To think there should be far far more serious consequences for indecent child image users?!

[PinkChestnut]

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-42119236

This guy shared hundreds of them and downloaded ones "of the most serious type" ie rape, possibly worse.

And he gets no jail sentence?

What message is this sending out to other would be perpetrators. Basically go ahead and do it. I know they get paton a register but it's not the same deterrent as a long jail sentence is it? Yet someone who has stolen money through fraud etc gets years in jail. Makes me sick :(

Yes it is disgusting and they should be jailed. Do you know if this is a normal sentence for these people?

I don't know Seacabbage. Had a look at sentencing site here

www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk/offences/item/possession-of-indecent-photograph-of-child-indecent-photographs-of-children/

And it's a bit too legal talk for me but custodial sentences dont seem long enough. Where is the deterrent to others?

The problem is that there are only so many prison places and they cost the taxpayer a small fortune so building more prisons isn't that feasible. Add in the variability of the judges - I know they have a range for a sentence but there has to be some standardisation within that so that like crimes get like sentences and not opposing ends.
Don't get me wrong, I think they should be severely punished and I can't think that any punishment other than jail is suitable for that crime. The only way to solve it is large-scale prison reform to look at the mental health status of prisoners (fairly large numbers have some level of learning disability or similar that makes them more likely to be persuaded to commit crimes by others, or admit to crimes they haven't committed etc.), to decide which crimes need prison and which could be better served by community sentences (but who wants burglars going scot-free (assuming they're even caught)?), to make prison more of a punishment as a deterrent etc.

Yes disgusting and also agree that fraud or anything to do with money seems to result in jail more than sex crimes, domestic violence cases, random attacks. Off topic but I think acid attacks should be a life sentence, no exceptions

Not that it's much consolation but Belfast/N.I. is a small place where people all know each other and everyone will know who he is. His life isn't going to be very comfortable at all there.

Literally every week one walks free from the court here. Someone got jailed for theft of £150 whilst working as a carer last year, now I'm not saying that was an acceptable crime, but it's astonishing that the judge jailed her and let all the paedophiles walk...

I read somewhere that the law is applied judgementally because animated images, and generic porn searches (via image search functionalities in search engines) all count as ‘downloaded’ images (even if they’re just clicked once and nobody downloads them) and that it’s sometimes possible for people looking at normal porn to accidentally download child porn as Google etc are shit at policing their searches.

Of course the above doesn’t apply in this case as the bastard downloaded images of real children, and so the judge should have been stricter.

In my opinion and I can't be the only one, the only way to deal with these bastards is the death penalty!

Bobstersmum I must admit part of me agrees. Or just a separate cheaper jail system with basics ie stone walls and a bucket and basic food where people who have harmed others directly or indirectly can go.

Stuff like this makes me so cross. Sounds like a very simple analogy but we actively PTS a dog if it attacks a child - and dogs don't have anywhere near the same thought processes as we do. I will never ever understand why we then pardon or treat paedophiles almost with kid gloves - this is so emotionally & physically damaging to the victims involved.

Personally i'd shoot the fuckers between the eyes - bullets are far cheaper than a prison sentence!!!

I agree mustbemad. As a society we should be bending over backwards to make sure children and the elderly and vulnerable are looked after. Yet the message being sent out with these light sentences and protection for the paedophiles is basically that it's not viewed as a bad crime

I read somewhere that the law is applied judgementally because animated images, and generic porn searches (via image search functionalities in search engines) all count as ‘downloaded’ images (even if they’re just clicked once and nobody downloads them) and that it’s sometimes possible for people looking at normal porn to accidentally download child porn as Google etc are shit at policing their searches.

^^ this

plus if you look at the actual law an 'indecent image' might be a cartoon / drawing. It might also be a picture of a child on a beach. A 17 year old in a bikini.

If you got the Beano as a kid like I did then some of the images when a child was being caned may now fall into the 'most serious category'.

