Austin Wolf has been busted

[BootmanLA]

I would like to point out one thing, NOT in defense of this guy at all, but to clarify: I don't see in any of the indictment or in the news reports surrounding it that there are any images or videos of Wolf himself having sex with anyone underaged. Rather, he's charged with possession of and distribution of child pornography. It may well be - or not - that he's never actually molested someone underaged, even if he's been willing to receive and send pornography of others doing exactly that (which, of course, is illegal).

So, for the sake of argument: it's possible that his own partners have always been of legal age to consent, even if he prefers them as close to that age as possible. I'm not saying this is likely (or unlikely), but there have not been any official indications of his personally being IN any of the porn he was receiving or sending. Those details could, of course, come out later, and even if they don't, it's possible such images/video do exist. But we don't, technically, KNOW that he's in any of them. 

[Sfmike64]

40 minutes ago, BootmanLA said:

I would like to point out one thing, NOT in defense of this guy at all, but to clarify: I don't see in any of the indictment or in the news reports surrounding it that there are any images or videos of Wolf himself having sex with anyone underaged. Rather, he's charged with possession of and distribution of child pornography. It may well be - or not - that he's never actually molested someone underaged, even if he's been willing to receive and send pornography of others doing exactly that (which, of course, is illegal).

So, for the sake of argument: it's possible that his own partners have always been of legal age to consent, even if he prefers them as close to that age as possible. I'm not saying this is likely (or unlikely), but there have not been any official indications of his personally being IN any of the porn he was receiving or sending. Those details could, of course, come out later, and even if they don't, it's possible such images/video do exist. But we don't, technically, KNOW that he's in any of them. 

Sorry, but that ABSOLUTELY does not matter. Owning the images creates demand for them which means more kids get abused.  So it's utterly irrelevant if he did it himself. Owning the images is, itself, a crime and should be.

And it's not "child pornography." It's CSAM: Child Sex Abuse Material. 

[BootmanLA]

5 hours ago, Sfmike64 said:

Sorry, but that ABSOLUTELY does not matter. Owning the images creates demand for them which means more kids get abused.  So it's utterly irrelevant if he did it himself. Owning the images is, itself, a crime and should be.

And it's not "child pornography." It's CSAM: Child Sex Abuse Material. 

As I said: it's not meant to defend him at all. But we should be clear we're condemning him for what he actually did and not what some people might IMAGINE he did in addition. I'm all for condemning Donald Trump for attempting to overturn a fair election, but I'm not going to condemn him for, say, murdering his first ex-wife (absent credible evidence that he did that).

I never said - and please do not pretend that I did - that owning the images should not be a crime. 

[Poz50something]

11 hours ago, Sfmike64 said:

And it's not "child pornography." It's CSAM: Child Sex Abuse Material. 

There was a report in the Bangkok Post of a 21 year old in some rural part of Thailand who set up some Internet group where he would share vids of him raping his relative’s 10 and six year old boys.  He was subject to a sting operation, and was arrested on the way to delivering one of the children to a  ‘customer’, in other words, a child abuser. This has real-world consequences. 

[50latinos]

On 6/28/2024 at 1:58 PM, ejaculaTe said:

The word "toast" accurately describes Wolf's future condition. (For the law nerds in the audience, based on the description given by NBC New York, the offense level is 40 (base offense level of 22 and 18 more points due to circumstances of offense. Even with a criminal history category of I, the Guidelines range is 292-365 months. The statutory maximum is 20 years (240 months), the most he can get, notwithstanding the Guidelines range.) 

If he gets convicted he can run for president as a republican. We know that he already complies with the requisite of racism. The dude is on his way . . . 

[ellentonboy]

Interesting how any video company that have  worked with him are trying quickly to erase any evidence of his past performances.

Men.com in particular putting out a statement saying they were horrified, yet less than a week prior he was attending a Men.com gathering which basically promotes the videos that he has appeared in.

But if you look at some of his recent posts, the writing is on the wall.  The one that I saw (it was a screen shot, not the actual footage) he's in a shower,  fucking  a guy who is probably 1/3 his size in mass, and though you can't see his face, he appears to be in his early 20s, or at least I hope so.

This  monster  has the nerve to say in his tweet, "see what happens to guys who don't......." well, you can figure out the rest.

