Kevin Strom (In Defense)

[Rounder]

Did yaw'll read this editorial in the Charlottsville (VA) Times ?? It pretty much exonerates Kevin Strom.

Kevin wasn't found guilty of shit. He pleaded guilty to one count of possession of child pornography, because the alternative to a guilty plea was a strong probability he'd have been found guilty of one or more of the other charges piled against him, for the sole reason he's a high profile white "supremacist" and a highly successful exposer of the jewish menace.

Had he not pleaded guilty to one count, he'd have served 10 years or more, in a nigger infested prison, and as a convicted child sex offender, at that.

Furthermore, get this: You are guilty of possession of child pornography on your computer, even if you don't know it's there. That's the freakin law, according to the Charlottsville editorial.

Who among you wouldn't have done exactly what Kevin did ??

This clearly means that any, and all of us, are vulnerable to exactly what Kevin faced.

NOTE: I admit I'm no great authority on this case. I never developed a strong interest because I'd never met Kevin, and I always figured he was just another cyber space WN intellectual.

Now this from The Charlottsville Times:




"The Kevin Alfred Strom Case
Posted by Editor in Opinion on 09 2nd, 2010

Kevin Alfred Strom (pictured) — the Charlottesville man who’s accused of being a racist and who pleaded guilty to possession of child pornography in a politically tinged case in which his main accuser was cop-follower/blogger estranged spouse Elisha Strom (herself now convicted of obstruction of justice) — staunchly maintains his innocence. What should the community’s attitude be to him? — Ed.

by D. Peter Maus

I’M GOING TO BE CAUTIOUS about addressing the politics, here, because I often find Kevin Strom’s politics to be uncomfortable, but he’s made a point that’s not altogether out of line. And raises legitimate questions about what actually happened, here.

Convicted upon the facts, perhaps. Convicted on the evidence, perhaps. And the truth is that only Kevin really knows what actually happened when the authorities came calling.

But, child porn is one of today’s hot button issues. Like heroin in the 50′s and cocaine in the 70′s, child porn is one of those issues that generally gets a pass when questions are raised about procedure in law enforcement. But, like heroin and cocaine, child porn has been made very easy to convict on. In fact, one need not even know one is in possession to be convicted. Hidden in clauses of bills like DMCA, are items making the reception, even if unsolicited or unknown, of child porn an actionable, criminal offense.

In that light, it’s very much like heroin and cocaine: Plant an item, try in the press, convict on the evidence.

Especially easy, when the target is politically hot, as is Kevin Strom.

There are few better ways to destroy someone in this culture than to attach their name to something like child porn. And that, alone, should raise questions when it happens to a politically charged citizen. Who benefits from the diminution of a politically charged citizen, unless it is someone who is politically invested?

Consider also, that we no longer accept the completed sentence as ‘payment in full’ for an offense in this society. No longer does the convict get a clean start, and an opportunity to rebuild their life after it’s been leveled by the legal system. No longer does the past get to be the past. Today, we have websites, we have registries, we have notices that there are convicts living among us. None more reviled than the child molester, or the ‘sex offender.’ And they are tarred for all time with that epithet.

Even if they are not actually guilty.

You think that doesn’t happen?

Just an example: Half of the people on death row in Illinois were proven to have been innocent when the evidence could be more coolly and more accurately examined. Let me repeat. Half of the people on death row in Illinois were proven to have been wrongly convicted.

Does anyone think that can’t happen in any other state?

Anyone think that can’t happen with those accused of sex crimes?

ESPECIALLY when there is a politically charged component to someone’s life?

Then consider this: Even the judge in Kevin’s case said the prosecutors were out of line and dismissed the bulk of actions as flimsy abuses of process. He even acknowledged that Federal agents were prosecuting what was, in fact, a local matter. But, Kevin’s politics stabbed at the heart of the Federal Government. If that’s not a coincidence, it needs to be proven.

And the single count upon which he was convicted was based on a confession extorted against threats of the horrors of a life in a federal prison as a sex crime convict.

Consider also, that he has sole custody of his children. Something a judge would not permit were he actually believed guilty of a sex crime.

And he has ready access to Internet traffic. Something that also would not be permitted, were he believed to be guilty.

These things must be considered when evaluating the conviction against Kevin’s rebuttal. But, as a culture, we don’t. Because ‘child porn’ is attached to the matter.

