Woman Sentenced for 'Obscene' Stories' WEB

[DR. YO]

A Pennsylvania woman has been sentenced to five years of probation, including six months of home detention, and forfeiture of her computer after pleading guilty Thursday to obscenity charges for running a Web site that featured text stories that were sexual and violent in nature.

Karen Fletcher, 56,of Donora, Pennsylvania, owned and operated the Web site, Red Rose Stories, which featured stories describing sexual molestation and violence against children. Other stories included torture, rape and murder of children, and Fletcher sold memberships to her site, where members could get full stories, the U.S. Department of Justice said.

Fletcher, using the pen name Red Rose, wrote most of the stories herself, the DOJ said. Some of the stories were available as audio files, but the site didn't include photos, according to press reports.

Fletcher reportedly was abused as a child and started the site as a form of therapy, according to news reports.

The U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation ordered the site closed in late 2005. Some constitutional lawyers have questioned the prosecution of Fletcher, saying many pieces of popular literature have contained similar descriptions of abuse or murder.

Fletcher pleaded guilty Thursday in U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania in Pittsburgh to six counts of using an interactive computer service to distribute obscene materials. She must serve the first six months of her probation under home detention and pay a US$1,000 fine, Judge Joy Flowers Conti ruled.

Mary Beth Buchanan, the U.S. attorney in the Western District of Pennsylvania, has filed obscenity charges against several defendants.

Buchanan "has gone on a rampage trying to stamp out expression that doesn't meet her standards of morality," Marc John Randazza, a law professor at the Barry University School of Law in Orlando, wrote on his blog.

Randazza, who teaches about free speech rights and other legal issues, acknowledges that the content of Red Rose Stories was shocking, but he suggested the U.S. Constitution protects fictional stories. "If you believe in the Constitution, and you believe in what this country means, you can NOT believe that any American should ever face prison for writing fiction -- no matter what the subject matter of that fiction might be," he wrote in a blog post.

Source

-------------------------------

Free speech

[InHuman]

WTF?!

She has every right do do waht she did...

[DR. YO]

In my opinion abuse of government power

[thefinalfrontier]

Out the door with free speech again, What constituton?? They (The US Gov.) are eroding that just as fast as they can,,

I dont read that kind of material but I supose if sopmeone wanted to then its at their own descretion, Nobody forced them to read it, Am I right in my trhinking?

[DR. YO]

Out the door with free speech again, What constituton?? They (The US Gov.) are eroding that just as fast as they can,,

I dont read that kind of material but I supose if sopmeone wanted to then its at their own descretion, Nobody forced them to read it, Am I right in my trhinking?

I agree

[eqgumby]

I'm almost torn here. Free speech yes, but the material sounds pretty bad. Was she prosecuted because of the content purely, or was there some angle regarding distribution and the fact that she sold memberships to the site?

I'm just wondering what exact law the government believes she violated.

[eqgumby]

I looked at it again, and unless she somehow incited someone to an illegal act, I can't see what law, other than obscenity laws, she may have broken. If the law states that obscenity is defined by the "community standards", I can't see that she really broke the law. I hope she appeals and they straighten this out. If indeed the prosecutor is on a kick to rout out obscenity as defined be HER, using the law as she wishes, she needs to be censured at the very least.

[Blue Box]

Unfortunately for her the whole case is a little ify some people would see it as child porn of some type which maybe why the judge decided the way she did. It may have been therapeutic for Karen Fletcher but on the flip side she maybe should have kept the stories to herself in a journal or something of that sort since some people tend to take things such as this badly (plus the making money off it didn't help any either since it may have made her look worse to those certain people).

IMO though, as long as she didn't act on the stories she wrote, I really don't see why she was arrested and charged. It's freedom of speech plus the fact that she did sell memberships to the site was another way of trying to control the site so that children wouldn't be able to see the stories, she also did not post pictures or illustrations for her stories. This kinda stuff isn't my cup of tea as for reading material but to some it is, to each their own as long as they don't act on it.

Edited August 11, 2008 by Blue Box

[pendora]

I'm almost torn here. Free speech yes, but the material sounds pretty bad. Was she prosecuted because of the content purely, or was there some angle regarding distribution and the fact that she sold memberships to the site?

I'm just wondering what exact law the government believes she violated.

It doesn't matter what the content is.

She wrote fiction. Fiction is supposed to be protected as creative design.

