Wtf? Is this Gallery Pedo-porn? You Tell Me........
 

http://www.vikinggalleries.com/patty...Pichunter.html

I had to rub my eyes a few times.............looks like CP to me or am I out to lunch?

Im not even clicking that fucking link :321GFY

Regards,

Lee

First off......You clearly don't know WTF is CP and what is not.

Secondly....If it was potential CP...WTF are you doing posting a link to it here?

click thru to the site before posting

Looks legal to me. Based on the size of her breasts, the wrinkles under her eyes and the texture of her skin, I'd say she's at least 20-22. I've also seen this content posted here before.

Because its on a major TGP, thats why.........I am amazed it got listed........those girls don't like of age.

I'm not sure if it was the 2257 info or the billing though a major US processor that gave away the truth to me.

you must be new
this is what they do, pigtails on younglooking girls which sells
welcome to the internet

Are you new to the Internet or something?

Thank you for your professional opinion.

BTW.....There is no nothing pornographic of that girl in that gallery in the first place.

If you THINK it MAY be CP, report it toASACP, not GFY!

She looks very much of age to me. She does have a baby face but if you look closely she doesn't look young at all. Christine Young looks younger than this girl. So does Little April.

hi biskoppen :glugglug

get fucking real, bringer.........who are you trying to kid.........those girls on that gallery look younger than your "average" teen gallery, by far..........don't play fast and loose........they may in fact be of age but my fucking point, if you can read, is that they don't appear of age.........the one girl looks younger than my niece you asshole

Totally legit, the site just looks a bit crappy tho.

http://www.littleapril.com/tour.html

btw, its all the same girl in that gallery

I wanted some more opinions..............its obvious that their bodies are developed but those very young looking faces threw me..........far moreso than a typical teen gallery

Well now....That holds merit. :thumbsup

If your niece is 32.....She is almost certainly younger than your niece.

are you trying to say those girls look as old as april? gimme a fucking break dude

I'd hit it :glugglug

:1orglaugh

http://web.archive.org/web/200108050...akeonline.com/

i doubt she was 18 in 2001 :321GFY

well i hate 2 admit it but.....

I agree
And
I AGREE.

Bringer knows the teen TGP area, who cares about young looking / appearing young ?

Pedo porn wtf???

That girl passed 18 long time ago and 2nd wheres the fucking porn?? Shes non nude!

People should think before posting.

Ya me too...after checking 2 peices of ID

pfftttt

what im saying is they do everything in their power to make them look as young as possible
havent you seen young looking girls with braces and pigtails in kid beds surrounded by teddybears?

I must agree again:Graucho

email and ask, claim you want to promote her site but are worried

Ugh i have to quote this one more time...CP, do you have a clue what CP is?

Battus, as much as I've agreed with other posts of yours, I think legally this is porn.........these girls are touching themselves thru their panties in for eg, pic 11 and 12.

My point is these girls may be of age, yes, but man, this is pushing the envelope too far and I can see this stuff agitating the DOJ into the 2257 bullshit we are now all subjected to. I don't agree with the DOJ, I hate the DOJ, but they use content like this as an excuse to slam us all........

Bah, shes 20 if shes a day

How old does this model look to you?

http://www.bannerbabe.com/jenny.jpg

She's 20.

My point is, just because a model has a young looking face doesn't mean she is young.

I honestly dont see anything wrong with this site. Nothing. The girl doesnt even look underaged to me.

You work in a business where you have no problems with a girl who turned 18 yesterday and now participates in a 10 guy anal gangbang but a 18+ year old girl in clothes you call offensive?

Not saying its offensive..........that gallery just caught me off guard because they are so young looking........moreso than per usual.......on that point most can agree...........my point is the draconian repubs at the DOJ use this stuff as an excuse to come after us all

But a double anal and triple facial is perfectly fine right.

2001

http://web.archive.org/web/200108050...akeonline.com/

(non nude)

Seems they all didn't see much teen stuff before.Just look at their tits, they tell you that they're 18+ , a babyface can't fool me.

Child = 12 or less
Real teen = 13-17
Teens sites = 18-20 something where the models appear to be max 15 or 16 so far away from CP.

to me, those girls on the above link look older than the gallery link originally posted..........

What girlS are you talking about? It's the same girl. It's a single model site. The pictures on that link are her in 2001. The blonde and the brunette are the same girl, just with different hair colors.

you keep saying those "girls" but the fact is, every picture on that site and in that gallery you posted is infact the SAME person.

She's just chubby . I wouldn't be surprised if she would be 25

Ex fucking actly

Don't forget to photocopy the IDs.

what he said

I know those guys well and they are stand up guys. vikingsgalleries guys are top notch

hehe, just saw this thread now... the gallery is mine, and NO, we would never touch CP - ever!

Dudes, the game with these sites are getting them look as young as possible. But it's all girls above 18..

Call it sick .. but it's still just the teen niche..

I agree that this Patty Cake is trying to look younger than 18 - but it isn't illegal - and if it was - we would NEVER touch it

But thanks for posting! - people posting CP should be nailed - all of them!

You sir are a dumbass.

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

In compliance with United States Code, Title 18, Section 2257, all models, actors, actresses and other persons who appear in any visual depiction of sexually explicit conduct appearing or otherwise contained in or at PattycakeOnline.com were over the age of eighteen years at the time of the creation of such depictions.

Records required to be maintained pursuant to U.S.C. Title 18, Section 2257 are kept by the custodian of records at:

PCM
PO Box 726
Forence, KY 41022
[email protected]

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

That not the appearance would make me suspicious and not promote them.

Had it actually been child porn you would have been banned from here. Never ever post suspected CP anywhere publicly, not even to "get opinions". It is a crime and anyone can report you for spreading child porn. Even though your intentions may be to help law enforcement doesn't look at it that way. :2 cents: