• You must be logged in to see or use the chatbox

I don't know what the hell to make of this.

A tip o' the ball cap to @GreenEyedDevil

ST. JOHN'S, N.L. — A man facing child pornography charges for ordering a child-sized sex doll repeatedly told a St. John's courtroom Monday that his only motivation was to replace his infant son who died more than 20 years earlier.

Kenneth Harrisson ordered "Carol" from a Japanese website advertising childlike and adult sex dolls in 2013, and the doll was intercepted by the Canada Border Services Agency on its way to Canada.

The complicated case has been working its way through court for years, raising the issue of what constitutes child pornography if no real child was involved.

Harrisson, 54, faces charges of possessing child pornography, mailing obscene matter and two charges under the federal Customs Act of smuggling and possession of prohibited goods.
Link

--Al
 

Don't like ads? Then help out the site and GO BOLD!


Don't like ads? Then help out the site and GO BOLD!

Alf

Cereal Box Reader
Bold Member!
I could chase my tail on this one for days, Keep. "On the one hand . . . but on the other hand . . . but on the other other hand . . . but on the other other other hand . . . " ad nauseum. I really don't know what to make of this story.

I believe Mr. Harrisson is guilty of nothing more than poor judgment; still, there are all those other considerations.

I like the way you think, Ripley.

--Al
 

Don't like ads? Then help out the site and GO BOLD!


Don't like ads? Then help out the site and GO BOLD!

ghosttruck

Level 57 Taco Wizard
Staff member
So what I'm supposed to believe that all over the entire internet there was no doll about the same size that didn't include a place for his pecker? He wouldn't be being looked at if he bought something he couldn't have sex with...there's more to this guy that what's reported.
 

Don't like ads? Then help out the site and GO BOLD!


Don't like ads? Then help out the site and GO BOLD!


Don't like ads? Then help out the site and GO BOLD!

Fives My Charm

Ruler of Minions..
Bold Member!
@JackBurton .. my question was .. simply looking at those sites and looking at the child dolls .. is that their justification for “child pornography” or something missing about this?!
Post automatically merged:

7064e2a0-556e-4303-809f-6bee2c473493-jpeg.17296


Kenneth Harrisson spent about $1,000 on the doll. He opted for the deluxe package, with the make-up and the little, child-size lingerie. The doll had no breasts and no hips. When assembled, it would only stand about four-feet tall. It was obviously meant to be a child, a Crown prosecutor told a Newfoundland court Tuesday, and Harrisson bought it for one obvious reason: sex. And for that, the prosecutor argued, he should be convicted and locked away... He was going to dress it as a boy eventually he said in court..

https://www.google.com/amp/s/nationalpost.com/news/canada/its-definitely-icky-but-should-it-be-a-crime/amp
 
Last edited:

Don't like ads? Then help out the site and GO BOLD!

everjaded

ಠ_ಠ
Bold Member!
The whole explanation given for why he ordered the doll sounds like bullshit, but at the end of the day I don't think you can really bucket this in the same category as people who actually abuse real children.

There are no victims here, and there have even been arguments that this type of doll may help pedophiles satisfy their desires without ever involving a real child. I realize that there is an argument on the other side that this might also make them one day escalate to real abuse.

I think if there is any possibility that this can keep real children from being victimized, we should allow it even if it's personally squicky. I don't see how this could be construed as child pornography just for the depiction, though.

That's basically like charging a person with murder because they have viewed or saved photos of dead bodies or gore that depicts a horrific crime.
 

Don't like ads? Then help out the site and GO BOLD!

Fives My Charm

Ruler of Minions..
Bold Member!
The whole explanation given for why he ordered the doll sounds like bullshit, but at the end of the day I don't think you can really bucket this in the same category as people who actually abuse real children.

There are no victims here, and there have even been arguments that this type of doll may help pedophiles satisfy their desires without ever involving a real child. I realize that there is an argument on the other side that this might also make them one day escalate to real abuse.

I think if there is any possibility that this can keep real children from being victimized, we should allow it even if it's personally squicky. I don't see how this could be construed as child pornography just for the depiction, though.

