andrei
Before you criticize the media - Discussion by Robert Gentel
Fatal Baloon Accident - Discussion by 33export
The Day Ferguson Cops Were Caught in a Bloody Lie - Discussion by bobsal u1553115
Robin Williams is dead - Discussion by Butrflynet
Amanda Knox - Discussion by JTT
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 05/05/2024 at 03:54:52