Creative Commons license icon

Furry artist Mitch Beiro arrested for child sex abuse images

Edited by GreenReaper as of Wed 20 Feb 2013 - 00:22
Your rating: None Average: 4.3 (10 votes)

Mitch Beiro mugshotOld-school furry artist Mitch Beiro has been arrested after police found that files depicting the sexual exploitation of minors had been shared online from his home.

Beiro, 47, worked as a guard for a security company in Tucson, Arizona. In the furry fandom, Beiro's artwork has been published in Huzzah, Wild, and several other publications. A frequent attendee of furry conventions, he was a guest of honor at ConFurence 11 (2000), and married Minerva Mink at a joke wedding during ConFurence 12.

Tucson detectives started an investigation on Beiro in December 2011, as part of a wider investigation into the online sharing of child sexual abuse images via peer-to-peer internet networks.

The police served a search warrant on his home on October 3, and found "various computer related items, which contained thousands of files depicting the sexual exploitation of minors". He is being charged with 15 counts of sexual exploitation of a minor.

During the investigation, detectives also found that he was part of an unreported child molestation case in California.

Update (19 Feb): Mitch has been sentenced to prison and probation


Your rating: None Average: 3.6 (13 votes)

His 2 accounts on FA:

For his clean account his current mood is "sick".
For his adult account his current mood is "dirty".

Fitting, now he will now forever be sick and dirty.

Your rating: None Average: 3.6 (17 votes)

Please keep in mind that there is a difference between 'arrested for' and 'convicted of'.

Until he is found guilty, take this with a grain of salt, please.

Your rating: None Average: 4.4 (8 votes)

Point for optimism- the article says "files" or "images", not photos. Hello Mike Diana

Point against- "During the investigation, detectives also found that he was part of an unreported child molestation case in California"

Your rating: None Average: 4.2 (5 votes)

That second part, I would call "sensationalism" --- because it's a lead-on phrase. Even the victims are "part of" any given case.

Your rating: None Average: 1.5 (13 votes)

You know, if it wasn't for the wonderful people I have had the pleasure of getting to know in this fandom, I would have left it long ago.

I'm very much bothered by the fact there seems to be so...many of these people within this fandom. I suppose however, it is like that in many fandoms. Just, why does it seem to be more in This one?

Your rating: None Average: 1.9 (19 votes)

Welcome to the (so-called) 'furry community', where beastiality-advocates rub shoulders (murr, murr) with fundies whose views make Bryan Fischer look like Michael Moore -- why, sometimes they even manage to exist in the same person simultaneously! -- and everyone cheers them as they walk past in the AnthroCon fursuit parade, all in the name of a misinterpretation of 'tolerance'.

Your rating: None Average: 3.6 (18 votes)

Child pornography charges and you bring up bestiality and fucking Crusader Cat?

Are you fucking stupid?

Your rating: None Average: 1.5 (15 votes)

Better to be "fucking stupid" than fucking dogs, fucking kids, fucking the teachings of Jesus, or fucking advocating any of the same. You just remember that the next time you're cheering on the dogmonglers and Christian Dominionists at AnthroCon, crossie baby.

Your rating: None Average: 3.7 (11 votes)

I don't attend Anthrocon.

Kind of like I don't bring up off topic bullshit because I feel like complaining about drama from last decade when this decade's drama has arrived.


Your rating: None Average: 3.8 (6 votes)

That's a rather more pessimistic view than I'm willing to accept.

Your rating: None Average: 4.4 (7 votes)

I do believe that there is reason behind this.

Look at our fandom back even a decade ago, then look at it today. We are much bigger and widespread than we used to be. We have people from every walk of life saying, "Hey, this looks cool." And sometimes, their walk of life may be less than pleasant.

As for why it seems like it is more in here, there are actually a few reasons:

-We notice it. This is our fandom, so we take more notice to events happening in it, than we do in other fandoms.

-We're more open. Sure, there are people who brush stuff under the carpet, but look at this. We have a story here on our 'main' news site. I've talked to people who have said that in some groups, the thought of even putting something like this out there can get you shunned.