That's basically like charging a person with murder because they have viewed or saved photos of dead bodies or gore that depicts a horrific crime.
In my Criminal Justice classes back in the day this was an actual legit concept to keeping pedophiles from reoffending.. or escalating.. I say it’s a slippery slope and we all know .. there’s one thing about a slippery slope.. that bitch is damn near impossible to get back up it’s pretty much a shit show into oblivion..
 

Don't like ads? Then help out the site and GO BOLD!


Don't like ads? Then help out the site and GO BOLD!

EyEgOrE

Active Member
Bold Member!
I don't know what to make of this one. If he was trying to 'replace his son,' did they not have a male doll for sale? Or was it like other male sex dolls that have the permanent hard-on, and that's not what he was looking for? Too hard to know his true intentions. However, no harm, no foul - right? Who is the victim, and if there is no victim is there really a crime?
 

Don't like ads? Then help out the site and GO BOLD!

Turd Fergusen

Trusted Member
Bold Member!
Child Porn as defined where this guy lives:
"a photographic, film, video or other visual representation, whether or not it was made by electronic or mechanical means".

It fits the bill as a visual representation. He found it using a google search for "sex doll".
 

Don't like ads? Then help out the site and GO BOLD!

Old Man Metal

Trusted Member
Staff member
His story makes no sense, but if Canada doesn't have an actual law against child-sized sex dolls, I don't see that he has committed a crime.

The complicated case has been working its way through court for years, raising the issue of what constitutes child pornography if no real child was involved.
Sounds like even the experts in Canada are collectively scratching their heads.

Let him have his toy... but monitor him closely.
Gonna have to go with this.
 

Don't like ads? Then help out the site and GO BOLD!


Don't like ads? Then help out the site and GO BOLD!

Cotton Candy 66

New Member
Hmm, I see both sides of this, but can ordering an adult, female, sex doll include charges of rape? I think they are being a bit overboard here! Watch him, hope the child doll releases urges is about all I feel they can do at this time! I also see where the law is different than in the US, or how I would "feel" it is in the US! I can't see it any differently than buying one of the anatomically correct dolls they sell that are like real babies!
 

Don't like ads? Then help out the site and GO BOLD!

Muriel Schwenck

polyracial ecosexual
Bold Member!

Don't like ads? Then help out the site and GO BOLD!

Fives My Charm

Ruler of Minions..
Bold Member!
I searched online for "vinyl lifelike child doll" and this is the first item that came up.
https://www.ashtondrake.com/products/302630001_luis-lifelike-child-doll.html
32 inches tall. They can usually wear real kids clothes. Only $200.


His dead little son wore makeup and lingerie?!
@Muriel Schwenck .. I lost a four month old son... I never felt the need to have a doll. Nothing.. I repeat nothing could ever replace the feel and smell of my Kaiden. I truly don’t understand. I went on to have another child. Every time I hold a smallish child does my heart hurt a little.. of coarse. Come August 8th will my day be shitty no matter how hard I try of course. I agree even if you needed a “replacement” .. the delux package with makeup & lingerie .. that’s pushing it .. I guess it comes down to how much money he has to spend on high priced attorneys..
 
Last edited:

Don't like ads? Then help out the site and GO BOLD!

Muriel Schwenck

polyracial ecosexual
Bold Member!
If he had purchased a conventional lifelike child doll, which is very easy to find, he would never be in court.
His story may be whacko, but the legal argument would be the same even if he said "yes, I bought it for sex"
 

Don't like ads? Then help out the site and GO BOLD!

The world we live in is SHIT. A few weeks ago, we had a bus driver found guilty of raping a 14 year old REAL LIFE child, and he wont serve a moment in jail, until he does it again. This guy, regardless of reason, wants to purchase a fake "child like" hunk of plastic, and we want to lock him up?

We have to stop being so damn sensitive as a society, if he fully intends to have sexual role play with that rubber ball, whats that doing do us as a society? Is he weird? sure. Are his wires loose? probably. Is he harming anyone with it? No. He paid a grand, for a product for sale, leave him alone. We have to stop charging people with "thought crimes", or "this is what i think you are doing this for" crimes. We have to take our emotions out, the simple question is, is this harmful to us or them, if not walk away. I know the other argument of "it will make him want a real child more" and that's crap. If he wants to do harm, he will, but maybe, for a few years, he can satiate himself with rubber, and save harm to others, or maybe, he would have never and will never do anything to harm a child. I know this is a particularly difficult topic for some, and i am all for castration and removing fingernails of all individuals who take the innocents from a child. But we have to be reasonable.
 

