Tampa, Florida lawyer Rugh James Cline arrested in Cambodia on child sex charge

[Lucky Lucan]

I wasn't really arguing with your points which were valid. I just found your comment a convenient way to get into the issue of why a certain section of long-term posters felt the need to blame the victims and declare that it was obviously a set up. We don't know yet but it says a lot when grizzled old men are prepared to blame underage ( all less than 15 if anyone wants to read the reports) street kids for being abused/ raped. A can of worms that Lucky Seven, Backhome, Khmerhit and others are welcome to open.

[khmerhit]

Pedophilia (alternatively spelt paedophilia) is a psychiatric disorder in which an adult or older adolescent experiences a primary or exclusive sexual attraction to prepubescent children.[1][2] Although girls typically begin the process of puberty at age 10 or 11, and boys at age 11 or 12,[3] criteria for pedophilia extend the cut-off point for prepubescence to age 13.[4] A person must be at least 16 years old, and at least five years older than the prepubescent child, for the attraction to be diagnosed as pedophilia.[4][5]

Pedophilia is termed pedophilic disorder in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5), and the manual defines it as a paraphilia involving intense and recurrent sexual urges towards and fantasies about prepubescent children that have either been acted upon or which cause the person with the attraction distress or interpersonal difficulty.[4] The International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11) defines it as a "sustained, focused, and intense pattern of sexual arousal—as manifested by persistent sexual thoughts, fantasies, urges, or behaviours—involving pre-pubertal children."[6]

In popular usage, the word pedophilia is often applied to any sexual interest in children or the act of child sexual abuse.[1][2][7] This use conflates the sexual attraction to prepubescent children with the act of child sexual abuse and fails to distinguish between attraction to prepubescent and pubescent or post-pubescent minors.[8][9] Researchers recommend that these imprecise uses be avoided, because although some people who commit child sexual abuse are pedophiles,[7][10] child sexual abuse offenders are not pedophiles unless they have a primary or exclusive sexual interest in prepubescent children,[8][11][12] and some pedophiles do not molest children.[13]
Pedophilia was first formally recognized and named in the late 19th century. A significant amount of research in the area has taken place since the 1980s. Although mostly documented in men, there are also women who exhibit the disorder,[14][15] and researchers assume available estimates underrepresent the true number of female pedophiles.[16] No cure for pedophilia has been developed, but there are therapies that can reduce the incidence of a person committing child sexual abuse.[7] The exact causes of pedophilia have not been conclusively established.[17] Some studies of pedophilia in child sex offenders have correlated it with various neurological abnormalities and psychological pathologies.[18] In the United States, following Kansas v. Hendricks in 1997, sex offenders who are diagnosed with certain mental disorders, particularly pedophilia, can be subject to indefinite involuntary commitment.[19]

from Wikipedia.

[khmerhit]

Pedophilia (alternatively spelt paedophilia) is a psychiatric disorder in which an adult or older adolescent experiences a primary or exclusive sexual attraction to prepubescent children.[1][2] Although girls typically begin the process of puberty at age 10 or 11, and boys at age 11 or 12,[3] criteria for pedophilia extend the cut-off point for prepubescence to age 13.[4] A person must be at least 16 years old, and at least five years older than the prepubescent child, for the attraction to be diagnosed as pedophilia.[4][5]

Pedophilia is termed pedophilic disorder in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5), and the manual defines it as a paraphilia involving intense and recurrent sexual urges towards and fantasies about prepubescent children that have either been acted upon or which cause the person with the attraction distress or interpersonal difficulty.[4] The International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11) defines it as a "sustained, focused, and intense pattern of sexual arousal—as manifested by persistent sexual thoughts, fantasies, urges, or behaviours—involving pre-pubertal children."[6]

In popular usage, the word pedophilia is often applied to any sexual interest in children or the act of child sexual abuse.[1][2][7] This use conflates the sexual attraction to prepubescent children with the act of child sexual abuse and fails to distinguish between attraction to prepubescent and pubescent or post-pubescent minors.[8][9] Researchers recommend that these imprecise uses be avoided, because although some people who commit child sexual abuse are pedophiles,[7][10] child sexual abuse offenders are not pedophiles unless they have a primary or exclusive sexual interest in prepubescent children,[8][11][12] and some pedophiles do not molest children.[13]
Pedophilia was first formally recognized and named in the late 19th century. A significant amount of research in the area has taken place since the 1980s. Although mostly documented in men, there are also women who exhibit the disorder,[14][15] and researchers assume available estimates underrepresent the true number of female pedophiles.[16] No cure for pedophilia has been developed, but there are therapies that can reduce the incidence of a person committing child sexual abuse.[7] The exact causes of pedophilia have not been conclusively established.[17] Some studies of pedophilia in child sex offenders have correlated it with various neurological abnormalities and psychological pathologies.[18] In the United States, following Kansas v. Hendricks in 1997, sex offenders who are diagnosed with certain mental disorders, particularly pedophilia, can be subject to indefinite involuntary commitment.[19]

from Wikipedia.

