Nope, nope, all the nopes.

mrsconn23

Dear Prudence,

My husband and I are expecting our first child in a few months, and we have had conflict over visits with his father. I have never gotten along well with his father, who lives in a different state. This year his father was arrested for possession of child pornography. My husband believes this was an innocent offense, some sort of unintentional mistake, and would like his father to visit us when we have our baby girl. I am very against this. Admittedly, he has not been convicted yet; his legal strategy is to postpone the trial ad nauseam. My husband thinks that I’m just using this new information to be punitive, since I never liked my father-in-law to begin with. I don’t have the full details of the crime in question, but my husband thinks it’s a good sign that my father-in-law’s girlfriend was shown the images in question by police and is staying by him. Also, my father-in-law continues to babysit his grandchildren who live locally. Can you help moderate this? Am I crazy for wanting to protect my baby and not wanting this man to be in our home or alone with my baby?

—Creep-in-Law

Casadena

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO.  Keep him away.  This is a hill I would die on. 

CharmedPam

How do you accidentally have child porn laying around?

ShesSoCold

Oh MAN. Not only does LW need to keep her kid away from FIL, but FFS, I'd be having a bigger problem with my husband, if I were in her shoes. I get this guy is his dad but dude is being charged with child porn! This is a big effing deal! I don't know what I would do here but I'd be having some sort of come to Jesus with my H.

banana468

How about LW educating herself on the case?  On the surface I'd nope the shit out of this but I'd also want to have more facts before responding and making snap judgments.

Also, WHY does LW not get along with FIL?   If it's because he always gave off a smarmy perv vibe and this only confirms it I'm more inclined to agree with LW vs, something like political leanings.

That said, she absolutely gets the right to veto and H needs to respect that.

STARMOON44

CharmedPam said:

How do you accidentally have child porn laying around?

You do not. 

short+sassy

STARMOON44 said:

CharmedPam said:

How do you accidentally have child porn laying around?

You do not. 

One exception I could see is if the performer(s) is an older teenager, but still under the age of 18.

The famous Traci Lords made tons of pornos at the age of 16 and 17, by giving studios/producers a fake ID.  Many companies went out of business when the truth came out and there was a huge crackdown, both legally and in the industry.  My impression is, before the huge Traci Lords scandal, IDs were required.  But, as long as one was shown and kept on file, no one really cared or worried about it.  After the scandal, more effort was made to ensure the IDs were legit.

More fun facts about porn laws.  Not only is it illegal to use a performer who is under 18.  It is illegal to even PORTRAY them as being under 18, even if the actual performer is of age.

With all that said, I sadly suspect that "almost old enough" teenagers and the FIL "didn't know" are not what the LW is talking about here. 

Jen4948

Noooooooooooooooooo! I'd also have a come-to-Jesus with my husband about this. Would he think it's so "innocent" if his own child were in those photos?

levioosa

If husband insisted on letting FIL see/babysit my child, I would be getting divorced and I’d be in court for full custody. You don’t just “accidentally” have child porn laying around the house/on your computer. 

CharmedPam

short+sassy said:

STARMOON44 said:

CharmedPam said:

How do you accidentally have child porn laying around?

You do not. 

One exception I could see is if the performer(s) is an older teenager, but still under the age of 18.

The famous Traci Lords made tons of pornos at the age of 16 and 17, by giving studios/producers a fake ID.  Many companies went out of business when the truth came out and there was a huge crackdown, both legally and in the industry.  My impression is, before the huge Traci Lords scandal, IDs were required.  But, as long as one was shown and kept on file, no one really cared or worried about it.  After the scandal, more effort was made to ensure the IDs were legit.

More fun facts about porn laws.  Not only is it illegal to use a performer who is under 18.  It is illegal to even PORTRAY them as being under 18, even if the actual performer is of age.

With all that said, I sadly suspect that "almost old enough" teenagers and the FIL "didn't know" are not what the LW is talking about here. 

actually, that's a very good point.  I've heard of people who have that on their record still because they were say 19, in a relationship with someone who was 17 but didn't let that fact be know.  So yeah, that can happen.

banana468

CharmedPam said:

short+sassy said:

STARMOON44 said:

CharmedPam said:

How do you accidentally have child porn laying around?

You do not. 

One exception I could see is if the performer(s) is an older teenager, but still under the age of 18.

The famous Traci Lords made tons of pornos at the age of 16 and 17, by giving studios/producers a fake ID.  Many companies went out of business when the truth came out and there was a huge crackdown, both legally and in the industry.  My impression is, before the huge Traci Lords scandal, IDs were required.  But, as long as one was shown and kept on file, no one really cared or worried about it.  After the scandal, more effort was made to ensure the IDs were legit.

