What does MN think of how this turned out? (TW)

[PhantomSmoke]

We had an ordinary marriage. Then I found out my husband had been viewing images of child abuse

I’m a bit shocked, tbh…

This is what I don't get. You either believe that he is a poor addict who stumbled upon the images by mistake and he's not attracted to children and would NEVER do it again or you don't.

Agree. He was caught this occasion four years after he accessed that particular site because that’s when it was closed down… wonder how many other sites he accessed that are yet to be closed down?

I also wouldn't be surprised if he’s arrested again. He describes his ‘addiction’ and needing more extreme images to fulfil it so I do not believe he just stumbled across these images and I also don’t believe he never looked at other sites, like he claims.

Unsettling, and an odd choice by the Guardian to publish. A generous interpretation is trying to establish general porn addiction as a gateway to even worse?

Arguably, if we want to intervene, treat, prevent, then we need the understanding shown in this article. Ugh. Not sure I'm ready for that.

What is she thinking? Seemed to be a lot of minimisation, and coping by pretending it's not that bad really, look I even stayed. Everything gambled on treatment leads to cure. Plus the usual dependencies and fear of going it alone. Possibly?

Given the move, name change, and new life of secrecy, I am assuming one of them is a Guardian staffer, or extremely close friends of a staffer, else how else would it come to be published?

Odd. Unsettling. Queasy.

I don't think it matters if he first saw them by accident. I can believe that. But he went back

It’s disgusting, but I think this sort of thing is a lot more common than we’d like to think. The whole “he’s a good man”, “he made a mistake” bullshit, families covering up for bastards like this… Not sure Lucy Faithfull is all that helpful, making them think they can be rehabilitated. Sentencing is far too lenient and it’s easy for the man to carry on with life relatively unburdened by what he’s done.

I think it's very sad and hope this woman finds the clarity and strength to leave her disgusting husband. For her own sake as well as her son's.

He down loaded the dark Web though because he says it was something he heard about on the news, that's something he purposefully did .

The dark web is just using tor browser I've used it. I saw some really weird emails between famous people then my phone went black and never turned on again

I actually can't believe the way they both speak about it. Like it's less grim than stealing a bottle of wine from Tesco?!
I really don't understand how she could bear to be with someone who gets aroused by child abuse? The mind absolutely boggles.
And they seem to want sympathy. Well, they ain't getting it from me!

The article is sickening - portraying themselves as the victims rather than the abused children.

The smallest of paragraphs from him about the actual victims that felt very much like he wrote it because it was expected, as opposed to actually feeling any remorse.

She clearly feels she saved him from suicide by giving him hard truths about their son, he clearly didn't even register that as he talks about not wanting to wreck his Dad's birthday! She is absolutely in denial about what happened. He is bleating about how tough it has been for him, there is no chance of rehabilitation if you can't accept and feel truly remorseful for your actions.

Really notable how little he mentions his wife and son and the massive impact on them by his appalling actions. In contrast to her which shows more guilt in many ways.

I think she will regret it but there you are.

It's very confusing: This isnt pitched as a factual "this shit happens and this is how it happens" article, its more of a human-face-behind-the-paedo angle. I feel the same as everyone else here, but let's examine the Guardian's role in this - WTAF? I mean where to begin - normalising it? Allowing this couple to have a pity party platform?

Sorry I've gone a bit incoherent! I just don't see how the most liberal minded person could think this journalist's presentation of a case of viewing child abuse could be ok.

And the Guardian is complicit in this portrayal.

The guardian seems to embrace everything sexual and this seems another step along the line. It is almost as if his behaviour is just a “kink” which is unfortunately illegal.
A vet near me recently got caught with over 2000 images of child and animal abuse and all he got was a suspended sentence and community service.
The judge said the loss of his business and profession had already been a severe punishment. The vet was near retirement age and very wealthy so that wasn’t even true.
Unbelievable.

I'm not surprised at The Guardian's stance, as they're generally very understanding and kind with regard to men's perversions, kinks and fetishes. Less kind to the women who are concerned with safeguarding. They've been on this path for years now but I think they've crossed a line with this, even for them.

Vile.
What kind of messages does send victims?
Someone got sexual satisfaction from watching you being raped as a baby and so did thousands of other people - don’t worry, he’s lost his job, yes he does have lots of money and a happy retirement ahead of him but nevemind!
No wonder victims don’t report after the trauma they go through plus a trial then the perpetrator getting a slap on the wrist at the end of it.

So much fucking self-pity. He is scum, and she's an enabler. Their poor, poor son.

@Blackcats7 yes that happened to a high standing person we knew. Went to court, no prison sentence.

Then he did it again and that time it was jail. Unfortunately it IS common.

I think the point of publishing the story was to plug that website (LucyFaithful or something) and to make current paedophiles or those involved comfortable enough to seek help to stop.

I absolutely don't feel sorry for the pair of them. But, from an emotional perspective, someone who is committing those heinous acts will most likely stop reading if they feel attacked. The most important objective is to get these people to stop. Disgust and shame doesn't seem to do that. This story might resonate with them enough for them to actual go to the website and get help to stop.

To add to my previous comment, the idea of not losing family and getting a lenient sentence would also encourage paedophiles to seek help, rather than keep their secrets buried (and continue to harm others).

I hope their son is okay. He shouldn't be living with his father.

I would argue that's already a form of trauma for the child, let alone if anything worse happens. Poor kid.

I’m a bit concerned about the IP address bit. They caught him because of it, but what about people who use VPNs? Does that mean those people will never be caught? Or can police go to the VPN company and somehow get a record of people’s real IPs and the fake IP they were given through the VPN and trace them that way?

utterly loathsome pair. Also the CCTV in the child's bedroom? that's the biggest red flag going. What's the betting that it doesn't get removed when the child is old enough to dress himself...."we have to keep it for your protection dear" whilst daddy dearest gets to watch his son undress via video monitor.