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

 

[DeadlyFoez]

Thats a little weird, I'd consider consent the ability to understand what is going to happen. If they want to have sex with a 40 year old, let them, they'll learn any consequences of it, but if they enjoy that life? Good for them, I dont want to stop pathways to happiness.

Your logic is flawed. A 10 year old can understand exactly what is going to happen. Kids are not stupid. Does not mean that since they can understand it that they can consent. And you know what, a 13 year old can "learn any consequences of it" as well. An 18 year old should not be with a 40 year old. There is an issue of power there.

 

[AmandaRose]

Some of us would say its not enough but compared to the pathetic convictions in the UK its amazing.

Yep don't know about the rest of the UK but here in Scotland he would not have even done jail time as it was a first offence he simply would have just been banned from using the Internet for life and banned from having unsupervised visits with kids for life and at worst banned from leaving his house after dark for a few years. The laws here are ridiculous.

 

[TheDarkGreninja]

Your logic is flawed. A 10 year old can understand exactly what is going to happen. Kids are not stupid. Does not mean that since they can understand it that they can consent. And you know what, a 13 year old can "learn any consequences of it" as well. An 18 year old should not be with a 40 year old. There is an issue of power there.

You're trying to tell me a child with all those hormones will understand that? No. All a 14 year old thinks about is the outcome of sex, kids aren't capable of that kind of thought.
If the child understands the consequences then they wont have sex. will they? Your logic is whats flawed here.

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

Yep don't know about the rest of the UK but here in Scotland he would not have even done jail time as it was a first offence he simply would have just been banned from using the Internet for life and banned from having unsupervised visits with kids for life and at worst banned from leaving his house after dark for a few years. The laws here are ridiculous.

I dont understand why our government is so lenient with these people.

 

[raphamotta]

They had no option had they not banned him then they would have got a lot of bad publicity IE guilt by association which then because of the bad press it could have led to the companies who advertise on the site to no longer use the site and any new company looking to advertise here may have been put off by the bad publicity . No advertising money then would have lead to the site having no money and having to shut down all because they never banned him. It's very much like how the WWE never mention Chris Benoit because they know they would lose all their advertising due to the fact the press and the internet community would be in uproar at the fact they were talking about someone who committed the horrible crimes he did.

Makes sense. .. it's all politics

 

[Ev1l0rd]

At this point it would be stupid to unban the dude. The little bit of energy to click a mouse a few times to actual ban him was more effort than he deserved, which is part of my many points that I keep trying to make here. He shouldn't have been banned because the staff should not have been meddling in the personal lives of a member to even come to the point where they need to have a discussion about if they should ban him or not. It's almost like the staff had their own little trial on the dude.

Staff banned him to send two messages to the community:

• GBATemp as a community does not accept pedophiles.
• To prevent users from spamming his threads and profile with accusations.

These are the main reasons I see as to why he is banned.

 

[Wiisel]

For me being 35, I wouldn't consider anything lower than 30 for a possible mate.

At least offer to buy me a drink first

 

[Psionic Roshambo]

Well with any luck maybe he can see Jared from Subway...

all kidding aside, I think child porn is abhorrent and should be punished way more than it is now...

It's nothing to do with consent or not consent, a child doesn't have the proper information to even provide consent.... Nor should they, at a young age kids should be thinking about coloring and toys and music. Plenty of time for other things later in life.

 

[DeadlyFoez]

I want to bring up a little more sensitive part of this subject that is not directly related to the perp but to pedophilia in general and our social dilemma with it.

Back hundreds of years ago it was not uncommon for a younger female to have sex with a man of her age or older. Even back before that it was common for the males to try to mate with a girl as soon as she was ready to bare children. There is a instinctive thing ingrained in many male species out there, and that is to mate as often as possible, with as young as possible, and with as many as possible. The reason why is because the males have tried to spread their seed as much as they can so that their genetic line carries on much further. That is the way we evolved. It has only been with advances in communication and civilization have we started to develop ethics and morals that have made us accountable for our actions and has set laws of the land. We now understand that everyone has rights. We understand now the way a body and mind matures and at what rate it does and when someone should be generally capable of making their own choices and such.