Add to that 'bulk downloading' where someone gets a file from a website they don't see everything in it until they open individual images, even if someone takes a look and then deletes it immediately, and by it I mean the entire file it is still in the 'possession' of the downloader.

There has also been some research to show that offenders offered reeducation are more likely to not offend in future.

Finally I think some judges are reluctant to jail after a guilty plea as the defendant isn't actually given the images, they are told how many images have been found and what category they are, but that can be quite subjective. If it goes to trial then there is more argument.

Judges tend to sentence on what the 'general picture' of the offender's interest is, a bulk download of porn which has a small number of images is looked upon differently to a person who has downloaded fewer but specific pictures.

The Game of Thrones books have a lot of sex in them, including one of a 13 year old with her new husband, that is legal. The TV show has depicted the same scene but the actors are older and that is legal. If you create a pencil sketch of the same scene it is illegal.

Of course there should be more serious consequences. Our legal system is a joke though.

I'm not a GoT fan (never even watched it) but that's a scary thought. I can (sort of) understand a dated context where it depicts what used to be okay in certain circumstances.

The idea of someone using a computer to make someone look younger to then get off on it is still just as bad imo as the 'real' thing. The fact that someone gets their rocks off of watching a child be used for sex is sickening. Personally i'd still shoot them. I also don't hold much hope for rehabing a paedo.

Sashh of course there will be instances where it was by accident or just a cartoon or whatever but not meaning those. It's articles like the above where the perpetrator has actively and knowingly downloaded specific real images and shared them with others online but walked free other than being put on a register.

It absolutely takes the piss out of those poor children in the images and the suffering they received. And without decent and effective deterrents more people may explore, and create larger demand for them to be made etc.

It's awful. A guy I used to work with got done for this, no jail and he even got to keep his job!! They even transferred him so he didn't have to face the people who knew all about him. Bizarrely his wife stood by him, he had school age children at the time which must have been horrific for them. Can't understand why there's no justice. And it wasn't just a one-off, it was reported in the papers that he had become "obsessed" with downloading the worst category over a six month period! Feel sick every time I see him.

Wander a mum at my DD's pre-school a few years ago stood by her fella when he got put on the register. He was done for cornering girls under 10 & flashing them!! She went on to have two more kids with him whilst he was on the register & he regularly took them to/from school - yet apparently he wasn't meant to be anywhere near under 16s!! Made me sick to hear her defending it when it came out

Our prisons are already vastly overcrowded. Where would you suggest we put them all? Are you willing to pay a higher tax rate to fund the extra prisons we'd need?

Wanderlust that's awful :(

That's exactly what I mean, a guy actively becomes obsessed with watching children being raped for a 6 month period and it's treated like a minor embarrassment to him instead of the horrific thing it actually is!

Right i'd happily cover the cost of a few bullets. Pretty sure we wouldn't be short of people to pull the trigger...

Porn apologists always say “Well, it’s just images- he didn’t actually do anything”..........

Rightsaidfrederick if I could choose I'd have a separate cheaper jail system for those who have actively and intentionally harmed others, including indirectly such as through child abuse image downloading, comprising of a stone room a bucket and basic food. They can rot in there for 10-20 years. I imagine when they come out they'd certainly not be tempted to do it again and it would deter others too.

if it's not accidental, then of course there should be much harsher sentences. These people are the only reason why the kids are abused in the first place. Isn't that enough reason to do something about it?

We should start charging every prisoner for their prison stay. If they have the funds, they can pay upfront, if they don't they can work towards their bill whilst they are inside, and pay the rest of it as long as necessary. This might not solve the entire prison budget, but that would help.

Has anyone been in on NHS ward recently? It's shocking. When you see how patients are treated, and how prisoners are treated, we seem to have got our priorities wrong.

Zatsuma that's a really good idea. The money saved from paying for prisons can go into hospitals, schools and caring for elderly etc. People who deserve it.