Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To wonder how people can be so utterly deluded and stupid re child sex offenders?

52 replies

LoverOfCake · 09/11/2017 16:59

Piece on Jeremy Vine earlier about a guide dog owner who has been convicted of downloading child images. Many people called in to say the dog should be removed, etc etc etc. And then this woman called in to say that people need to not be so quick to jump to conclusions, how things are so often not what they seem, and how she has a friend who has just been convicted of the same thing and he is completely innocent, has no idea how the images got on to his computer but he obviously didn't download and don't people realise that you can just inadvertently end up with images being downloaded in this way? Oh but he's had to plead guilty because he can't afford to defend himself.

Honestly I wanted to slap her.

How do people get drawn in like this? How?

OP posts:
stopfuckingshoutingatme · 09/11/2017 17:02

Why remove the dog ?
How can they see images if they are blind?

It's always been this way and there will always be deniers sadly

Spangles1963 · 09/11/2017 17:02

If he has a guide dog,isn't he blind? So how would he be able to see to download stuff on his computer?

Spangles1963 · 09/11/2017 17:03

And what purpose would removing the dog serve?

Sodaface · 09/11/2017 17:05

They are nieve
Stupid
In denial
Have never been effected by it.
Don’t care
Cunts/smypathasiers

That’s mostly what I’ve come across.

abbsisspartacus · 09/11/2017 17:06

I suppose the dog is on the at risk register and may be removed for his own good?

If he goes to prison who has the dog?

Is it a dog for blind or a different assistance dog 🤔

mallardduckponds · 09/11/2017 17:06

Well,
People can be registered blind and still have some vision.

SingingTunelessly · 09/11/2017 17:09

He's partially sighted. There's concern about the fact that the dog could be targeted by paedophile hunters or that he might use the dog as an enticement for young children. And yes totally agree about that stupid, stupid woman on the JV programme. Totally deluded.

misscockerspaniel · 09/11/2017 17:10

He could use the guide dog as a means of attracting or contacting children.

mustbemad17 · 09/11/2017 17:11

Not every guide dog owner is totally blind. I guess it depends on the type of images he has as to whether the dog is at risk.

Last year at my daughter's pre-school one of the dads started picking up/dropping off because his missis had a c-section. Something about him made a lot of us uncomfortable, then it eventually emerged that he had been on the SO register for five years. He had been done for exposing himself to girls under the age of 9, masturbating in alley ways when kids walked past. Absolutely disgusting & we were quick to get rid of him from pick ups! The scary thing was, his missis had 4 kids to him (two girls)...at least two of them were born whilst he was still on the register. She excused it as 'stupidity'! Some people are just either idiots, exceptionally naive or just don't give a crap

Ttbb · 09/11/2017 17:12

You can actually accidentally download images though. Every time you look at an image on your computer it will be downloaded. If you end up on a child porn site through clicking links/pop ups you could have I advertently downloaded a stay image here or there. Clearly that's not the case here but hypothetically it could could happen to someone who is not tech savvy.

PinkHeart5914 · 09/11/2017 17:12

If he was blind, how did he donwnload the images and how the bloody hell was he looking at them? Surely your sight has to be quite bad if not completely blind to get a dog, they don’t just hand them out do they?

Before someone is convicted for something I try not to judge too much as people can get accused of things they haven’t done but once someone is convicted they must of done it as courts tend to want evidence and I don’t believe many people are wrongly convicted in our courts.

WeeMadArthur · 09/11/2017 17:17

I heard her as well, and rolled my eyes so had that I might need to retrain DDog as a seeing eye dog! The partially sighted guy had images in the 3 -12 year old age range so it isn’t as if he could say that they looked 18.

I think that they are quite right to take the dog away for various reasons, if he is attacked the dog might also be injured or traumatized, he might use the dog to get access to children, and having access to a guide dog isn’t a right, there are plenty of other people with sight issues who are waiting for a dog.

RhiannonOHara · 09/11/2017 17:18

we were quick to get rid of him from pick ups

How did you do that? Did his wife recover or did someone else have to pick up the children?