The entire Constitution of the United States was written by men with an innate distrust of the power of government, and the fear of the abuses of men overwhelmed by power. They specifically prohibited the creation of propaganda organs of government to bamboozle the public with false witness, and guaranteed a free press to protect themselves from such an abomination. (Which we have since voluntarily abrogated, apparently.) They were men who’d experienced first hand the horrors of power. And they created a legal system designed to protect the innocent, and protect the falsely accused, by remaining institutionally skeptical, and questioning everything said about someone, putting in place safeguards to protect the human rights of the accused against legal abuses, and allowing for the true recovery of one’s life after conviction. So that once sentence is served, the prosecution ends. Unless provoked by a next offense.

We’ve gotten away from all of that. We try in the press. The government forms alliances with media (Google has an office in the White House, for Christ’s sake). We empower one class against the other. (In Florida, a man is automatically removed from his home on charges of spousal abuse, even if the accusation is made anonymously by phone from out of state by someone who’s never met either party. Conviction is also nearly automatic. And this is becoming the standard across the States.) We persecute at whim. We prosecute for unpopularity of language. We erase protections from abuse, and presumptions of innocence. We register released offenders. And we persecute in perpetuity.

And we do it without the skepticism that the Founding Fathers specifically codified into the structure of the Nation. The skepticism that ensures the protection of the rights of the accused. The skepticism that ensures the pursuit of the absolute truth.

That, alone, should raise questions that deserve answers about every conviction, every accusation, every interview of a citizen whose politics stand in opposition to the Government.

It is our right to dissent. Guaranteed by the Constitution. It is our right to oppose. It’s how we keep the government honest. To limit the power of what Paine termed ‘a necessary evil.’

And, yet….

Again, Kevin, alone, knows what the truth really is. But in the case of one so politically charged, we should all be skeptical of what is said about him. It may, indeed be true. But in a case where politics figure so prominently in the irregular pursuit of citizen, we must remain skeptical.

[M. Gerard]

1.

Again, Kevin, alone, knows what the truth really is.

2. Calling him "Kevin" is rather odd.

[Nate Richards]

I remember the case being pretty iffy. Accused of having photoshopped Gaede girls' faces on adult nudes, right? I didn't like him before that, just didn't like the guy's voice being used on ADV. I know it's superficial but it matters in mass media. Pierce sounded like stern, angry grandfather, and it fit the message. Strom sounded creepy-smooth.

Anyway, guilty or not he should understand that he's useful to the enemy now and not be trying to get involved publicly.

I still don't even know who Will Williams is, beyond his name coming up whenver Covington's is mentioned.

[Bardamu]

Strom was railroaded. That's clear enough. Strange though that an MSM organ would take up his cause.

[cillian]

[SA Mann]

Would you really want to belong to an organization that someone like Mr. Strom is your group's leader? Down through the years many members of groups (myself included) turned a blind eye to womanizing and someone occasionally helping themselves to the receipts or pocketing money from merch sales.

If you are in the leadership of an organization would you invite Mr. Strom and his people to your function? If the "movement" has sunk this low and needs warm bodies, lets call up several former Nazi and Klan leaders that don't need to be named here but were banished for similiar activities that Mr. Strom admits to have engaged in or fantasized about.

Bottom line, Kevin Alfred Strom has done some wonder things for the "movement" in the past. For whatever reason that he finds himself on the PA State Police's Sex Offender Website, that in and of its self disqualifies him to represent himself as a "leader" of any group that seeks to enlist the help of normal White men and women in our titantic struggle. His presence serves as nothing but a distraction and wastes the time of legitimate, dedicated activists that do not have the time to waste answering questions about Mr. Strom.

I personally wish him well and hope that he has gotten the help that he admitted needing. Your work with Dr. Pierce was commendable and may you find peace in your life.

[Rounder]

Originally Posted by cillian

Apparently, you overlooked this part of the Charlottesville Times editorial:

" But, like heroin and cocaine, child porn has been made very easy to convict on. In fact, one need not even know one is in possession to be convicted."(end quote)

FACT: In other words, somebody can plant a few child porn photos inside your computer, and you, yourself, are automatically guilty, by law, of possession of child pornography even though you didn't put it there, and didn't even know it was there. That fact alone, GUARANTEED guilty verdicts in Kevin's case. Consequently, at least 10 years in prison. (Read that again, and let it sink in)

Kevin pleaded guilty to possession of child porn. He admitted he had possession because the child porn was on his computer. But he has always maintained he didn't know it was there, and that his vindictive, vengeful wife put it there just to spite him.

If you were an active and successful international WN leader charged and put on trial by the JOG, wouldn't you have signed that scrap of paper in order to get released almost immediately ?? I think all honest WNs will say "yes".

[Crowe]

No man with any honor is going to plead guilty to possessing child pornography if the accusations are total bullshit, and the evidence was planted.