A former member of the community, not extremely active on GBAtemp but known for contributions to several projects on the 3DS hacking scene, Thomas Edvalson aka 'Cruel', has recently received a 20 year jail sentence for supposedly hosting a child porn site (although he firmly denied it).

Thomas Scot Edvalson, 28, appeared to be providing a website where other users could download images of child porn, according to a press release form the District Attorney’s Office. The site came complete with an online guide detailing how to use the dark web to set up a website for trading pictures of child sexual abuse.

Source: Gwinnett Daily Post
A thread was started on GBAtemp to discuss the issue a couple of months ago, before the final judgement was rendered. At the time our decision was to lock the thread up as it began to heavily derail. Some members and visitors took this as a 'cover up' and wondered why we didn't ban this guy's user account on GBAtemp.

We had long discussions in the staff forum and decided to wait for the final verdict (the appeal that is) before doing anything, thereby letting justice do its work. We banned this person from our forums immediately after we heard the final judgement and by the looks of it he won't be around again for a while. Since then, there hasn't been any new threads about the story but if there had been one, we would have allowed it for sure.

At this point we are wondering why anyone would think we are 'covering' this up? Why would we even need to? It's not like people don't know what happened already. If you have any questions, feel free to ask in this thread.

Furthermore, there is an ongoing story concerning another person, it's been posted on a Reddit thread (edit: now removed, but you can see screenshots here) and, again, we certainly won't prevent you from discussing it wherever you want just as long as you stay civil.

We at GBAtemp value freedom of speech above all, but within the boundaries of the law. If you think someone is guilty of a crime it is your duty to report it to the relevant authorities (not the GBAtemp admins, I mean the police). But otherwise let justice do its job. We do not believe that witch hunts have their place on GBAtemp.


The staff

 

[Deleted-355425]

Yeah right
first of all you realize that they are humans being so they know their action could traumatize someone life

The problem here is that many pedophile would like to confess to a psycholog but they don't because by doing so they risk prison

plus if you look in the statistics 90% of child rapist arent actually pedophiles but just rapist

I hope you have alerted the police/authorities that your 'friend' is a pedophile.

 

[JCCG1989]

Well even if you are a physician, it add no value to your argument
if you were a philosoph then maybe, but even in this subject, when we are abording law, a subject should not be judged if he didn't choosed in a councious mind something exept if he represent a treat to the civilisation
so a "low risk" pedophile shouldn't be judged but one who commited a crime or is in a state of mind that make him very likely to do so, should be put in jail

Well, since you ignored ALL the post I did since it didn't condone your negligence respect the matter (as a health professional you said my reason why your "pedophiles don't seek help because they will be prosecuted" is a lie don't add value?) you're not worthy of wasting time. You're convinced by your ignorance on the matter. Good luck with that. At least bother to answer my question, where did you get those numbers at?

 

[Alkéryn]

I hope you have alerted the police/authorities that your 'friend' is a pedophile.

No and i never will because this guy will never ever harm anyone even if he is attracted to underages, he can't do anything about that and he is suffering because of that
but he have really high morals which is why he already have been close to suicide many time
Though this guy is a great person despite of his condition and he once saved my life
but if he would someday do harm to someone or if i saw him about to do so then i would call the police and he know it

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------

Well, since you ignored ALL the post I did since it didn't condone your negligence respect the matter (as a health professional you said my reason why your "pedophiles don't seek help because they will be prosecuted" is a lie don't add value?) you're not worthy of wasting time. You're convinced by your ignorance on the matter. Good luck with that. At least bother to answer my question, where did you get those numbers at?

