Revenge porn site owner sentenced to 18 years


#1

[Permalink]


#2

This landed on the right person. This feels like justice.

It’s easy to claim Internet culture is this state of nature where no one can anticipate or control people. But peel back the anon a little, and time and again, there are people making deliberate choices that set norms for the communities they create. Online forums are technical artifacts, created with intention by people. In the cases where these forums are shaped with intention to victimize people, the creators should be accountable for their creations.


#3

You scoffers think the criminal justice system is unfair?


#4

What a disappointment he must be to his Vulcan brethren.


#5

Admittedly, this is the first I’ve heard about this, and I have faith in the court finding him guilty of what ever crimes he is accused of committing, but 18 years in prison seems like utter madness to me. We don’t even put most killers in jail for that long in my country.

What is the idea or purpose behind such long prison sentences?


#6

18 years for a non-violent crime. Geez. And people wonder why we have more prisoners than any other country.


#7

Yeah, it’s a screwy sentence, but for a non-violent crime like that he may have opportunity to get out early, with good behavior and so on.

But I really don’t have any sympathy at all for him as an individual; it’s just the comparison to some other crimes which is a little problematic for me. But then the whole so-called justice system is obviously completely wrong-headed, grotesquely so. I’d rather that this guy get 18 years (at least he has done substantial harm to a lot of people) than some poor bastard who got picked up with 2 ounces of marijuana after a couple of similarly trivial minor offenses.


#8

I think the fact that he was also extorting his victims probably has something to do with the severity of the sentence.


#9

Perhaps you should do some research about what his actions (ie posting nude or explicit photos submitted to him by ex-boyfriends, etc with no consent from the photo subjects) did to the many victims ( estimates are HUNDREDS of women) who were affected. Not only was their privacy and intimacy violated - then asshat dude charged a extortionate fee (ie $ 350.00 PER PHOTO) to remove them from his site.

Victims said that his site - which profited from stolen images of them - had a profoundly traumatic effect on their life, including relationship break-ups, loss of employment, and suicide attempts. These pics were forwarded to their friends, family, employers, etc. They were also downloaded and reposted many times over on other porn sites. Many victims contacted him to demand that he remove these images which he ignored.

Hundreds of women ! Not even one year per woman who was affected.

How is it not possible to view his actions as sexual and social violence ?


#10

This doesn’t seem moral to me, but given our problematically-retributive “justice” system, this is about what I’d expect. I don’t know what I’d consider more appropriate… maybe half that sentence? Considering he could be out early (with his current sentence, he could be out in a decade at the earliest).

I find it hard to be compassionate towards an extorting identity thief who abused women and enabled their abuse by others. I dunno, maybe it is appropriate. I dunno. I don’t know enough about the rehabilitation prospects of people like him or how much of a deterrent effect his sentencing might have (I suspect little, tbh).


#11

For those who think the sentence is too harsh:

While I’m generally not a big fan of harsh sentencing, as non-violent crimes go, this one seems to have a lot of potential for ruining lives.

In many cases the amount of damage he’s done to the victims is likely comparable to assault in terms of lasting impact on their lives, ignoring the increased risk of violence/stalking/etc that he exposed them to.

Besides this, it seems this was done in an extremely calculating manner, destroying their lives for personal profit. We’ve seen others who’ve created ‘businesses’ of this sort, and it’s something that as might be attractive for an enterprising young gentleman with a complete lack of empathy or social well-adjustment. As such, it’s up to society to make an example of what happens to those who try to make a living ruining other people’s lives: Their own lives are ruined. (Unless they channel that impulse into politics or the police force.)

In short, he’s being made an example of, and I’m quite OK with that, because it’s likely to succeed in actually deterring others.


#12

Something doesn’t become violent just because it is severe. Violent crimes involves physical harm to your person. If he threatened to kill or maim his victims, then he would be a violent criminal.

I have no idea what the right number that this person should go to prison for, but 18 years seems like overkill.


#13

Its a hard thing to contemplate–on the one hand the sentencing ratios seem bonkers but on the other it is clear the most popular revenge porn/doc sites were heavily influenced by the seeming invulnerability of previous sites (is anyone up/is anyone down).

Perhaps this sentence was handed more as a deterant to future exploiters.


#14

It is a lot of years-- like, the kind of sentence I think you don’t come back from-- but I can see the thinking behind it. He did something that was unquestionably, deeply wrong and illegal, by choice, for money, in the open, for years. What possible grounds could a judge have to go easy on him? (Other than the argument that prison is intrinsically wrong, and it’s safe to assume no working judge agrees with that).

But it makes me think, if he’d been arrested and charged the first time he did it, then a short sentence would’ve been appropriate, and a lot of people would be better off; how did the crime reach these epic proportions in the first place?


#15

In my opinion (not a lawyer) the veneer of legality Hunter Moore projected contributed to the mentality that he could get away with it. But that is simply a guess, I have no actual evidence (other than being an internet denizen who lurks in questionable places).


#16

Research has shown that long prison sentences don’t act as a deterrent. The most obvious proof is when you look at the crime rates of people about to turn 18 and those who have just turned 18 when sentences jump significantly. There is almost no difference in arrest rates between the two groups where you’d expect to see a massive drop off.

No one wants to go to prison at all. If someone don’t think they’ll get caught, they are desperate or stupid, they’ll commit the crime regardless of the prison sentence.


#17

Agreeing that there’s no need to redefine the word violence. There are already plenty of other words to describe the terrible harm caused by this guy’s site.


#18

If someone harms another person, we might agree that a month in jail is a just penalty for the specific injury. If this individual causes the same harm to 100 people, is 100 months no longer justice? Does the perpetrator receive a “bulk discount” for committing the same crime against many people?


#19

You are right, I phrased that badly. Perhaps, “the judge and prosecuters believe or profess to believe it will act as a deterrent”.


#20

Deterrence exists only in the minds of those with foresight and a sense of personal fallibility. Those whose foresight is blinded by a sense of impunity are about as much deterred as those who believe themselves fallible but only think one step ahead in considering the consequences of their actions. Judging by the timeline of his actions, Mr. Bollaert would seem to fall into one of the two latter categories.