Your rating: None Average: 4.2 (6 votes)

Biero's not new; he's basically a "greymuzzle."

That Minerva wedding thing happened when "Animaniacs" was still a thing.

Your rating: None Average: 4.2 (6 votes)

We're more open. Sure, there are people who brush stuff under the carpet, but look at this. We have a story here on our 'main' news site. I've talked to people who have said that in some groups, the thought of even putting something like this out there can get you shunned.

The BBC suggests that, in part, it's a generational thing. Of course, right now they're trying to defend against accusations that they did nothing when one of their more famous personalities was exploiting groupies.

Flayrah's been criticised for muckracking in the past – but our loyalty is to the fandom, not individuals or organizations within it. Besides, in a group as large and diverse as furry fandom has become, shunning only hurts if you let it. (Just don't stop scritchin'!)

Your rating: None Average: 4 (11 votes)

I'm very much bothered by the fact there seems to be so...many of these people within this fandom. I suppose however, it is like that in many fandoms. Just, why does it seem to be more in This one?

It only seems like there are more of these people in this fandom because this fandom (blogs like Vivisector and Flayrah in particular) like to point it out more than other fandoms do.

Seriously, ask yourself: Do actual news sites in any other fandom—Sci-Fi, Steampunk, Anime, etc.—put this kinda thing in the spotlight with the same fervor that Vivisector and Flayrah do?

The reality is there aren't more of these people in this fandom. They're just talked about more, so it seems like there's more of them when they're really just a tiny, tiny minority.

Your rating: None Average: 3.6 (12 votes)

I think you need to read more news sites, Xydexx. Let's take one of our closer equivalents, Anime News Network:
* Handley to Be Sentenced for 'Obscene' Manga in January
* Convicted Rapist Pleads Guilty to Coercing a Minor to Engage in Sex
* Shota Community, Other LiveJournal Accounts Suspended
* Virginia Man Found Guilty of Downloading Child Porn
* UNICEF Japan Continues Push against Virtual Child Porn
* Australian Sentenced for Cartoon Child Pornography
* Man Pleads Guilty to Possessing Obscene Visual Representations of the Sexual Abuse of Children

That was just with a couple of minutes of looking. Are these people representative of anime fans in general? No, they're the exception. That's why they're news.

Would a pure literary magazine cover such topics? Perhaps not; it would be off-topic. But Flayrah is as much about the furry community as it is about books and cartoon shows. We are fans of each other, after all.

Perhaps you could tell us how else the 40+ conventions that Mitch might seek to deal at will be made aware of his arrest. Will you be telling their organizers? What about those who aren't in your good books - or who you just don't know? What if he was on AC staff?

Our readers have made it clear that they want us to cover serious topics like this, and we will continue to do so.

Your rating: None Average: 2.6 (11 votes)

Our readers have made it clear that they want us to cover serious topics like this, and we will continue to do so.

And Flayrah's been (rightly) criticized for muckracking in the past.

My point—that furry fandom doesn't have more of these people than other fandoms—stands.

Your rating: None Average: 3.1 (8 votes)

Better to rake the muck then to have it build up to one's nostrils.

Your rating: None Average: 2.2 (6 votes)

I personally feel it is useful for sites such as Flayrah to point out individuals like the above who should be both condemned and avoided. It's not drama if it is fact.

Your rating: None Average: 3 (7 votes)

Green, Xydexx's long-standing position has always been that "talking about a problem that affects the fandom's image HELPS ruin the fandom's image".

There's nothing "muckraking" about this story, not to anyone who bothers to check what the journalistic use of the term actually means. It means you're sensationalizing nastiness just to get better ratings.

In this case, NOT reporting on it would be a matter of trying to pretend it never happened. It could only be considered muckraking if Flayrah were to try and do something "extra-special" with the piece above and beyond its actual context --- and that has not been done.

There are no wagging fingers in this article, no editorial screeds, not even a slanted headline.

This is, simply put, NEWS.