[Yerg]

Pedophilia (alternatively spelt paedophilia) is a psychiatric disorder in which an adult or older adolescent experiences a primary or exclusive sexual attraction to prepubescent children.[1][2] Although girls typically begin the process of puberty at age 10 or 11, and boys at age 11 or 12,[3] criteria for pedophilia extend the cut-off point for prepubescence to age 13.[4] A person must be at least 16 years old, and at least five years older than the prepubescent child, for the attraction to be diagnosed as pedophilia.[4][5]

Pedophilia is termed pedophilic disorder in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5), and the manual defines it as a paraphilia involving intense and recurrent sexual urges towards and fantasies about prepubescent children that have either been acted upon or which cause the person with the attraction distress or interpersonal difficulty.[4] The International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11) defines it as a "sustained, focused, and intense pattern of sexual arousal—as manifested by persistent sexual thoughts, fantasies, urges, or behaviours—involving pre-pubertal children."[6]

In popular usage, the word pedophilia is often applied to any sexual interest in children or the act of child sexual abuse.[1][2][7] This use conflates the sexual attraction to prepubescent children with the act of child sexual abuse and fails to distinguish between attraction to prepubescent and pubescent or post-pubescent minors.[8][9] Researchers recommend that these imprecise uses be avoided, because although some people who commit child sexual abuse are pedophiles,[7][10] child sexual abuse offenders are not pedophiles unless they have a primary or exclusive sexual interest in prepubescent children,[8][11][12] and some pedophiles do not molest children.[13]
Pedophilia was first formally recognized and named in the late 19th century. A significant amount of research in the area has taken place since the 1980s. Although mostly documented in men, there are also women who exhibit the disorder,[14][15] and researchers assume available estimates underrepresent the true number of female pedophiles.[16] No cure for pedophilia has been developed, but there are therapies that can reduce the incidence of a person committing child sexual abuse.[7] The exact causes of pedophilia have not been conclusively established.[17] Some studies of pedophilia in child sex offenders have correlated it with various neurological abnormalities and psychological pathologies.[18] In the United States, following Kansas v. Hendricks in 1997, sex offenders who are diagnosed with certain mental disorders, particularly pedophilia, can be subject to indefinite involuntary commitment.[19]

from Wikipedia.

That bastion of user-defined content that is Wikipedia. Awesome!! Disorder, disease, compunction, call it what you will. If it helps you sleep at night.

[Lucky Lucan]

Khmerhit, you really fucked up there, trying to split hairs without even knowing anything about the case. You are definitely in the creep watchlist from now on.

[Yerg]

Khmerhit, you really fucked up there, trying to split hairs without even knowing anything about the case. You are definitely in the creep watchlist from now on.

This is why we need a like button lol

[horace]

I thought it was safe to look at this thread again, apparently not.
Bloke's a nonce , sex case, call it what you will, hang him , hang him, hang him.

[Alexandra]

Didn't he get off purely on a technicality?? Caught but escaped by the skin of his teeth. Agree with Vlad, you can't "almost" be a nonce. You are or you are not. Or is there now such a thing as "transitioning" to become...???

But I suppose you can "almost" be a nonce-apologist!! Fucknugget.

Cline is still incarcerated.

It is Alfred Stelpstra the Canadian teacher whose computer Canadian police found child porn on who got off on a technicality and now he creates sock puppets like Geaker and Lovelybunny and Ccline blaming the victim underage street children and claiming it was a set up. He does that and debates the age of consent and generally tries to push the limit of acceptance because he identifies with pedophiles because he himself is a pedophile who is no longer allowed to teach in Canada because he's a pedophile so he frequently travels to Siem Reap and trolls Cambodia forums with his pedophilia shit.

Khmerhit is just a low IQ moron who thinks normal people give a shit about the difference between a pedophile and a hebephile. He's either plain stupid or autistic or worse.