More fun facts about porn laws.  Not only is it illegal to use a performer who is under 18.  It is illegal to even PORTRAY them as being under 18, even if the actual performer is of age.

With all that said, I sadly suspect that "almost old enough" teenagers and the FIL "didn't know" are not what the LW is talking about here. 

actually, that's a very good point.  I've heard of people who have that on their record still because they were say 19, in a relationship with someone who was 17 but didn't let that fact be know.  So yeah, that can happen.

Essentially why I just want more details.   Is this a situation of barely legal?   Is it on Dad's system but it's a pic exchanged by a live in HS student of another student?  None of that is OK but it's different than say someone like Larry Nassar. 

That said, something had to trigger the police.   So I'm still questioning the LW's husband.

climbingsingle

OMFG NO. levioosa said:

If husband insisted on letting FIL see/babysit my child, I would be getting divorced and I’d be in court for full custody. You don’t just “accidentally” have child porn laying around the house/on your computer. 

And ditto this. 

levioosa

Also, all of this justifying “maybe she gave a fake ID and was actually older” is making me squeamish. How often does that actually happen? If he had a shadow of a “good” defense like that he’d be going to court to exonerate his name. But his strategy is to defer court indefinitely? That doesn’t seem like that action of someone who just “made a mistake.”

LW needs to document every time her husband asks her to let their child see FIL. And if he brings the kid over to FIL without her consent I’d be documenting it immediately and emailing everything to my attorney while I filed for divorce. Child safety trumps marriage. 

ei34

levioosa said:

Also, all of this justifying “maybe she gave a fake ID and was actually older” is making me squeamish. How often does that actually happen? If he had a shadow of a “good” defense like that he’d be going to court to exonerate his name. But his strategy is to defer court indefinitely? That doesn’t seem like that action of someone who just “made a mistake.”

LW needs to document every time her husband asks her to let their child see FIL. And if he brings the kid over to FIL without her consent I’d be documenting it immediately and emailing everything to my attorney while I filed for divorce. Child safety trumps marriage. 

This is where I am.  If god forbid a mistake ever popped up on my phone I’d hire the best lawyers I could afford to clear my name.  
Ditto all PP who say this is an H problem in addition to a FIL problem.

ei34

And omg I can post again!! 

climbingsingle

levioosa said:

Also, all of this justifying “maybe she gave a fake ID and was actually older” is making me squeamish. How often does that actually happen? If he had a shadow of a “good” defense like that he’d be going to court to exonerate his name. But his strategy is to defer court indefinitely? That doesn’t seem like that action of someone who just “made a mistake.”

LW needs to document every time her husband asks her to let their child see FIL. And if he brings the kid over to FIL without her consent I’d be documenting it immediately and emailing everything to my attorney while I filed for divorce. Child safety trumps marriage. 

Agreed! Also, are they really investigating pornography that maybe included a 17 year old, or are they investigating images of very underage children. Not likely. Also not likely that he's being charged over an "accidental" picture, you know? 

short+sassy

climbingwife said:

levioosa said:

Also, all of this justifying “maybe she gave a fake ID and was actually older” is making me squeamish. How often does that actually happen? If he had a shadow of a “good” defense like that he’d be going to court to exonerate his name. But his strategy is to defer court indefinitely? That doesn’t seem like that action of someone who just “made a mistake.”

LW needs to document every time her husband asks her to let their child see FIL. And if he brings the kid over to FIL without her consent I’d be documenting it immediately and emailing everything to my attorney while I filed for divorce. Child safety trumps marriage. 

Agreed! Also, are they really investigating pornography that maybe included a 17 year old, or are they investigating images of very underage children. Not likely. Also not likely that he's being charged over an "accidental" picture, you know? 

This occurred to me also.  While I can't say for certain, I would think the police/FBI would usually go after bigger fish who have LOTS of content and downloaded child porn at least dozens, if not hundreds of times.

I've told this story before.  I used to work for a defense contractor at a Naval facility.  (The Background)  Everyone there accesses the Internet and other networks through lines governed by the U.S. Navy.  It was no secret that they regularly monitor what people are dong online.  They can also take over your computer whenever they wish.  Usually they would pop up (on screen) and ask first.  But I also had occasions where I was suddenly not controlling my computer because some IT person somewhere was doing an update or whatever.

There was big craziness one day.  A bunch of police cars showed up.  One of the people who worked there was led away in handcuffs and other police officers were carrying away his work computer and other equipment.