On Mitch himself --- I am a very long-time friend of his. I was the preacher who "wedded" him and Minerva. I've seen most of what he's contributed to the fandom, and knew/know many of his friends and enemies alike...

...and NO ONE, not even the people who drew up and made hay out of unflattering animated caricatures of the man, thought he was a pedophile.

There are plenty of people in this fandom who draw animal characters who are specifically identified as children, engaged in every sexual habit and fetish known to man, who are routinely defended by prominent members of this fandom as NOT being pedophiles because "these aren't actual children". Mitch? He was never known as a prude, but also never known to draw anything younger than a teenager.

On basis of the limited information at hand? I am willing to bet dollars to doughnuts --- literally --- that the "thousands of images" on his hard drive are furry characters with a sexy look to them, tagged by police and prosecutors looking for evidence as "Joe Camel" material.

It was successfully argued in court that a cartoon camel, by dint of BEING a cartoon camel, can be used to target children for promotion of a given subject. Sexy animal characters? A talented prosecutor can and most likely will say that these were created and distributed in order to lure children into a net of sexual predation, and that even if such predation never took place, the artwork itself is sufficient to qualify as "conspiracy to commit".

Turning a blind eye to this case is the worst thing this fandom could possibly do. We need to know, not as a matter of leaping to conclusions or vilifying Mitch like a mob with pitchforks, but because we need to be ready to respond to a legal issue that could very well mushroom into a witch hunt against a great number of people in this fandom.

Your rating: None Average: 2 (2 votes)

Groat knows him very well too, and was quite quick to draw an image of himself getting stabbed in the back, and invoking McMoo.

Seems Groat thinks it was very possible.

Your rating: None Average: 5 (2 votes)

Jim Groat pulled that image within hours of posting it, which should be taken into consideration if you're going to infer anything about his take on the Mitch Beiro arrest.

Your rating: None Average: 3 (3 votes)

He pulled it because Dragoneer placed a moratorium/silence on shouting/commenting about it after banning/suspending Mitch's FA accounts.

Your rating: None Average: 4.5 (4 votes)

I've known Jim Groat longer than I've known Mitch (in fact, I met Mitch via Jim).

To put it nicely, Jim is not exactly known as a "reliable narrator", relative to folks who know him. Especially if the issue in question is negative.

Your rating: None Average: 3 (10 votes)

The difference I believe is making these things hurt in the present versus letting them build up to an explosion down the road.

Do you really want the fandom to have the same policies in trying to deal with these things as the Catholic Church or the Boy Scouts? I think it's good for us to talk openly and highlight instead of shutting it in, for if a child molester is reading, he might suddenly be worried about being caught, it might change his behavior.

Does it make the fandom look bad? No. It makes a particular furry fan look bad. Human beings in general need to learn to separate the individual from the group. These individuals are talked about because they are infamous, which is a good thing to talk about because if people talk about it people will be less wanting to go down that path.

We talk about these things and show the consequences because if we don't, if we 'protect by omission' this kind of behavior, these kinds of individuals will take note and walk on in. Think of what you feel like a fever. It might make you feel crappy, but that's your immune system kicking in. It's better to temporarily feel crappy then to be overrun with infection.

Your rating: None Average: 2.1 (12 votes)

Does it make the fandom look bad? No.

Giving people inside the fandom the impression there are more of these people than in other fandoms doesn't make the fandom look bad?

Giving people outside the fandom the impression the fandom is hive of depravity and criminal activity doesn't make the fandom look bad?


Your logic that talking openly and putting this in the spotlight will dissuade others is flawed. Considering Flayrah's endless fascination with the Alan T. Panda case, it obviously hasn't worked.

The point here is not whether these people should be prosecuted (they should and are) or whether the media should report on them (they should and are). The point here is whether it's really a good idea for Flayrah to go around highlighting his status as a furry artist and trying to link this to the fandom when it isn't relevant to the case at all.

According to Flayrah's editorial review process, "Flayrah does not seek a reputation as a promotional or sensational news source." Yet Flayrah has a history of publishing articles connected tenuously at best to the fandom, and right now this is the only "news" article on Beiro's arrest that says anything about furry fandom. How is that not sensationalist?

