Alexander Kieths dude

[crazedcanuck]

He got his major start when he took over hosting Colin Mocherie's old vehicle "Supertown Challenge" in 1999, a local cable game show produced by Steve Smith of Red Green fame.

I used to work the set on that show, and played football with Rob and a few of the other improv actors in between shoots

He had to be the nicest, down to earth guy, so this is quite a shock.. especially after seeing the women he used to run with.

You just never know I guess.

(funny, you don't hear about his Bank of MOntreal commercials that were running as late as last week)

 

[Boo]

Beer actor facing child porn charges
Feb. 15, 2006. 07:37 PM
FROM CANADIAN PRESS

The plug has been pulled on a beer advertising campaign featuring an over-the-top Scotsman after police laid child pornography charges on a Toronto commercial actor.

Robert Norman Smith, 40, is charged with two counts of possession of child pornography and one count of making available child pornography.

It is believed that Smith is the actor best known as the angry Scotsman in the Alexander Keith's beer commercials.

The brewer pledged late Wednesday to terminate any further association with him.

"We are surprised to learn of these charges today," the company said in a statement.

"Clearly, we have decided not to run any future television commercials featuring this actor until this information is confirmed."

Authorities said Smith was the subject of an undercover police investigation.

They searched a Toronto home as part of a probe that involved people who were allegedly downloading child pornography from the Internet.

Smith has been released on $25,000 bail and is due back in court on Thursday.

 

[lobo]

Yeah I was pretty shocked when I saw this on the news tonight. So question, when police charge you with downloading and sharing child porn, are we talking about the real sick stuff or could he have been nabbed for downloading and sharing all kinds of "barely legal" pics? Wouldn't girls just under the age of 18 also be considered child porn?

Lobo

 

[DJ 6 String]

that guy is a cockbag

 

[veteze]

i hated those ads anyway.

 

[HouseHeadSacha]

on the brighter side of things, atleast we wont have to see that asshole and the most annoying commercials ever again.

 

[ndrwrld]

pictures and videos of children under 16 is considered kiddy porn.
the above, involving children who havent seen their 2nd birthday, should involve public castration, and a 5 minute stoning, from the family of the child.

 

[zoo]

it must be pretty serious if they're dragging him out into the public like this

 

[D1Willow]

There was a thread last week about the legal age for sexual consent in Canada being 14, and kid porn is 18, this alone should mean the legal age be 18. Somehow I can't understand being charged for looking at pictures but it being alright to actualy have sex with kids!
Sorry, got a litttle serious there

 

[ndrwrld]

Canadas sex laws, involving children are a fucking joke, and an embarrassment to Canada, world wide.
pedophiles can waltz into Canada, and prey on 14 year olds, where in another country, they'd be hung, or castrated, or stoned to death in public.
its happening ALOT MORE in Canada now...and our government is doing nothing about it.

 

[shortbus]

AIE HE LIKES THE KIDDIE PORRRRRRRRRRRRRRRNNN

 

[chloe69]

I doubt pictures of 14 year olds constitutes kiddie porn. Dont they have to be having sex with someone? What about baby formula ads?

 

[Ditto Much]

Originally posted by Boo

Robert Norman Smith, 40, is charged with two counts of possession of child pornography and one count of making available child pornography.

Alright wait a second for the voice of reason here. The man was in possesion of two peaces of what might be child porn and may have tried to lend one out.

If you own ANY of the original Tracy Lord's porn movies your guilty of possession of child pornography. If you own a copy of an original Tracy Lord's porno and lent it to your friend your guilty of 1 count of possession and one count of making availible. If you own two of her films and lend one to a friend technically your guilty of the EXACT same thing.

Is this like Paul Rubin (Pee Wee Hermen) who got busted and served time for owning a collection of old gay erotica that contained a single picture of a person believed to be underaged.