Come to find out, some offsite Navy IT person had been doing their usual monitoring and saw this guy had been at sites with child porn.  They went into his computer files and also found child porn.  Hundreds of files/videos.  I'm sure there was some process in place with lots of steps.  Because, you know, it's the military.  And one of them was contacting and coordinating with the local police.

Putting aside the horror, for a moment.  What was this guy thinking?  On his work computer.  On a military's network that is always keeping tabs on people.  It makes you wonder if subconsciously he wanted to get caught. 

ShesSoCold

levioosa said:

Also, all of this justifying “maybe she gave a fake ID and was actually older” is making me squeamish. How often does that actually happen? If he had a shadow of a “good” defense like that he’d be going to court to exonerate his name. But his strategy is to defer court indefinitely? That doesn’t seem like that action of someone who just “made a mistake.”

LW needs to document every time her husband asks her to let their child see FIL. And if he brings the kid over to FIL without her consent I’d be documenting it immediately and emailing everything to my attorney while I filed for divorce. Child safety trumps marriage. 

I absolutely agree with you.

I'm pretty sure LW's FIL isn't a 19 year old guy who didn't know the snapchat he received was from a 17 year old. Regardless of the age of the victims in this porn, it's creepy, it's illegal and most importantly, it's fucking WRONG.

And sure porn =/= predator and sure it could have been an "older" child (CHILD!!!!!) but that is not a chance I (as a hypothetical parent) would be willing to take. Eventually my hypothetical child will be of whatever age these victims were and if something terrible were to happen to them, it would be my fault that I allowed this man access to my child, knowing what he'd been charged with.

But I do have to say that the daughter of a family I grew up with stole her sister's ID when she was 16 so she could strip. Not the same as porn, I know.

I also agree with PP that I would want more information on the case myself. I don't know anything about how law enforcement tracks, catches or charges people with child porn but there MIGHT be a slight chance that this guy is innocent and/or not as bad of a guy as this sounds. But until I know these things for a fact, dude will NOT be alone with my child(ren).

downtondiva

If LW has doubts about her child's safety around FIL, then she is 100% right about keeping the child away from FIL. I would not take the fact that his girlfriend was staying by him as any sort of guide to what to do - people often stay with partners who have done terrible things.

I agree with @levioosa that delaying the trial indefinitely is not the action of someone who can clear their name and has nothing to hide. In light of that, I find it disturbing that LW's husband isn't more concerned about his child's well-being (or that of the other kids in the family).

ETF typo

mrsmitten

First:  Hell to the nope.

Second:  "I don’t have the full details of the crime in question, but my husband thinks it’s a good sign that my father-in-law’s girlfriend was shown the images in question by police and is staying by him"

This makes me feel like the story isn't even being told to her Husband. except for Hey, my GF doesn't think it's that bad - which makes me assume it's actually worse!

Third:  Boy bye.  Still Nope.

levioosa

I just remembered that you can look up the exact charge online. It will literally tell you the age range in most cases. Case in point: an employee of my school was arrested in front of us on campus a few months ago. I found his arrest record later that night with a google search. It told me that he not only had child pornography, but the ages (under 13) as well as sexual assault of a minor (under 10). Finding the information isn't difficult. LWs husband is being willfully ignorant here. I feel sick just thinking about it. LW must feel so anxious and betrayed by her husband. 

banana468

CharmedPam said:

short+sassy said:

STARMOON44 said:

CharmedPam said:

How do you accidentally have child porn laying around?

You do not. 

One exception I could see is if the performer(s) is an older teenager, but still under the age of 18.

The famous Traci Lords made tons of pornos at the age of 16 and 17, by giving studios/producers a fake ID.  Many companies went out of business when the truth came out and there was a huge crackdown, both legally and in the industry.  My impression is, before the huge Traci Lords scandal, IDs were required.  But, as long as one was shown and kept on file, no one really cared or worried about it.  After the scandal, more effort was made to ensure the IDs were legit.

More fun facts about porn laws.  Not only is it illegal to use a performer who is under 18.  It is illegal to even PORTRAY them as being under 18, even if the actual performer is of age.

With all that said, I sadly suspect that "almost old enough" teenagers and the FIL "didn't know" are not what the LW is talking about here. 

actually, that's a very good point.  I've heard of people who have that on their record still because they were say 19, in a relationship with someone who was 17 but didn't let that fact be know.  So yeah, that can happen.

Essentially why I just want more details.   Is this a situation of barely legal?   Is it on Dad's system but it's a pic exchanged by a live in HS student?  None of that is "good" but it's different than heading into Larry Nassar territory.