Your rating: None Average: 3.1 (15 votes)

Xydexx, where in this article does it say "like all the other furry pedophiles that are so prevalent in furry but nowhere else"?

Stop worrying about what other people think about furry fandom (hint: they don't) and start worrying about what people think about you (hint: an annoying guy who won't ever shut the fuck up). Seriously, Xydexx, your entire worldview is based on the tiny hole in the ground you stick your head in as soon as possible; please take your head out of the ground, because we're all tired of talking to an ass.

Your rating: None Average: 1 (6 votes)


"Brothers, we should be struggling together!"

"WE ARE!!!"

How'd you like the taste of them hey-lets-be-inclusive-lets-not-be-judgmental-oh-noez-lets-avoid-teh-dramallama-by-tolerating-any-amount-of-shit apples now? :-)

Your rating: None Average: 2 (12 votes)

I reiterate: Right now this is the only "news" article on Beiro's arrest that says anything about furry fandom.

But, as a sidebar, what's really interesting is the fact that Crossie's ad hominem attack (despite the claim Flayrah doesn't want it) has a higher rating than the valid (and longstanding) criticism about Flayrah's sensationalist reporting. Saying the readership of Flayrah wants more "hard news" stories is like saying the readership of the Weekly World News wants more stories about Elvis and Bigfoot. It's obvious criticism of Flayrah is something that can't be discussed civilly or rationally here.

That's okay, I'm done. This says more about Flayrah better than I ever could.

Your rating: None Average: 3.1 (13 votes)

Xydexx, this IS where I grind my axes. You are posting to my grindstone. You don't want to spin in circles while I apply the pressure, you get a hotel room.

Also, people who argue on the Internet by linking to Wiki articles about logical fallacies have made the logical fallacy of thinking that means jack shit.

And finally, the reason I got upvoted and you didn't is because your opinion (Flayrah is sensationalist) is stupid, while my opinion (Xydexx is stupid) isn't. And you want to link to that Wiki article again, I will ad hominen you so hard you will actually feel it through the Internet.

Your rating: None Average: 2.6 (8 votes)

Gee, I wish I could spend all day on websites I dont like, looking for any excuse to criticize it, too, because like yours, my word is as God's. But, alas, I cannot. I always end up looking at pictures of Carth or doing something else that both interests me, doesn't make me seem like a jerk, and causes me no stress.

I really envy your one-trick-pony lifestyle.

Your rating: None Average: 2.9 (8 votes)

Excuse me, but technically, Xydexx is a one trick SQUEAKY pony.

Your rating: None Average: 3.2 (6 votes)

One could say you're spending your time being a squeaky pony and not a bitter old dinosaur?

Your rating: None Average: 3.6 (5 votes)

Unfortunately the Alan T. Panda case was a judicial mess, and there were a few too many articles on that I would agree. I hope this case doesn't get a new article every time a mouse farts in the case. I would say that the only additional one should be when there is a final closing, if I were calling the shots on this.

You are correct there is no link between the act of pedophilia and the furry fandom, however, there is a reason that furries might be interested in knowing that an artist of theirs is going to jail. If they were friends of his, if they commissioned them, they'll now know not to expect replies.

It's not sensationalist because he was a furry, or called himself one. That's a fact, not some arbitrary thing made up by someone to "make us look bad". Now if someone's response to this article is that furries are more likely to be pedophiles, THAT is sensationalist. Or if someone thinks the whole world will think as those sensationalist do because of the article, that is sensationalist.

In the US, in 2010 the FBI reports that for every 10,000 children in this country 8.3 are victims of sexual assult now lets take the fact that there were 74.1 million US children in 2010 that means that means 61,503 children were molested in the year 2010 in the US... and those were just the ones reported. Now lets go back to how many of those were caused by furs... 1 and that's me being generous as the person was only alleged, I don't think they were arrested over it, and this is throughout the WORLD, not just the US. That means I don't even think they'd be among-st the reported.