Edited August 11, 2008 by pendora

[Yahveh]

Yeah, I don't know about this. Of course I don't know all of the details, but from what I see there isn't really stopping her from writing stories. This attorney, Mary Beth Buchanan, sounds to me like a fundamentalist on a power trip to me. Never a good thing.

[GothicRainbow]

At first, I thought "Freedom of speech gone too far" but then I thought about it...The website stories are probably no different than reading a book on the same subject. People read books on crime all the time.

Edited August 12, 2008 by GothicRainbow

[Korbus]

I cant figure out the crime just from browsing over the story. Did she distribute the material to people who didn't want it? Did they not have a choice as to read it or not? I don't get it.

[eqgumby]

I cant figure out the crime just from browsing over the story. Did she distribute the material to people who didn't want it? Did they not have a choice as to read it or not? I don't get it.

I think it's a "decency" thing. As in, the community sets the standards. It's often used to prevent porn shops from opening up in some areas. I find it hard to figure out how they applied it to the internet.

[girty1600]

Did she use any age verification; if she didn't she should have.

[Radian]

What hypocrites! I just posted this non-sense contrived bull by those West Borough baptist Loons that actually makes the initiative to impose their sick twisted ideals on the public with their pickets and so forth..When they picket their ideas are being thrown out there, there's really not much you can do other than not be a the "funeral" they're picketing etc,. It's freedom of speech they say, and have gotten away with it..

I don't agree with the material she (Fletcher) writes, but how can she be seen as a threat? This material isn't being pushed, nor forced, NOR has her material (that we know of) directly caused any crime... I don't get it. ludicrous.

[Korbus]

What hypocrites! I just posted this non-sense contrived bull by those West Borough baptist Loons that actually makes the initiative to impose their sick twisted ideals on the public with their pickets and so forth..When they picket their ideas are being thrown out there, there's really not much you can do other than not be a the "funeral" they're picketing etc,. It's freedom of speech they say, and have gotten away with it..

I don't agree with the material she (Fletcher) writes, but how can she be seen as a threat? This material isn't being pushed, nor forced, NOR has her material (that we know of) directly caused any crime... I don't get it. ludicrous.

I would honestly prosecute those knuckleheads as harassment or perhaps inciting a riot. I'd probably lose. But yeah, I see what you mean. They are horrible. Best the jurisdiction they protest in keeps them in an area far enough away from the cemetery so that they cannot disrupt the services or instigate any violence. Maybe so far away the family doesnt even see their insanity at all. Honestly, Id spend a night in jail to club one of those neandrathals upside the *** with a Louiville Slugger.

[goalienan]

We can go on the internet and see ten times worse than this, or read it in a book. Unless there's more to the story than what we read, this sounds like a personal vendetta against Fletcher...

[psyche101]

We can go on the internet and see ten times worse than this, or read it in a book. Unless there's more to the story than what we read, this sounds like a personal vendetta against Fletcher...

You can?

Why would anyone want to make things ten times worse than this?

There are things ten time worse than fantasies about molesting and torturing children to death? I am quite sure if you buy a book on this swill your as s will be slammed in jail quicker then you can count to ten, and may not come out, and deservedly.

She will inspire some, no doubt about it. She is selling to a community that we should be drowning, not offering more avenues of entertainment. The ramifications for this "therapy" are too socially dangerous.

I'd punish her. She was molested, she should know better, sick creeps who get turned on by this nefarious material pay full price for full versions

What human slime is she feeding to fatten her bank account?

Therapy is carried out under medical supervision. Not free reign with sicko communities on the Internet.

If even one case of attrocity can be attributed to this book, I hope she, and all the people who advised this "therapy" are held as fully accountable as the perpetrator.

Why is this "therapy" in public domain, why not being studied?

This is a gross misuse of "free speech". Free rights to pen pedophilia, for the general community?

She has problems alright..........

Edited August 18, 2008 by psyche101

[Purplos]

A tiny search found that US anti-pedophile laws extend to 'visual depictions' only, and not written word.

While I seriously question the therapeutic benefits of this, and think it morally reprehensible, I really don't think she did anything illegal.

[Denzanrom]

I actually tried looking for one of those stories she writes. She didn't do anything illegal but dear god what a sick mind. She's associating her abuse as a child as a form of erotica. I hope she at least gets proper help this time. However late it may be...

She reminds me of this blogger who was supposedly a victim of pedophilia. She said it was a form of therapy but then started viciously attacking anyone who was suspected of pedophilia and so far as saying that any form of interaction between parent and child was obscene. I left a comment there once and I've never seen anyone with so much venom.

Edited August 20, 2008 by Denzanrom