Cant find the original source but here is a similar one
I read it on a psychology study so it was on paper

https://broadly.vice.com/en_us/article/most-child-sex-abusers-are-not-pedophiles-expert-says

 

[Alkéryn]

No i am someone with high morals and i know for a fact that this guy will never commit any crime and never did
Though if he would or was about to do so, i would imediately call the police
but this guy is one of the nicest people i know and he don't deserve jail
he didn't choosed to be attracted by childs and i think he need help not being persecuted

Plus i am the first and only person he confesed to and i speak with him quite often
he chosed to abstain for the rest of his life and really try to change his condition, he made progress through the years and i think he will one day reach his goal (being attracted by adults), that's it

 

[Foxi4]

There is no such thing as an innocent pedophile. You are part of the problem.

Demonising mental disorders is not the solution here, there are many non-offending paedophiles who are well-aware of their affliction and sound of mind enough to seek help. If we treat them as monsters, they will never look for help and may very well end up offending. These people need therapy.

 

[Alkéryn]

Demonising mental disorders is not the solution here, there are many non-offending paedophiles who are well-aware of their affliction and sound of mind enough to seek help. If we treat them as monsters, they never will look for help and may very well end up offending. These people need therapy.

Exactly

 

[scionae]

Dude I can't understand why people does this kinda stuff. And now, for this one person, 2 communities are in a lot of drama and witch hunting.
Man, come on.

 

[Searinox]

Whatever he did outside the site, he did it and is now paying for it. But I do not, and cannot, agree on a forum ban when he did not use the forum in any way to promote, distribute, or even discuss this stuff. It is gross overreach. We can talk about whether or not the community could keep civil or would even respond or tolerate his presence knowing what he did, and the problems that may cause. But I don't believe that burden rests with him.

 

[laudern]

@MrVojo

https://www.deepdotweb.com/2017/04/09/georgia-man-sentenced-darknet-child-porn-guides/

Your grub of a brother is obviously guilty.

 

[Searinox]

The conversation I am seeing here and all the constant fumbling, notably also nuances and people stopping short of what their sentences mean, illustrate the existence of a problem. I read an article a while ago about a 17 year old being arrested for having naked pics on his phone - of HIMSELF when he was 16. Bonus: he was tried for the crime as an ADULT. Legislation like this was created precisely because of how much fumbling goes on when thinking up the contours of these situations. In another, a mother suspecting a stepdad of paedophilia set up a hidden camera in the room. She caught him in the act and when it came time to present the evidence in court, she was convicted instead for its possession. Due to the high emotional charge and lack of structure on these matters, a climate of problems has been created.

This is what happens when objective conversation is crushed by strong emotion. No matter the topic. Especially when that outcome then goes on to dictate policy and order.

Somewhere beyond the horizon, a difficult conversation is brewing. It will be a high-profile case that will start the public conversation. Because as things are now the very conversation itself is difficult to have without being immediately hanged. But I will not start that conversation. History will. And I am nothing if not patient.

 

[Alkéryn]

This says it all about him, Minox.

I said i suport pedophiles
not pedophilia by itself

Btw even if you consider it a mental illness instead of a sexual attracton (which by definition it is)
Then all they deserve is help to overcome their issue, not jail unless they already commited a crime in which case, yes they desrve prison

 

[Ev1l0rd]

Well... this thread jumped of the intelligence scale pretty quickly. This post should really be moved to EOF by now, it's about that level of maturity. Having said that, here are some things that (to me) shouldn't be up for debate:

• Pedophilia is bad.
• Pedophiles should seek mental help.
• Society shuns pedophiles, and so do I and a surprisingly small amount of GBATemp, because wanting to fuck kids isn't fucking acceptable. The amount of people that want to get this in a form of acceptance beyond 'let's make sure they get proper mental help' here is ridiculous. No. It's not acceptable at all beyond that point. Why do you folk even think it is acceptable?

 

[leon315]

Is this sentence definitive?

 

[Costello]

Is this sentence definitive?

Yes. He had been convicted on his first trial, then he appealed but he lost the appeal, so that's it.