This by the way was looking through the "sensationalist" websites, as you would call them. Mostly they bitch about FA or art commissions, relationship issues, and such. I think you're sensationalizing how much the sensationalists sensationalize pedophilia and it's connection to the fandom, and that sir is quite sensational.

Your rating: None Average: 3 (4 votes)

I just read that article from outside the fandom, and it's kind of strange that their story about this seems to be more accurate then your own account. As a furry it should scare you that an outsider appears to have more of a grasp on the complexities of the fandom as a whole then yourself.

No where in the outsider article you linked does it say that the fandom is a hive of depravity. Instead it does talk about the complexities that minority groups do cause within the fandom such as baby furs and plushies, which is not inaccurate. A bit off topic I could criticize, but not inaccurate. I think the problem isn't what's being said, it's what you're reading into it.

That and I note the author of the outsider article discusses the discussion here. Could you imagine what a change in tone there would be if everyone here was going "sweep this under a rug, see no evil speak no evil"? They would see certainly be seeing that as a bigger issue.

Times are a-changin'. Hiding the bad that individuals do in your group is no longer seen as an action of merit, it's seen as political.

Your rating: None Average: 3 (4 votes)

The premise of this argument thread is flawed, in that it assumes that this story is written by an unbiased, naive observer — while the piece's own subtitle states that the fandom has a "notorious reputation".

The Daily Dot article is deliberately constructed to make furries look bad, reaching a decade back to Vanity Fair and using selective linking and quoting to emphasize "deviant" aspects of the fandom. Flayrah's report may have triggered its creation; however, we are not responsible for its author's malice.

Over the years, many unscrupulous journalists have sought to make a dime off the fandom. One more is of little concern.

Your rating: None Average: 4.4 (9 votes)

I'm hoping it's either a case of trumped up charges by an overzealous DA (such a case happened a few years ago in Iowa over shota manga), or he did something stupid (and hopefully provable) like leaving his WiFi open.

Your rating: None Average: 3.7 (3 votes)

Despite how often I'm proven wrong, I Always hope that it's not the worst caste scenario.

Your rating: None Average: 4 (3 votes)

Ditto. My first thought was "he's not technically savvy, he probably torrented something and ended up being a porn server's hidden-directory front without even noticing". But that's because I'd like to believe the best about someone who never exhibited any such tendencies in all the years I knew him --- not because I absolutely know for sure he couldn't possibly have done it.

Your rating: None Average: 1 (15 votes)

why cant we go after the gays like we go after these sick fucks?

Your rating: None Average: 2.6 (5 votes)

Hi there, Paden!

Your rating: None Average: 2.4 (12 votes)

Between this and noted whackjob Richard "Betawolf" Helms' admission of wanting child porn, maybe the feds should start taking a closer look at the furry community for pedophiles.

Your rating: None Average: 5 (6 votes)

Is there any evidence that there's a larger percentage of pedophiles in the furry fandom than in society as a whole? Until there's evidence to the contrary, I'm going to assume the rates are about the same. It also can be a bit vague what a furry is, I mean if you call yourself a furry you're basically a furry - there is no real guideline. So if someone calls himself/herself a furry and does something heinous, we're all supposed to bear the brunt of their actions when the rules about who is a furry is squishy and the rest of us had nothing to do with said actions?

Let us not gloss over all the good furs have done also, not that they're supposed to even things out but let's not go crazy with the bad and forget the good.

The lines are blurry when it comes to art versus photographs. I mean fantasy art of young furs... is that considered pedophilia? What about fantasy art of young humans? It may point to behavior and interest but does it fall into the definition of that crime and is it illegal? Photographs constitute actual abuse, I mean there is a kid out there that has been humiliated/abused to get that photograph but art is imagination, and if we're talking about imagination well... there's a lot of sick sh*t that the human mind can imagine but that rarely translates into action.

Beiro stands out because his artwork is recognized and been published to a wider audience. Pointing out some individuals in a community of thousands and thousands of people hardly makes it a trend, it's sick and sad but it does not mean all furries are like him, and again - no group is immune from having sick individuals like him amongst their ranks, it's more about how the community handles them that matters.