Here's my question, no one close to him knew anything about his preferences?  Granted you don't tell your secrets to everyone, especially something like this, but I'm scratching my head at the thought that NO ONE close to him had a clue he was into young boys.  Sure, we tell people if we are tops or bottoms, and maybe somethings that aren't exactly subjects you would talk to your family members about.  But there has to be SOMEONE out there who knew what he up to.

I noticed the US Attorney's Office is asking for people to come forward who may have information regarding his past behavior.  Another twist, he was denied bail.  I don't know if that is common is cases like this, from what I am reading he is facing up to 30 years.  But I wonder why people who have been charged with manslaughter or other crimes where people died are granted bail.  It's checked off, he is a "Flight RisK", so that is their reasoning for not allowing bail.  I don't believe he has his next court date until the end of July, I imagine he is at Riker's (Sp?) Island, I wonder how long it will take for people to know what he's been charged with.  I have a feeling he is going to have a very tough time in jail.

[partying.hard]

Lort knows, I have my own kinks and fetishes.  I get it-most of society would think I’m a ultraperv.

BUT LEAVE THE KIDS ALONE!  🤬

[BootmanLA]

16 minutes ago, ellentonboy said:

But I wonder why people who have been charged with manslaughter or other crimes where people died are granted bail.  It's checked off, he is a "Flight RisK", so that is their reasoning for not allowing bail.  

Bail is supposed, in theory, to simply be a guarantee that if you're released, you will show up for trial. That's why the constitution bars excessive bail; they're not supposed to set bail any higher than is necessary to ensure presence for trial (because you forfeit the bail if you don't show).

People charged with manslaughter or negligent homicide typically didn't set out to kill anyone (if they had, the charge would be murder in the first or second degree, typically; the exact differences don't matter for this purpose). At least much of the time, they're horrified themselves by what happened, even if they intend to mount a vigorous defense. They're typically not flight risks - and in many of those cases, a cooperative (and white, middle-class) defendant can plead down to something that ends up being a few years behind bars and supervised release. 

People who send/receive child porn, by contrast, pretty much have "intent" nailed down tight. The sentences are stiff, the evidence is usually solid, even overwhelming, and there's a huge incentive for people to flee rather than stand trial. So bail, if it's even granted, tends to be very high; passports have to be surrendered, there's often an ankle monitor involved, etc. Just as often, or more so, bail is simply denied if the person has overseas assets and/or contacts, as this guy almost certainly does.

On the flip side, people who themselves have molested children tend not to fare well in prison. Even those who "only" sent/received images or video of those things often don't, either - the prisoner environment doesn't necessarily distinguish details like that. So he's possibly being held in a unit isolated from the general population of people awaiting trial.

[deepnrawnyc]

I thought (could be wrong) they separated the gays from the general population in prison.  

[BlueSaphir]

This news make me sad still 

[PrisonbaiT]

20 hours ago, BootmanLA said:

I would like to point out one thing, NOT in defense of this guy at all, but to clarify: I don't see in any of the indictment or in the news reports surrounding it that there are any images or videos of Wolf himself having sex with anyone underaged. Rather, he's charged with possession of and distribution of child pornography. It may well be - or not - that he's never actually molested someone underaged, even if he's been willing to receive and send pornography of others doing exactly that (which, of course, is illegal).

So, for the sake of argument: it's possible that his own partners have always been of legal age to consent, even if he prefers them as close to that age as possible. I'm not saying this is likely (or unlikely), but there have not been any official indications of his personally being IN any of the porn he was receiving or sending. Those details could, of course, come out later, and even if they don't, it's possible such images/video do exist. But we don't, technically, KNOW that he's in any of them. 

If you distribute child pornography, it is as bad as performing it yourself, why would you expose victims of sexuall abuse to others??? These victims are branded for life, and they have no say in whom sees these images, willing it or not.  I assume most victims do not even know they are filmed in their hardship.  There is no excuse for this.

[ejaculaTe]

8 hours ago, ellentonboy said:

I imagine he is at Riker's (Sp?) Island,

More likely at the (federal) Metropolitan Detention Center - Brooklyn.

[abm0011]

10 hours ago, ejaculaTe said:

More likely at the (federal) Metropolitan Detention Center - Brooklyn.