 

[FAST6191]

Whatever he did outside the site, he did it and is now paying for it. But I do not, and cannot, agree on a forum ban when he did not use the forum in any way to promote, distribute, or even discuss this stuff. It is gross overreach. We can talk about whether or not the community could keep civil or would even respond or tolerate his presence knowing what he did, and the problems that may cause. But I don't believe that burden rests with him.

As before the general policy of the forum is to promote good discussions and good times. If you wish to take an absolutist position on some kind of free speech and in turn apply it to a private entity we can certainly entertain arguments on the matter.

Well... this thread jumped of the intelligence scale pretty quickly. This post should really be moved to EOF by now, it's about that level of maturity. Having said that, here are some things that (to me) shouldn't be up for debate:

• Pedophilia is bad.
• Pedophiles should seek mental help.
• Society shuns pedophiles, and so do I and a surprisingly small amount of GBATemp, because wanting to fuck kids isn't fucking acceptable. The amount of people that want to get this in a form of acceptance beyond 'let's make sure they get proper mental help' here is ridiculous. No. It's not acceptable at all beyond that point. Why do you folk even think it is acceptable?

Point me at those posts, or some kind of log/screenshot if they have been edited/deleted. Several have said this now, thus far nobody has shown what they consider that.

Also "because wanting to fuck kids isn't fucking acceptable."
I fear you are not getting the distinction between thoughts and actions. It is an important one in law and ethics so maybe I will go for a similar example that is marginally less loaded and prone to emotional thinking

Think people of a certain skin colour are sub human scum all you want, I would hold it is rather irrational position* but it is a thought in your head and thus your own**.
The moment you deny people a service, employment and certain other things for the reason of their skin colour then you can be slapped.

*some people like to bring up stats and I have great issue with many of them, or at least the notions of them. The question then becomes are any of those stats of a statistical usefulness if you should encounter one of those in a neutral setting without any other identifying characteristic. The answer tends to be no https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2012/05/criminal_intent.html

**I would go so far as to say every legal system you might care to live under would hold that your thoughts are your own and to try to police those is abhorrent.

Back on topic it is absolutely not an impulse you want to act upon, an impulse that if acted upon holds an unacceptably high risk of harm to another, said act I would be ill able to argue against not having harsh sanctions for, and back on the impulse stuff the sort of thing you want to seek clinically verifiable help with controlling. The existence of the impulse and the thought itself is a different matter though, at least pending some demonstration that the conversion rate of impulse to harm done is of such scope as to warrant it. As no legal code has anything like that, and with the amount of utter bullshit technology laws that get passed and proposed in an effort to curb CP I have to believe if they could then they would, then yeah.

Is this sentence definitive?

It would seem this is a judge handing down a sentence, I agree the word suspected in the title could cause some confusion (others reading along at home then reporting outlets tend to have to use words like suspected until a sentence has been reached lest they be guilty in turn of libel or slander). Whether there are appeals* in the future we will have to wait and see about, or perhaps get the court transcripts and put on a lawyer hat to determine some scope for. This is not an arrest, a charge being filed or a grand jury indicting someone but an actual result of a trial (I have not looked to see if this was a jury trial or a bench trial at this point but the distinction matters little as long as I don't use a phrase like verdict handed down by a jury). I don't know the full stats on appeals that might apply in cases like this, much less successful ones, but they are not the highest.

*despite what some think an appeal is not a new trial and chance to go through it all again. It could be that an appeal leads to a retrial (a fairly serious thing should it happen), or indeed the vacation of a sentence.

 

[raphamotta]

I understand that what he did is wrong and he must pay for it (if it's true what's you're saying). But I can't understand why it's related to GBATemp and other hacking sites. There was no need to ban him anyway. He will be out for 20 years. And one this is his life out there, other thing is his life in the hacking scene.

 

[Ev1l0rd]

Point me at those posts, or some kind of log/screenshot if they have been edited/deleted. Several have said this now, thus far nobody has shown what they consider that.