Your rating: None Average: 1.3 (6 votes)

Perri Rhodes left anime fandom 'cause of the pedophiles, accorfing to Perri, but is fine with furry's levels.

Your rating: None Average: 3.8 (8 votes)

That's certainly not a flattering photo of him. What I'm most interested in here, other than the final verdict, is whether those images were fictional or real. Is there any information on that?

"If all mankind minus one, were of one opinion, and only one person were of the contrary opinion, mankind would be no more justified in silencing that one person, than he, if he had the power, would be justified in silencing mankind."
~John Stuart Mill~

Your rating: None Average: 3.7 (3 votes)

It's a big fandom, there are going to be those like this scattered about, it's beyond belief that the furry community would contain nothing but good people (heh, more of a fantasy than believing in your own fursona ;P ).

The real question is whether furs are going to condemn those those who broke the law or rally to their side because they're being so-called "fursecuted" or have extenuating circumstances. That's the real issue, whether we acknowledge what is right & wrong and that those actions have consequences?

Your rating: None Average: 4.2 (5 votes)

One issue I have to address, especially because it's often quite prevalent, is the conflation of right and wrong with legal and illegal. They are not the same thing as you seem to imply. Many things are not wrong but are illegal in many places, homosexuality is a good example because it's not fully accepted in the American legal system, is illegal in some Middle East and African countries and because it applies to a large number of furs. Since what is legal differs between countries and time means you need to be very clear if you are saying something is right or if it is legal.

"If all mankind minus one, were of one opinion, and only one person were of the contrary opinion, mankind would be no more justified in silencing that one person, than he, if he had the power, would be justified in silencing mankind."
~John Stuart Mill~

Your rating: None Average: 3.2 (5 votes)

In this case, child porn is illegal and wrong.

Unless its, like, cub porn or something. In that case ... I'll be nice and say jury's still out.

Your rating: None Average: 2 (3 votes)

Let's use some common sense here, I mean you could go on and on trying to make distinctions in issues that are considered part of this or that 'grey' area. In this case it's child porn, in another it might be drug dealing, in another it might be physical abuse... what I said in my above comment is hardly a set in stone guideline for everything that comes up nor did I try to be clear to the point of getting lost in the details, I'm talking about too many bad actions which are dismissed or glossed over because of misquided qualifying of their actions.

Your rating: None Average: 1.2 (6 votes)

"Shouting has been disabled on this user's page."

Damn you FA, you've no sense of fun.

Your rating: None Average: 4.2 (6 votes)

Yay, bout time they fixed that issue. Much easier then deleting shouts and warning people that they'll be banned if they do shout.

Your rating: None Average: 3 (3 votes)


Well, I'll be...

Your rating: None Average: 4.3 (4 votes)

When did you register an account?

What did I miss?

Your rating: None Average: 1.3 (3 votes)

I know! He's even submitted two stories.

Go talk about unicorns in his story now!

Your rating: None Average: 4 (6 votes)

Anyone commenting here prepared to be embarrassed if it turns out he didn't do anything illegal or immoral?

The news-media (and the investigators) are maybe sharing bits of facts with you - they expect you to make up your story of the truth from what they have selectively given you.

Flayrah here says "on his computer". The news article actually only says "various computer related items". It was in his house? Was it his? It makes a better story if the material is "on his computer", doesn't it? Can you come up with other stories that fit the selected facts, if you presumed him to be innocent?

This story doesn't fit what I've seen in his shared artwork. I'd rather wait to judge until I've seem more specific information, rather than from a TV news report.

Your rating: None Average: 3.2 (5 votes)

If it comes back that he's not guilty, then I'll accept it yes.

However, it's important to note that not every pedophile draws cub art, that's just one of those fandom assumptions. It's why this one came as a "shock".

Your rating: None Average: 5 (4 votes)

The first paragraph of the first article linked at the time of your comment said:

A security guard in Tucson is behind bars tonight after police say they found thousands of child pornographic images on his computer.