Who knows, maybe 1,000 years in the future there will be a global age of consent that it high like 30 and back low again like after the first period.

But those natural instincts not only affect that some people are still neanderthals and have the urge to procreate with someone so young, many men still cheat like crazy or have hundreds of partners without ever committing into a relationship. The difference between now and back 20,000 years ago is that we are far more conscience of our choices because of accountability. People have to actually tell themselves that they are going to make a "good" choice and resist from making "bad" choices. Back then, everyone did whatever they wanted. Many people were victims, many where offenders, and not just in the sexual aspect of things. Murder wasn't such a big deal because people thought more about themselves than they do today.

Take a good look in the animal kingdom, because that is what shaped our ancestors. Compare the ways animals do things in the wild and relate that to the tendencies that people have today with stealing, fighting, sex, caring for family members, and so much more. There is no age of consent when breeding dogs. It generally is once a dog can become in heat they can bread, and that is usually between 1.5 to 2 years of age. Animals don't hold trials because johny chimpo hit riley rhino with a club. Animals steal shit from each other all the time. We are the only species that hold it's member accountable for their actions, otherwise nature is a free-for-all.


So what is my point to all of this. Treating people for pedophilia is a difficult thing because you are basically trying to tell someone to fight their natural ancestry instincts but they are too much of fucking neanderthals to really have that higher level of conscience decision making to know how to make the right choices bc their stupid instincts kick in.

In the end, anyone who has offended and has an attraction you children does not and will not ever be able to fit into todays society where the majority of people are above falling to their natural instincts, even with some kind of treatment besides a lobotomy. The only thing we can do to protect the children and the innocent is to separate these people from the rest of society and sterilize them so they can't have children of their own to abuse. Even chemical castration is not effective enough to guarantee that there will be no more offenses by a particular person.


I hope the way I explained things was well enough for you all to understand how I am trying to convey the thoughts in my head, but I fear I might have lost some of you in the process. But this is a topic that I do hold some knowledge about and I figured I would quickly try to share.

 

[smf]

Yep don't know about the rest of the UK but here in Scotland he would not have even done jail time as it was a first offence he simply would have just been banned from using the Internet for life and banned from having unsupervised visits with kids for life and at worst banned from leaving his house after dark for a few years. The laws here are ridiculous.

These are the UK sentencing guidelines:

page 75-79

http://www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk...ffences_Definitive_Guideline_content_web1.pdf

Running a web site would be classed as distribution. Assuming category A images (any that include penetrative sex) that is 2 to 5 years in prison, with the prosecution putting forward aggravating circumstances and the defence arguing those and putting forward mitigating factors. I don't think you can mitigate distribution of category A down to a community order.

https://www.sentencingcouncil.org.u...Sentence_for_a_Guilty_Plea_-Revised_20071.pdf

It's difficult to work out his UK sentence though as I can't find the US sentencing notes and it won't include the right details anyway. The news reports seem to contradict each other (and the court notes available) over the exact details. He didn't plead guilty so his mitigation would be limited, assuming the worst details in the news are correct then he could easily be sent away for 5 years.

When I typed his name in google (from github) I saw he was arrested in 2013 for having the same weird s***

http://cases.justia.com/georgia/supreme-court/2016-s15a1869.pdf?ts=1457357464

tl;dr He was arrested in 2012 and indicted in 2013, but was released on bond which included restrictions. In 2014 they tried to revoke his bond for breaking his restrictions, but in court they couldn't put forward any evidence that he did but put more restrictions. In 2015 he tried to get the restrictions removed as they were too broad.

There was an article posted in 2013, but it had the text "(Editor's Note: This article was originally published September 26, 2012.)"

In the end, anyone who has offended and has an attraction you children does not and will not ever be able to fit into todays society where the majority of people are above falling to their natural instincts, even with some kind of treatment besides a lobotomy.