Hell to be guilty of possession of child porn technically this could be an issue of him having a couple of pictures on his computer. I've had more than one picture sent to me over the years (like the stripper from western) where amateur photos showed obvious nudity and had no evidance to suggest the age of the person in the act.


I hate these commercials and I hate this ass but this sounds like a VERY minor charge.

 

[Gizmo]

Originally posted by Ditto Much
Alright wait a second for the voice of reason here. The man was in possesion of two peaces of what might be child porn and may have tried to lend one out.

Police allege that they've found over a thousand electronic files during their investigation with some of the images involving children as young as a year old.

the charges are related to the times he's tried to obtain more or allegedly distribute them, has nothing to do with the amount of files on his comp.

The over a thousand figure is related to the entire investigation. It might have been a databank they were all viewing or something.

 

[salad]

Originally posted by Gizmo
It might have been a databank they were all viewing or something.

More like a spankbank.

 

[Incrimin8]

I heard on the radio that 'Labatt' was pulling the 'Kieths' ads...I didn't know Labatt owned Kieths.

 

[marcinm]

but was it young kids or girls who were just about to turn 18?

is there a difference in how they prosecute that sort of thing?

 

[DJ 6 String]

i just dont understand why someone would take the chance of downloading kiddie porn - i mean we see it all the time where someone gets busted all over the news - how embarrassing....

 

[sam]

Originally posted by Incrimin8
I heard on the radio that 'Labatt' was pulling the 'Kieths' ads...I didn't know Labatt owned Kieths.

Yep....it's one of their "regional" brands.

 

[Ditto Much]

Originally posted by marcinm
but was it young kids or girls who were just about to turn 18?

is there a difference in how they prosecute that sort of thing?

See thats the thing, if he had a collection of 8 year olds getting raped I have no issue with hanging the fuck. If he had a copy of a tracy lord's porno (none of them are legal) I have a different feeling on this.

I keep getting the feeling that the new McCarthy'ism is child porn.

 

[HMP]

Originally posted by Ditto Much
See thats the thing, if he had a collection of 8 year olds getting raped I have no issue with hanging the fuck. If he had a copy of a tracy lord's porno (none of them are legal) I have a different feeling on this.

I keep getting the feeling that the new McCarthy'ism is child porn.

they found 200 files on his computer (toronto sun), depicting graphic sex with children as young as 12 months.

and he's being processed in court through legal channels for contributing to the exploitation of children as sexual objects; not unilaterally being accused without a fair trial for his politics.

I find your comparison to be ham-fisted.

 

[VinylRach]

this chick at my work is totally tripping out. she was his mortgage broker in Forest Hill

 

[Rude1_247]

Originally posted by Ditto Much

I keep getting the feeling that the new McCarthy'ism is child porn.

what?

 

[coleridge]

Originally posted by marcinm
but was it young kids or girls who were just about to turn 18?

is there a difference in how they prosecute that sort of thing?

What I've read in the past is that it's a judgement call on the courts behalf as to whether the person in the picture is a child or not. As such the pictures have to obviously be children for them to be considered child porn. If the identity of the person in the picture isn't known and it's possible the person could be of age then the picture isn't considered child porn. After a collection of child porn is seized every picture and video has to be reviewed and catalogued (a big issue with the Canadian court system being so slow in prosecuting these crimes).

However, when the cops make the arrest they will announce that it's child porn before they've reviewed all the drawings. That's why these guys with only pictures of unknown teenagers will ultimately have the charges dropped. Their reuptation in the community will be destroyed though.

 

[littlejon]

more ham please, but hold the kiddy porn.



i believe there is some leniency within the prosecution of the law for images of 'barely legal' youth, but that would depend on the po-lice, judge and legal system.

my understanding is that if pubic hair is visible you are not in for the same level of shit as with a baldie, but you are still fucked and your life is in the toilet.

farewell life, wife and job, good luck in jail.
plus you will never see your niece + nephews again.