Now, it is possible that they were incorrect. This source appears to be a more exact copy of the press release. It says:

During the investigation, detectives located a computer in the Tucson area that had been sharing multiple files depicting the sexual abuse of minors.

This may not be "his computer", although it seems unlikely given that said files were still present after the period of file-sharing. I have changed our lede to "...after police found that files depicting the sexual exploitation of minors had been shared online from his home."

Your rating: None Average: 4.8 (5 votes)

Green Reaper - Thank you. That's a very reasonable change. You seem to understand what I was talking about.

Your rating: None Average: 2 (6 votes)

II can go it this line in trying to inject doubt. the investigation was on going for months , they problem had been monitoring him not to mention a connection to anther case. I think they had a strong case.

Your rating: None Average: 4.6 (5 votes)

You'll find a great many months-long investigations where the claims being made at the time of the bust ended up being utterly nonfactual.

Classic Example: the Branch Davidians were ultimately tried and found guilty on weapons charges --- but not on any of the counts initially claimed by the ATF, which had been monitoring them for a year and a half. The ATF claimed, amongst other things, that the Davidians had a .50 caliber Browning heavy machinegun --- because one member bought .50 ammo. Federal records showed that same man to own a bolt-action and perfectly-legal .50 rifle, but the ATF chose to ignore that fact (despite the information being in their specific bailiwick of weapons registration) because it did not advance what they hoped would be a successful raid and subsequent high-profile prosecution.

Your rating: None Average: 4.4 (5 votes)

In my experience, the press usually just "reports" what is told to them. They do very little investigation, beyond asking questions from trusted authorities --- i.e., the police.

If a cop looks at a few files of Babs Bunny in a miniskirt, leaps to the conclusion that every one of "thousands" of files in the same folder is the same kind of stuff, and then tells the first reporter he talks to his opinion, the reporter does NOT say "this is the officer's opinion".

Because of this phenomenon, we've had a lot of interesting news articles from otherwise reliable outfits, such as a butter-knife-blunt replica sword that "could have taken an officer's arm off" or demilitarized grenades with holes in the bottom and no powder in them that "could have leveled the block".

Initial reports are just that --- initial. Look only for the general scope and don't count on many of the specifics to be terribly accurate, ESPECIALLY if the specifics are something that would make the speaker look good: "I'm a police officer, and I just busted a massive dope smuggling ring! I should get a raise!" (as two kids with a bag of pot are led to a patrol car).

Your rating: None Average: 2.6 (7 votes)

Tucson local news station KGUN9 reported last night that mr. Beiro admitted to being addicted to kiddy porn and a sexual attraction to children. I think the court decision is straightforward and obvious. Though I am sorry to hear it.

Your rating: None Average: 4.7 (6 votes)

Just went and checked KGUN's story: it is precisely the sensationalism that Xydexx complains Flayrah is engaged in here.

It starts off with a "scare you" paragraph about how sexual predators look and act "like us", then references Mitch as having child-exploitation files on his computer and "fear there could be unreported victims of abuse". That's a lovely catch-phrase meaning nothing more or less than "we don't have evidence to claim he ACTUALLY abused anyone sexually, but you should leap to that conclusion anyways".

"9 On Your Side obtained court documents that show the 47-year-old “admitted he had a problem with child pornography and had an attraction towards children.” In fact, the search warrant describes in explicit detail some of the files on the computer, many of children in sexual acts."

Parse that.

What "court documents"? He only just got arrested, there hasn't even been time for the initial hearing. This references the old California case, not the current arrest. But failing to mention it's an old case suggests to the unknowing viewer that Mitch just confessed guilt to the court. The quote is clearly not from Mitch, but from someone commenting on something Mitch said, such as a prosecutor.

If a prosecutor asks you, during interviews, "do you have a problem with child pornography?" and you say "yes, I do" --- meaning "I think it's disgusting, I hate it" or whatever --- the prosecutor is NOT required to assume you meant the negative. He is perfectly within his legal rights to stand before the judge and assume the opposite stance: "your Honor, the accused has admitted he has a problem with child pornography".