Now that law enforcement is taking the issue seriously you're finding a lot of the worst offenders have been fitting in. They aren't all social outsiders.

 

[TheDarkGreninja]

I want to bring up a little more sensitive part of this subject that is not directly related to the perp but to pedophilia in general and our social dilemma with it.

Back hundreds of years ago it was not uncommon for a younger female to have sex with a man of her age or older. Even back before that it was common for the males to try to mate with a girl as soon as she was ready to bare children. There is a instinctive thing ingrained in many male species out there, and that is to mate as often as possible, with as young as possible, and with as many as possible. The reason why is because the males have tried to spread their seed as much as they can so that their genetic line carries on much further. That is the way we evolved. It has only been with advances in communication and civilization have we started to develop ethics and morals that have made us accountable for our actions and has set laws of the land. We now understand that everyone has rights. We understand now the way a body and mind matures and at what rate it does and when someone should be generally capable of making their own choices and such.

Who knows, maybe 1,000 years in the future there will be a global age of consent that it high like 30 and back low again like after the first period.

But those natural instincts not only affect that some people are still neanderthals and have the urge to procreate with someone so young, many men still cheat like crazy or have hundreds of partners without ever committing into a relationship. The difference between now and back 20,000 years ago is that we are far more conscience of our choices because of accountability. People have to actually tell themselves that they are going to make a "good" choice and resist from making "bad" choices. Back then, everyone did whatever they wanted. Many people were victims, many where offenders, and not just in the sexual aspect of things. Murder wasn't such a big deal because people thought more about themselves than they do today.

Take a good look in the animal kingdom, because that is what shaped our ancestors. Compare the ways animals do things in the wild and relate that to the tendencies that people have today with stealing, fighting, sex, caring for family members, and so much more. There is no age of consent when breeding dogs. It generally is once a dog can become in heat they can bread, and that is usually between 1.5 to 2 years of age. Animals don't hold trials because johny chimpo hit riley rhino with a club. Animals steal shit from each other all the time. We are the only species that hold it's member accountable for their actions, otherwise nature is a free-for-all.


So what is my point to all of this. Treating people for pedophilia is a difficult thing because you are basically trying to tell someone to fight their natural ancestry instincts but they are too much of fucking neanderthals to really have that higher level of conscience decision making to know how to make the right choices bc their stupid instincts kick in.

In the end, anyone who has offended and has an attraction you children does not and will not ever be able to fit into todays society where the majority of people are above falling to their natural instincts, even with some kind of treatment besides a lobotomy. The only thing we can do to protect the children and the innocent is to separate these people from the rest of society and sterilize them so they can't have children of their own to abuse. Even chemical castration is not effective enough to guarantee that there will be no more offenses by a particular person.


I hope the way I explained things was well enough for you all to understand how I am trying to convey the thoughts in my head, but I fear I might have lost some of you in the process. But this is a topic that I do hold some knowledge about and I figured I would quickly try to share.

I'd say I agree with you but 30 is still a little much.
Also pedophilia is legally recognised as the attraction to pre-pubescent children which is completely wrong.

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

These are the UK sentencing guidelines:

page 75-79

http://www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk...ffences_Definitive_Guideline_content_web1.pdf

Running a web site would be classed as distribution. Assuming category A images (any that include penetrative sex) that is 2 to 5 years in prison, with the prosecution putting forward aggravating circumstances and the defence arguing those and putting forward mitigating factors. I don't think you can mitigate distribution of category A down to a community order.

https://www.sentencingcouncil.org.u...Sentence_for_a_Guilty_Plea_-Revised_20071.pdf

I dont think it was category A, though.

 

[wurstpistole]

For God's sake lock this thread up, this discussion has gone far off any gbatemp related topics. We all know it now, thanks and goodbye. Discuss pe-do and c-p morality issues on a more suitable platform please.

 

[TheDarkGreninja]

For God's sake lock this thread up, this discussion has gone far off any gbatemp related topics. We all know it now, thanks and goodbye. Discuss pe-do and c-p morality issues on a more suitable platform please.

