It’s one thing to harbor fantasies of having sexual liasons with children, but then again it’s another thing all together when you trade those fantasies with other like minded individuals.
“They were curators of their collections, who carefully labeled, sorted and shared their cache with others.”
Carefully labelled, sorted and shared? Isn’t there something all together too meticulous with the way these perpetrators manifested their crime? Something too methodical, especially in lieu of how maniacal their desires really were.
The parade of purported perverts included a Harvard-educated lawyer, a building super, a banker, a bartender, a high school student and a National Guard member.
It has been said, images detained include 3 year olds getting raped in a bathtub, and a 5-year-old forced to perform oral sex.
One man caught in the sting- Joshua Ruiz, a substitute school teacher, denies guilt, but retrieved online chats included the following:
“I’m so jealous of you,” Ruiz told one chat buddy who described having sex with a 12-year-old boy, prosecutors told the judge.
“Where do you meet them?” Ruiz asked, according to Assistant District Attorney Lauren Gretina. “How do you approach them?”
“I would love to be a part of it, even, at least, if you could let me just watch,” Ruiz told the dad, Gretina said.
Despite said conversations, Ruiz argues he has never touched a child in his life. Which begs the question, should we necessarily convict someone who has fantasies of sex with children even if they have never perpetrated them? And how much does this change when they are found to be in possession of said images? After all they did not produce the material nor star in it- but in a roundabout way their desire for such material feeds the demand for others to perpetrate this crime.
But perhaps the biggest question may be why do certain individuals have such desires? Shouldn’t moral aptitude guide them otherwise- or this a situation beyond morality?