Don't like ads? Then help out the site and GO BOLD!

Turd Fergusen

Trusted Member
Bold Member!
But we have to be reasonable.
Child porn = photo/video/depiction of child engagin in sexual acts.

Sounds pretty reasonablel to me. I mean if he made a video of himself fucking this doll that would constitute child porn too. That is where the harm is in letting any of these sicko's keep thier kiddy sex dolls.
 

Don't like ads? Then help out the site and GO BOLD!

Future_Milf

Active Member
Bold Member!
It stood four feet tall and was replacing an infant? I felt bad for him and wanted him to just be a confused, grieving father, but that changes EVERYTHING. I mean, shit-I was 4'8 in the eighth grade til I hit a growth spurt and shot up to 5'1. Second-and final-growth spurt was at 26 and put me at a bit over 5'3. Considering my grandma was 4'10 and my mom 4'11 and I'm the tallest woman in my family, I'm quite lucky. Except the feet that have been the same size since I was 12. In expensive dress shoes, I can usually get away with a 5 or 6, *BUT* in sandals, flip flops, tennis shoes, or boots, I'm between 3 and 1/2 and 4 and a half. I hate saying this, but it seemed that in passing, his infant son was spared a lifetime of sexual abuse.
 

Don't like ads? Then help out the site and GO BOLD!

CalicoJack

Member
Bold Member!
If a guy wants to fuck a doll, he's got the right to do so. Is it creepy and disturbing that the doll is designed to be a child? Absolutely. Do I think this guy's a danger to children? Hell yes.

I do think he should be monitored. This guy is a heartbeat away from abusing an actual kid.
 

Don't like ads? Then help out the site and GO BOLD!

Fives My Charm

Ruler of Minions..
Bold Member!
As a parent who has lost a child.. the dumb bitch suing deep pockets when it’s her own fault - this dumbass using the excuse a premium delux version sex doll with makeup and lingerie replaced an infant son.. stop! You make it horrible for parents who grieve a lifetime. Find some other fucking excuse you make yourself look shallow and moronic truly fucking stupid!
 

Don't like ads? Then help out the site and GO BOLD!


Don't like ads? Then help out the site and GO BOLD!

CalicoJack

Member
Bold Member!
See that's just it. He does not have that right. Not when the said doll features a prebubescent vagina, anus, etc. That makes it child porn and makes it illegal. They are for legal reasons considered "child exploitation materiel".
I think there would be issues in prosecuting this, because it's a doll. Can a doll be considered "child exploitation material"? I hope so, because this SHOULD be illegal in my opinion.

I'd love to see this asshole locked up.
 

Don't like ads? Then help out the site and GO BOLD!

Fives My Charm

Ruler of Minions..
Bold Member!
I think there would be issues in prosecuting this, because it's a doll. Can a doll be considered "child exploitation material"? I hope so, because this SHOULD be illegal in my opinion.

I'd love to see this asshole locked up.
@CalicoJack

Forensic psychologist Peter Collins testified at an earlier trial date that "Carol" is the size of a prepubescent child without sexually mature characteristics. He said the doll meets the definition of child pornography.

By Canda’s Rules.... more at original link
 

Don't like ads? Then help out the site and GO BOLD!

CalicoJack

Member
Bold Member!
Good. Put him away.

I get angry because there seem to be so many loopholes these days where these fuckers can get away with shit like this.

The company that makes these awful dolls should be taken down, too.
 
Last edited:

Don't like ads? Then help out the site and GO BOLD!

Turd Fergusen

Trusted Member
Bold Member!
There was a case where a guy got charged becaus he was posting photographs of his child sex doll in the nude. You can Google it is you wish, I'm at work and am not going to do that search. I believe most countries consider them as child pornography.
 

Don't like ads? Then help out the site and GO BOLD!

Members online

Top