I'm guessing you've heard of the off-topic chat on Temp?

 

[wurstpistole]

I'm guessing you've heard of the off-topic chat on Temp?

Where this thread is not

 

[DeadlyFoez]

You're trying to tell me a child with all those hormones will understand that? No. All a 14 year old thinks about is the outcome of sex, kids aren't capable of that kind of thought.
If the child understands the consequences then they wont have sex. will they? Your logic is whats flawed here.

So are you trying to tell me that adults even fully understand the consequences of their actions in relation to sex? I know so many adults that are totally freaking out when they find out that they have a kid coming. Adults are pretty fucking stupid too. We have sex for fun, which is also part of our instincts, and we do it when we are horny not stopping to think about what might happen and how life will change if someone gets pregnant.
I can promise you, my 12 year old knows damn well about what sex it, why people have sex, why people want to, how and sperm inseminates an egg, how birth defects happen, how dna works (in a general level). My daughter knows so much that she will be just like her mother and not get a boyfriends until after becoming an adult. Children are completely capable of understand all of it, and can many times make much better decisions then us reckless adults.

It also helps that our 12 year old takes care of our 2 year old quite a lot and she understands how much of a handful having a baby can be. She will be the responsible child in the family.

Our 16 year old virgin just can't seem to get sex off his mind though. Luckily, no chick will ever get with his neanderthal ass.

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

For God's sake lock this thread up, this discussion has gone far off any gbatemp related topics. We all know it now, thanks and goodbye. Discuss pe-do and c-p morality issues on a more suitable platform please.

Exactly. This really should have never been posted up on this site in the first place.

 

[TheDarkGreninja]

So are you trying to tell me that adults even fully understand the consequences of their actions in relation to sex? I know so many adults that are totally freaking out when they find out that they have a kid coming. Adults are pretty fucking stupid too. We have sex for fun, which is also part of our instincts, and we do it when we are horny not stopping to think about what might happen and how life will change if someone gets pregnant.
I can promise you, my 12 year old knows damn well about what sex it, why people have sex, why people want to, how and sperm inseminates an egg, how birth defects happen, how dna works (in a general level). My daughter knows so much that she will be just like her mother and not get a boyfriends until after becoming an adult. Children are completely capable of understand all of it, and can many times make much better decisions then us reckless adults.

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


Exactly. This really should have never been posted up on this site in the first place.

Im not talking about whether or not they understand sex, im discussing whether or not they understand the CONSEQUENCES and ALL of them not just the possibility of a baby. If they understand that, I see no reason to prohibit sex as long as they are of good mental and physical health (meaning theyve completed puberty, not hit it.)

If you are incapable of understanding the consequences, whatever happens, is on you, there is no point limiting people who DO understand the consequences because of someone else's dumbass mistakes, thats completely illogical and limits freedom for those who arent idiots.

 

[laramie]

Hey I totally get that this is public information, but do you really have to put someone else's personal business up like this? I mean really the guy just probably got 20 years.. I don't think its very polite.

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

 

[TheDarkGreninja]

Where this thread is not

And thats why i voted for it to be moved.

 

[DeadlyFoez]

I'd say I agree with you but 30 is still a little much.

Who the fuck knows with all these feminists and sjw's trying to convince everyone that a woman is never able to consent, even when she does consent. We are headed for some dark times if we let these fucking millennials get their offended pansy ass ways.

 

[TheDarkGreninja]

Hey I totally get that this is public information, but do you really have to put someone else's personal business up like this? I mean really the guy just probably got 20 years.. I don't think its very polite.

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

The guys a pedophile, his life is completely ruined anyways, he'll probably die in the cell they put him in.

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

Who the fuck knows with all these feminists and sjw's trying to convince everyone that a woman is never able to consent, even when she does consent.

Consent is a very subjective term, if they say yes, then objectively i can have sex with them, if they say they want to stop then i should respect that decision. Any other way of thinking imo, isnt objective.

 

[mgrev]

Well that's a damn shame. I'll let the jury decide.