That is correct. This is a federal case.

[brnbk]

On 7/1/2024 at 4:04 AM, BootmanLA said:

As I said: it's not meant to defend him at all. But we should be clear we're condemning him for what he actually did and not what some people might IMAGINE he did in addition. 

I want to add, that it does seem most people seem to have made up his mind that the accused, Austin Wolf IS guilty. I would recommend, waiting for more details & facts in the case to show up, before making up one's mind. For all that it is worth, here are facts of the case that seem odd to me.

• I noticed something from the news articles and indictment   that only one SD Card was found as evidence. People who are of such a temperament( pedophilles) are usually quite driven in their (criminal) pursuit and tend to make a fair bit of mistakes, i.e. have images all over their PC, and other places where they could easily get caught as they are quite driven by this illegal pursuit — which doesn't seem to be the case with Austin. 
• Also this one SD card was apparently found in late April, why is this making to the news 2 months later. that seems like an awful lot of time by the concerned authorities  to allow the criminal to carry on with his alleged criminal tendencies. Could it be that he was/is being blackmailed by someone who planted this evidence against him for any number of reasons including, revenge, jilted lover, co-porn star rivalry, porn industry hatred etc. 
• Since the police has been on this case for at least 2 months more, how is it that they haven't found anymore evidence. Seems odd. if this guy was truly a pedophille as is alleged, he definitely would be back trying to look for such material and would actually have a pattern of such behavior. 
• Based on the media report from gay times, Austin received hundreds of  images from a guy called 'TT User 1' who he had also met in person. Is is truly possible that someone would receive hundreds of images from someone online but not when they meet in person? Thus, does this SD card belong to Austin or this other gentleman who seems to be rather close to Austin, given that he not only knows Austin's  travel plans but also where he lives, but also what is on his computer!
• Who is this TTUser1: a jilted lover, a crazy guy who wants to frame Austin because he cannot have him fully? What is the age of this "guy" who sent these images to Austin. Is Austin the guilty party here or this other gentleman, whom the FBI was investigating in the first place. Why are details about this other guy, TTUser1, not being released by the police since he clearly committed a crime — the real crime — by sending Austin illegal material. Anyone can send anyone illegal material, if you are online. 
• Are the powers that be in the United States trying to "punish" a gay porn star who likes younger men, because of a mistaken belief that men(and women) become gay because they are introduced to that lifestyle (called propaganda in Russian terminology) by adults. Thus a younger individual chooses the gay lifestyle not because he wants to have gay sex but because an adult influences him into it. Is Austin facing prejudice because he is seen as a gay Influencer: someone who influences younger men into pursing the gay lifestyle/option.?

Austin Wolf definitely seemed to like younger thinner men. anywhere between 18 to 22 or 25 I would say. We all have our preferences and men who prefer younger men should not be villainized. 

Pedophilias is one of the worst crimes that exists; however, falsely convicting an innocent man of it, is an equally heinous crime. The case against Austin Wolf should be thoroughly investigated so that no prejudice against him, is allowed to influence the verdict and truth of the case. 

=================================================================================================

[think before following links] [think before following links] https://www.pride.com/gay-news/austin-wolfs-arrest-industry-reacts#rebelltitem5

[think before following links] [think before following links] https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/pr/adult-film-actor-justin-heath-smith-aka-austin-wolf-charged-distribution-child

[think before following links] [think before following links] https://www.gaytimes.com/life/porn-star-austin-wolf-arrested-and-charged-with-distributing-child-sex-abuse-material/

Edited Tuesday at 02:35 PM by brnbk

[BootmanLA]

5 hours ago, brnbk said:

• I noticed something from the news articles and indictment   that only one SD Card was found as evidence. People who are of such a temperament( pedophilles) are usually quite driven in their (criminal) pursuit and tend to make a fair bit of mistakes, i.e. have images all over their PC, and other places where they could easily get caught as they are quite driven by this illegal pursuit — which doesn't seem to be the case with Austin. 

But Austin was/is a producer of porn himself, and undoubtedly knew the laws involved, especially as proprietor of his OF/JFF knockoff "4MyFans". It's reasonable to assume he would be more careful than the average user, and one thing I'd do, in his shoes, is keep all such files on a single physical device that's easy to conceal and/or destroy as needed. 

