I'm pretty sure I know who it is. If I'm right, I figure the argument was probably that it would destroy his relatives' busines, and they didn't commit the crime. I don't think that's good enough, but I think that is likely the consideration
Replies
I havent a clue who it is. It would be unfair to destroy the relatives business. Surely they could have media articles that exonerate the relative from any prior knowledge. The relative could launch a anti CSAM fundraising campaign from the business to promote their stance & distance themself.
sep 12, 2025, 9:45 am • 0 0 • view
I could be wrong. But if I'm right, there would be a high chance that no matter what, the business would be seriously damaged. The relatives would be fine, they're very, very rich. But the business would be badly damaged
sep 12, 2025, 9:56 am • 1 0 • view
Does it sell items for children?
sep 12, 2025, 10:05 am • 0 0 • view