Also "because wanting to fuck kids isn't fucking acceptable."
I fear you are not getting the distinction between thoughts and actions. It is an important one in law and ethics so maybe I will go for a similar example that is marginally less loaded and prone to emotional thinking

Think people of a certain skin colour are sub human scum all you want, I would hold it is rather irrational position* but it is a thought in your head and thus your own**.
The moment you deny people a service, employment and certain other things for the reason of their skin colour then you can be slapped.

*some people like to bring up stats and I have great issue with many of them, or at least the notions of them. The question then becomes are any of those stats of a statistical usefulness if you should encounter one of those in a neutral setting without any other identifying characteristic. The answer tends to be no https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2012/05/criminal_intent.html

**I would go so far as to say every legal system you might care to live under would hold that your thoughts are your own and to try to police those is abhorrent.

Back on topic it is absolutely not an impulse you want to act upon, an impulse that if acted upon holds an unacceptably high risk of harm to another, said act I would be ill able to argue against not having harsh sanctions for, and back on the impulse stuff the sort of thing you want to seek clinically verifiable help with controlling. The existence of the impulse and the thought itself is a different matter though, at least pending some demonstration that the conversion rate of impulse to harm done is of such scope as to warrant it. As no legal code has anything like that, and with the amount of utter bullshit technology laws that get passed and proposed in an effort to curb CP I have to believe if they could then they would, then yeah.

It's mostly implied by certain users. Nobody is saying it straight up, but with a number of users, the implications are heavily there. And I agree, thought policing is bad.

My other statement could have been worded better. Thought policing is not what I intended there. What I intended is that the moment these people start spouting about this matter, whether in private or in public, they should be helped with finding mental help immediately.

 

[FAST6191]

But I can't understand why it's related to GBATemp and other hacking sites. There was no need to ban him anyway. He will be out for 20 years. And one this is his life out there, other thing is his life in the hacking scene.

You know when you go into clubs and on the wall is a sign saying "the management reserves the right to refuse service to anybody". This is that. Equally if the ban prevents the mod team having to do a profile cleanup later (and there is precedent from other forums and sites in similar situations, and this thread alone can safely be described as lively and heated) then consider it a preventative measure.

 

[smf]

Well... this thread jumped of the intelligence scale pretty quickly. This post should really be moved to EOF by now, it's about that level of maturity. Having said that, here are some things that (to me) shouldn't be up for debate:

• Pedophilia is bad.
• Pedophiles should seek mental help.
• Society shuns pedophiles, and so do I and a surprisingly small amount of GBATemp, because wanting to fuck kids isn't fucking acceptable. The amount of people that want to get this in a form of acceptance beyond 'let's make sure they get proper mental help' here is ridiculous. No. It's not acceptable at all beyond that point. Why do you folk even think it is acceptable?

It's not acceptable, but people can't get proper mental help if they are being "shunned" & to be honest you're just as likely to get beaten up, run out of town, sacked etc. Society will need to accept some responsibility if the problem is going to be solved. But again I'm not saying that people should be allowed to act on it.

It would seem this is a judge handing down a sentence, I agree the word suspected in the title could cause some confusion (others reading along at home then reporting outlets tend to have to use words like suspected until a sentence has been reached lest they be guilty in turn of libel or slander).

Judges don't rule whether someone is a pedophile. Someone running an illegal web site may be doing it for the money rather than because they were a pedophile. People like to add labels though. Being a pedophile and being guilty of child sexual exploitation are two completely different things. The courts are only interested in the later.

 

[Joom]

Um, you do realise, that people have brains for a reason, right? They can make their own desicion....

So your arguement is invalid...

Nobody wakes up one morning and decides sexual preferences or fetishes. How dense are you? I seriously recommend you read up on John Money's "lovemap" theory, as there many psychological factors in play. (Inb4 some child comes along to accuse me of defending the act of pedophilia because half this thread obviously knows how this shit works...)