That said, something has to tip off authorities on this so I'm HIGHLY skeptical about why this dude could be innocent and why the son feels he is.

banana468

CharmedPam said:

short+sassy said:

STARMOON44 said:

CharmedPam said:

How do you accidentally have child porn laying around?

You do not. 

One exception I could see is if the performer(s) is an older teenager, but still under the age of 18.

The famous Traci Lords made tons of pornos at the age of 16 and 17, by giving studios/producers a fake ID.  Many companies went out of business when the truth came out and there was a huge crackdown, both legally and in the industry.  My impression is, before the huge Traci Lords scandal, IDs were required.  But, as long as one was shown and kept on file, no one really cared or worried about it.  After the scandal, more effort was made to ensure the IDs were legit.

More fun facts about porn laws.  Not only is it illegal to use a performer who is under 18.  It is illegal to even PORTRAY them as being under 18, even if the actual performer is of age.

With all that said, I sadly suspect that "almost old enough" teenagers and the FIL "didn't know" are not what the LW is talking about here. 

actually, that's a very good point.  I've heard of people who have that on their record still because they were say 19, in a relationship with someone who was 17 but didn't let that fact be know.  So yeah, that can happen.

Essentially why I just want more details.   Is this a situation of barely legal?   Is it on Dad's system but it's a pic exchanged by a live in HS student?  None of that is "good" but it's different than heading into Larry Nassar territory.

That said, something has to tip off authorities on this so I'm HIGHLY skeptical about why this dude could be innocent and why the son feels he is.

WinstonsGirl

I know someone who has been in a similar situation (not anywhere near as serious as child porn, but allegations of sexual harassment years later with no proof/legal action - Think the current Me Too movement with nothing physical from years ago).  Anyway, the person I know has had a very hard time believing that their family member could be involved in this as that was never their experience with them.  They have chosen to believe them and stand by them, I think a lot because it's easier than cutting out an immediate family member from your life.  They also believe the victim, but see it as more of a misunderstanding of what happened.  Anyway, not saying it's ok, but I've seen first hand how someone can have a hard time believing allegations like this against a parent.  It's easier to believe it was a misunderstanding, a set up, etc. cos then you don't have to deal with it or be the kid with 'that' parent.  

I agree with LW.  There's no way FIL should be alone with that.  I don't blame her for wanting to keep her kid away from someone with those charges

CharmedPam

short+sassy said:

STARMOON44 said:

CharmedPam said:

How do you accidentally have child porn laying around?

You do not. 

One exception I could see is if the performer(s) is an older teenager, but still under the age of 18.

The famous Traci Lords made tons of pornos at the age of 16 and 17, by giving studios/producers a fake ID.  Many companies went out of business when the truth came out and there was a huge crackdown, both legally and in the industry.  My impression is, before the huge Traci Lords scandal, IDs were required.  But, as long as one was shown and kept on file, no one really cared or worried about it.  After the scandal, more effort was made to ensure the IDs were legit.

More fun facts about porn laws.  Not only is it illegal to use a performer who is under 18.  It is illegal to even PORTRAY them as being under 18, even if the actual performer is of age.

With all that said, I sadly suspect that "almost old enough" teenagers and the FIL "didn't know" are not what the LW is talking about here. 

actually, that's a very good point.  I've heard of people who have that on their record still because they were say 19, in a relationship with someone who was 17 but didn't let that fact be known.  So yeah, that can happen.

CharmedPam

short+sassy said:

STARMOON44 said:

CharmedPam said:

How do you accidentally have child porn laying around?

You do not. 

One exception I could see is if the performer(s) is an older teenager, but still under the age of 18.

The famous Traci Lords made tons of pornos at the age of 16 and 17, by giving studios/producers a fake ID.  Many companies went out of business when the truth came out and there was a huge crackdown, both legally and in the industry.  My impression is, before the huge Traci Lords scandal, IDs were required.  But, as long as one was shown and kept on file, no one really cared or worried about it.  After the scandal, more effort was made to ensure the IDs were legit.

More fun facts about porn laws.  Not only is it illegal to use a performer who is under 18.  It is illegal to even PORTRAY them as being under 18, even if the actual performer is of age.

With all that said, I sadly suspect that "almost old enough" teenagers and the FIL "didn't know" are not what the LW is talking about here. 

actually, that's a very good point.  I've heard of people who have that on their record still because they were say 19, in a relationship with someone who was 17 but didn't let that fact be known.  So yeah, that can happen.