BottleBeach · 09/11/2017 17:19

I suppose the dog is on the at risk register and may be removed for his own good?

Huh?! What are you talking about?

mustbemad17 · 09/11/2017 17:22

RhiannonOHara we met with the committee that ran the pre-school & basically told them on mass that they needed to sort it. The pre-school is directly next to the primary school too so a lot of primary parents were concerned given the age range he targeted. Something was put into place that he didn't directly drop the kids on the premises, but more often than not a friend of the missis' brought the kids in with hers. Never saw him on school premises at all after that

ReanimatedSGB · 09/11/2017 17:25

Well it is possible for someone who is not very tech-savvy to accidentally download a few images. There are also idiots of the 4-chan variety who think it's funny to send other people illegal images.
I think generally the CPS look at how many illegal images are on the computer. if it's only a handful then the defence of them being unintentional downloads or pranks is more plausible than if there are thousands.

ReanimatedSGB · 09/11/2017 17:28

And there have been cases in the past of people who were arrested for some kind of 'sex offence' and told that if they just accepted a caution it would all be over. This was wrong, misleading advice (and generally meant that the person had a good chance of being acquitted because they either hadn't done whatever it was or there was wiggle room within the law) given so that the police could boast a better clear-up rate.

Gingernaut · 09/11/2017 17:29

You can actually accidentally download images though. Every time you look at an image on your computer it will be downloaded. If you end up on a child porn site through clicking links/pop ups you could have I advertently downloaded a stay image here or there. Clearly that's not the case here but hypothetically it could could happen to someone who is not tech savvy.

That may be possible for 'ordinary' porn, but to download child abuse images, one must specifically search for those images without the aid of Google or Bing.

mustbemad17 · 09/11/2017 17:30

Yeah usually you're talking dark web stuff, not the usual claptrap porn

OrlandoMusc · 09/11/2017 17:30

Some people are just either idiots, exceptionally naive or just don't give a crap

This.

Lallypopstick · 09/11/2017 17:31

It’s really very unlikely that someone would happen upon abusive images of children.

pisacake · 09/11/2017 17:33

Lol what a fucking stupid lawyer.

www.blackpoolgazette.co.uk/news/crime/blind-man-accused-of-downloading-child-abuse-images-thought-he-was-looking-at-adults-1-8728444
His lawyer Allan Cobain said: “This is an unusual case as my client is registered blind. He has no sight in one eye and only a small amount in the other. It may be argued that difficulty with his vision makes it difficult for him to put an age to images he downloads. He may think he is looking at 16-year olds.”"

It's illegal to look at a 16 year old you twat.

He had 71 abuse images on his PC, this is not an accidental thing.

Barbie222 · 09/11/2017 17:41

I think it's hard to say you downloaded kiddie stuff by accident. You'd need a dark web browser and know the web address. Sadly though it's quite easy to do / find if you take those steps. If you have Tor for any legitimate reason you have to be very careful.

Original poster
LoverOfCake · 09/11/2017 17:42

That statement from the lawyer made me incredibly Angry so he's insinuating that being blind means that someone could mistake images of a three year old for images of a consenting adult? Twat.

And no, you don't happen upon images like that accidentally.

TBH he has some limited vision apparently, and according to reports one of the images also contained an animal which could add to the belief that the dog is potentially at risk. Sad. But he's not the first to be convicted, there was another one earlier this year? Does anyone remember seeing articles in the press last year about a dog called tess which went missing in Scotland? Well her owner has subsequently also been convicted of downloading thousands of images Angry he's gone to jail though.

As for the woman calling in, I couldn't help wonder just how she had been so stupid as to believe any of the clearly bollocks her "friend" had fed her. I mean what right-minded person would just lie down and accept a guilty plea because they couldn't afford to defend themselves?

OP posts:
brasty · 09/11/2017 17:47

I am not tech savvy. I have googled for things innocently and had porn popups. I have never ever had child abuse images pop up. That just does not happen. But some people are so desperate to believe the "nice" man they know, is not guilty.