5 hours ago, brnbk said:

• Also this one SD card was apparently found in late April, why is this making to the news 2 months later. that seems like an awful lot of time by the concerned authorities  to allow the criminal to carry on with his alleged criminal tendencies.

This one isn't all that unusual necessarily. The feds undoubtedly seized a lot more electronic devices in the April search, and it would take time to go through all of them forensically to determine what they have. In addition, let's say he had a computer (laptop, desktop, whatever) that had some of his business documents/accounting on - the FBI would have to let a separate "taint team" go through everything to ensure that nothing privileged (such as communications with his attorneys over business, etc.) got to the prosecution team - who only has a warrant for certain things, remember. It's only after they finish that analysis that they can actually issue the arrest warrant (because they want it to be air tight).

As for allowing him to continue: My assumption is that anyone who just got busted for child porn and had all his devices seized is highly unlikely to go out and buy a new computer to start up trading again, especially since he knows they're watching him.

5 hours ago, brnbk said:

• Since the police has been on this case for at least 2 months more, how is it that they haven't found anymore evidence. Seems odd. if this guy was truly a pedophille as is alleged, he definitely would be back trying to look for such material and would actually have a pattern of such behavior.

Again, maybe not. Having the FBI seize all your shit can be a powerful motivation to not keep fucking up.

5 hours ago, brnbk said:

• Based on the media report from gay times, Austin received hundreds of  images from a guy called 'TT User 1' who he had also met in person. Is is truly possible that someone would receive hundreds of images from someone online but not when they meet in person? Thus, does this SD card belong to Austin or this other gentleman who seems to be rather close to Austin, given that he not only knows Austin's  travel plans but also where he lives, but also what is on his computer!

"TT User 1" is how the complaint (the FBI document seeking the arrest warrant) refers to "Target Telegram User 1" - the guy who was already an FBI target in a child porn investigation. TT User 1's phone was seized at the time he was being investigated (just as Wolf's devices were, in his investigation), and the FBI found a Telegram chat log on the phone with another person, whom they determined to be Wolf. That conversation log contained lots of videos and images the two had exchanged (the CP kind). TT User 1 apparently agreed to cooperate, to some degree, with the FBI in investigating Wolf.

So there's evidence beyond the SD card - on the phone of the guy they had arrested first. And yes, it's quite possible someone would NOT want to be out in public with child porn on a disk or drive or SD card or whatever. While obviously it's not necessarily safe from a search warrant and a determined FBI team, it's a lot easier to keep that kind of thing secret in your own home than to risk carrying it out in public.

The FBI then (with TTU1's permission) used TTU1's Telegram account to communicate with Wolf, eliciting comments that helped confirm Wolf was the user. At the raid, they seized Wolf's phone, and confirmed that the contact on TTU1's Telegram account was, in fact, Wolf's phone.

So there's a LOT of evidence beyond that one SD card. The reason they focus on it is that it proves POSSESSION of the CP (which he's charged with), in addition to the evidence that he SENT CP material (via Telegram) which they can show by the connection between the two Telegram accountsl.

5 hours ago, brnbk said:

• Who is this TTUser1: a jilted lover, a crazy guy who wants to frame Austin because he cannot have him fully? What is the age of this "guy" who sent these images to Austin. Is Austin the guilty party here or this other gentleman, whom the FBI was investigating in the first place. Why are details about this other guy, TTUser1, not being released by the police since he clearly committed a crime — the real crime — by sending Austin illegal material. Anyone can send anyone illegal material, if you are online. 

He has not been identified yet, but I suspect he will be. That's standard for cooperating witnesses. He may get a lesser sentence for his cooperation, but it won't be short. His age will presumably come out about the same time. As for your "real crime" idea - well, the Telegram account shows BOTH parties sending AND receiving such material between themselves, or so the criminal complaint form says. The line in the news about a 10-year old being tied up and raped by adults in one video? That's a video WOLF sent to TTU1, not the other way around.

If he did what he's accused of, then it doesn't matter whether TTU1 was a jilted lover or not (though I'm leaning towards not). 

Here's the criminal complaint, which was easy to find online:

[think before following links] https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/media/1358681/dl