[Lucky Seven]

I wasn't really arguing with your points which were valid. I just found your comment a convenient way to get into the issue of why a certain section of long-term posters felt the need to blame the victims and declare that it was obviously a set up. We don't know yet but it says a lot when grizzled old men are prepared to blame underage ( all less than 15 if anyone wants to read the reports) street kids for being abused/ raped. A can of worms that Lucky Seven, Backhome, Khmerhit and others are welcome to open.

My posts were made well before photos of the girls and allegations of the trafficking were available. The only info at the time being the seemingly voluntary soliciting on pub street late at night by what has now been proven to be underage girls.

Having seen images of the girls and now knowing they were trafficked I agree they were victims and the perp definitely would have known they were underage .

Nothing in my posts did I suggest there was a set up , I didn't regard them as victims at the time though because the evidence was not as obvious as it is now .

It's easy to get on a forum and crow about how objectionable this behaviour is and do nothing to prevent it happening. I remember one poster pounding his chest a while back about how he had a go at all the old blokes drinking at his mates bar . He was so disgusted at them taking advantage of the underage girls working there and told them so , what the hero failed to do was have a go at the owner of the bar that employed them !

[batshitcrazyweirdo]

I wasn't really arguing with your points which were valid. I just found your comment a convenient way to get into the issue of why a certain section of long-term posters felt the need to blame the victims and declare that it was obviously a set up. We don't know yet but it says a lot when grizzled old men are prepared to blame underage ( all less than 15 if anyone wants to read the reports) street kids for being abused/ raped. A can of worms that Lucky Seven, Backhome, Khmerhit and others are welcome to open.

My posts were made well before photos of the girls and allegations of the trafficking were available. The only info at the time being the seemingly voluntary soliciting on pub street late at night by what has now been proven to be underage girls.

Having seen images of the girls and now knowing they were trafficked I agree they were victims and the perp definitely would have known they were underage .

Nothing in my posts did I suggest there was a set up , I didn't regard them as victims at the time though because the evidence was not as obvious as it is now .

It's easy to get on a forum and crow about how objectionable this behaviour is and do nothing to prevent it happening. I remember one poster pounding his chest a while back about how he had a go at all the old blokes drinking at his mates bar . He was so disgusted at them taking advantage of the underage girls working there and told them so , what the hero failed to do was have a go at the owner of the bar that employed them !

Every man is responsible for his own actions, so stop trying to group people together.

They all sound like top blokes, tho. You have a good memory, by the way.

[Lucky Lucan]

I wasn't really arguing with your points which were valid. I just found your comment a convenient way to get into the issue of why a certain section of long-term posters felt the need to blame the victims and declare that it was obviously a set up. We don't know yet but it says a lot when grizzled old men are prepared to blame underage ( all less than 15 if anyone wants to read the reports) street kids for being abused/ raped. A can of worms that Lucky Seven, Backhome, Khmerhit and others are welcome to open.

My posts were made well before photos of the girls and allegations of the trafficking were available. The only info at the time being the seemingly voluntary soliciting on pub street late at night by what has now been proven to be underage girls.

Having seen images of the girls and now knowing they were trafficked I agree they were victims and the perp definitely would have known they were underage .

Nothing in my posts did I suggest there was a set up , I didn't regard them as victims at the time though because the evidence was not as obvious as it is now .

You were pretty quick to jump to the conclusion that the victims were soliciting on Pub St and therefore complicit.

The very definition of a victim is also someone who is tricked , duped or helpless . These underage girls were not in this category. Your " very definition " is valid however they deliberately placed themselves for reward to become victims .

My very definition of a victim would be a molested child not encouraging an offense.... e.g. alter boy / priest ....teacher / student . These trusting minors are victims not underage girls soliciting at night in pub street .

Anyway you think their victims , I don't but regardless of that if he's done the crime then he deserves to be appropriately punished.

[Lucky Seven]

Being complicit doesn't necessarily mean they were culpable .... one can still be complicit under duress which diminishes culpability.

[Alexandra]

before photos of the girls and allegations of the trafficking were available. The only info at the time

"Man arrested in Cambodia on child sex charge", this was the info available. Was it not enough for you to believe that the victims were underage children? What possible reason could there be for arresting someone on child sex charges if no children were involved? Do you think these arrests happen accidentally?

Why do they need to send you pictures of the underage victims before you believe that the victims of "child sex" were minors? How much detail do you need before you decide to shut the fuck up?

Idiot

[kinard]

Being complicit doesn't necessarily mean they were culpable .... one can still be complicit under duress which diminishes culpability.

Well, that is down to interpretation but imo it is too convenient for a defense.