موقع جذاب

http://www.jzaab.com

يـرحـــب بـــكمــ جميعـــاً

ويفتح لكم الباب للمشاركة معناا

فــأهــلاً بكم ....

موقع جذاب

http://feeds.feedburner.com/jzaab_articles

Yiff in hell! ...oh wait.
In all seriousness this just comes to show how obscene the very idea of an 'obscenity trial' is if a lot of people secretly (incl. apparently the judges) don't mind any of this while others simply prefer not to be exposed.

"concerned citizens" (or whoever came up with the idea of obscenity trials) should get laid more often.

Just perhaps the judge involved had been downloading this stuff to get an idea of what was available, to better inform himself about the case he was overseeing. Just a thought.

Only 2 examples of the Judge's so-called "bestiality" pics are cited in this article, and one of them is described as women painted like cows, apparently containing neither sexually explicit behavior nor any actual animals. I fail to see how this even remotely qualifies as bestiality. The other example is also vague, mentioning that the guy is "partially" naked and that he is "cavorting", which is about as ambiguous as you can get. If there were something more explicit to report, I'm sure the Inquirer would report it. So, if these are the most blatant examples of "bestiality" that they can come up with, I see no issue here. Next up, they will describe a photo of a cow being milked using loaded terminology like "touching", and "titillating".

Who cares, the judge's sexual preferences are nobody's business but his own.

He is appointed and can be removed....

IF he does have such imagery on his hard drive would have a clear conflict of interest and should be removed from the case.

If he refuses to resign from the case he should be deposed of his office, as his appointment is for a term of good conduct.;

Do not be afraid, after we have cleared God out of the "civilized world" everything is permitted. You only need time and the communiry will change it's attitude to accept your perversions.