Similarly, teenagers under the age of 18 (and in many areas, older than that) are legally considered children, even if they are at or beyond the age of consent. If you say you think a 16-year-old in a string bikini is hot, you may have just admitted "sexual attraction to children".

None of this proves, or even alleges on my part, that Mitch Beiro is necessarily innocent of what he's accused of.

But after nearly 45 years of life and a fair amount of both political and social activism, I can say with confidence that the free press is simply a business industry. "True believers" in news as a public trust are few and far between.

Your rating: None Average: 3.8 (5 votes)

I agree with what you say here, Calbeck.

There is also an election in Tucson in early November. It will be interesting to see what happens after the election is over. On the website for the county prosecutor (in charge of prosecuting felony trials in the city & county, I believe), it is stated that the prosecutor hardly ever allows plea-bargains.

Your rating: None Average: 4.8 (5 votes)

As someone whose best friend was arrested for child-raping 8 kids..

Pedophiles are very , very good at masking who they are and what they do. I'm not saying guilt one way or the other on Mitch's case, but I assure you.. they are very good at keeping things underground. I've been in your exact spot, trying to understand how I missed things that simply weren't there. I remember a long conversation with an investigator where he laid out hotel bills, receipts, photos, a tape recording of my friend admitting to it to one of the kid's mothers, chat logs, and phone logs. Even then, I was still in doubt.

So , it's possible, and it's heartbreaking. For months, I questioned if I was an awful person for missing things. Let's wait for the trial.

Your rating: None Average: 1 (5 votes)

> pedos are good at hiding it

He'll need to hide what he was in for if he's going to stay with the general prison population, else he'll get shanked first chance for "street cred" while in prison.

Your rating: None Average: 3 (6 votes)

I had a highschool friend who snapped and killed his own mother, if you were to ask anyone who attended school and you put people in order of being capable of murder, I'm sure he would have been near the bottom on all counts. Typically those with a 4.0 GPA don't go off and kill someone.

No one knows anyone more then they know themselves, and even then, do they really?

Your rating: None Average: 4.8 (4 votes)

Well, there's a difference between being capable and actually doing it. I was voted both Most Geeky and Most Likely to Become a Serial Killer by my university fellows. Perhaps they figured that if I ever did go crazy, I'd at least be able to pull off a few murders before being caught. (It may also have been the hair.)

Your rating: None Average: 4 (5 votes)

Well that and you carry a raccoon puppet around with you. You'd be like a batman villain.

Your rating: None Average: 3.5 (4 votes)

Damn, your school is an asshole.

My response to the "You look like a serial killer" comment (a lot of geeks get it) is "You look like my next victim."

Your rating: None Average: 4.5 (2 votes)

They also voted me Worst Dressed, an election which has since received independent acclamation.

Your rating: None Average: 3.2 (5 votes)

Two things, one pertinent to the article and the subthread, one only pertinent to the subthread.

Wichita's BTK serial killer had a wife and kids while collecting trophies from his victims that were completely in the dark about his ... hobby.

Second thing is two people were voted Most Likely To Succeed at my school. One was a fundie Christian who actively spoke out against evolution at every opportunity. She was pregnant before the vote was taken and is now a white trash mother; she could allow her religion to blind her to centuries of scientific progress, but actually follow the religion's rules? Hell no!

The guy was, oh, yeah, me. What a wash.

Your rating: None Average: 1.9 (9 votes)

Mitch Beiro: the Sir Jimmy Saville of furs.

Your rating: None Average: 1.9 (7 votes)

David Koresh deserved to burn and the world is a better place without him.

Mitch Beiro deserves to be locked up and the world will be a better place for it.

Post new comment

  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <img> <b> <i> <s> <blockquote> <ul> <ol> <li> <table> <tr> <td> <th> <sub> <sup> <object> <embed> <h1> <h2> <h3> <h4> <h5> <h6> <dl> <dt> <dd> <param> <center> <strong> <q> <cite> <code> <em>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

More information about formatting options

This test is to prevent automated spam submissions.
Leave empty.