It would be nice if you'd take a few deep breaths before you write, Jorge. It can be hard to figure out if there's even anything to respond to when you rant this loudly.
The question "what laws did he break" was neither dumb nor rhetorical. You acted like you knew something so I asked you.
When you constantly point to my attempts to justify Witkins behavior, you're setting up a paper man to knock down. I never once defended Witkin's behavior. Unfortunately, in order to see this, you would have to read what I wrote, which doesn't seem to be your style. At any rate, I'm not sure why you're commenting on my arguments that you haven't read.
I've actually been interested in hearing what your arguments are... when I tried to understand your position you just said I didn't get it, and you refused to elaborate.
But one general point seems to be that you feel the esthetic judgements of a work must be dependent upon ethical judgements made on the artist or his working methods. Do you believe this? if you do, I'm very curious to hear you defend it. You may not realize this, but that is a radical position. Which isn't to say that It couldn't be defended, but I'd be very curious to hear someone do it, and to find out what such logic could be based on.
For whatever it's worth, constantly repeating words like "crap", "ridiculous," and "idiot" doesn't actually strengthen anyone's case.