Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

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

57 replies

PinkChestnut · 03/01/2018 09:46

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 :(

OP posts:
mustbemad17 · 03/01/2018 12:53

Zatsuma a family member of mine is a P/O. They recently also had to start the process of looking at care homes for another family member. He has been very vocal about the fact he would rather a vulnerable family member was on a VP unit in prison than in some of the care homes he visited. To me, that is a sorry state for the country to be in

midnightmisssuki · 03/01/2018 12:55

what sort of punishment - capital punishment? Like for child rapists etc?

FakePlantsOnly · 03/01/2018 13:00

A relative of mine works for the local police in their POLIT team which is-if I remember correctly, might be slightly wrong- the Paedophile On Line Intervention Team and some of the stories I've heard where the perpetrator has walked free because they've either been given no sentence at all or a suspended sentence-which we all know is nothing really-are heart breaking, they will have ruined the lives of at least one child and in some cases dozens, even hundreds of children; and nothing happens. Unfortunately, we don't have space in prisons and a lot of these people manage to get incredible lawyers that our police paid lawyers cant beat.

Take solace in what a PP said about his life being hell when he gets home; unfortunately that's all we can do.

Original poster
PinkChestnut · 03/01/2018 13:00

In an ideal world midnight yes. As long as fully proved etc.

Or as said above the prisoners can pay for jail themselves and have long sentencing, or cheaper jails

OP posts:
BertrandRussell · 03/01/2018 13:01

" I imagine when they come out they'd certainly not be tempted to do it again and it would deter others too."

Yeah-because that's exactly how it works......Hmm

PixieXox · 03/01/2018 13:01

I've recently found out that my ex boyfriend had pleaded guilty to possessing indecent images of children and he wasn't jailed. Disgusting.

BrandNewHouse · 03/01/2018 13:05

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Zatsuma · 03/01/2018 13:16

what sort of punishment - capital punishment? Like for child rapists etc?

do you know what, this might not be justifiable on a pure economic point of view, but if that is the only way to protect children, I am not seeing many negative. Knowing that a toddler has been abused (even if that word does not sound strong enough) is bad enough, but knowing that another toddler has been abused because we didn't do enough the first time! The idea makes me sick. How can we all sleep if we are guilty of it.

I am very serious about prisoners paying their way, not just spending pocket money in the tuck shop. What's wrong with that?

Original poster
PinkChestnut · 03/01/2018 13:24

Why wouldn't it Bertrand? The explaining part of your reply seems to have auto corrected to a sarky smiley

OP posts:
Original poster
PinkChestnut · 03/01/2018 13:25

I agree Zatsuma

OP posts:
mustbemad17 · 03/01/2018 13:26

One of the lads that murdered James Bulgar is now inside again for possession of child 'porn'. This is what, the third time he's broken parole & been pulled back in? Sorry, but definitely in cases like his - ie where the revolving door is full in motion - i'd wipe them out.

I know people who have been inside (not related to child abuse) & some of them go out to break their parole so that they end up back inside. I know it's only a very small number but to me that suggests prison doesn't work as a deterrant...i bet that a wider scale of returning prisoners break the rules deliberately to get back

Original poster
PinkChestnut · 03/01/2018 13:40

Mustbemad I overheard a guy on the bus saying exactly that once too. He was saying how he'd just got out "again" but was away to go do something to go back in. It's far too comfortable

OP posts:
mustbemad17 · 03/01/2018 13:54

Makes me sick. I was a carer, some of our service users lived in situations that meant no heating, or if they did have the heat on they had to scrimp elsewhere.
Meanwhile prisoners get 3 squares (and have to have a certain element of choice so i'm told), hot showers, a bed, the works. They can work for pocket money that can then be used on luxuries that some people who have worked their entire lives can only bloody dream of in today's society.

I get told all the time i'm too quick to suggest the death penalty. I've been a victim of sexual abuse, that alone is enough to make me less tolerant of people who use others against their will for sex. Anyone who views this sort of thing - especially if caught more than once - deserves nobody's patience imo.

Ginkypig · 03/01/2018 14:06

I know of someone who is currently coming to the end or might have already served their 4th! Prison sentence for sexual offences.

They served the first for sexual abuse of two children, he was out within 5 years (the children, now adults have never recovered from the things he did)

He has since been caught for possessing images of child abuse (a lot of the most serious category) 3 more times,

This is a perfect example of why the current rules around child sex offenders and similar crimes does not work! The terms are too short to prevent the crimes.

He and others seem to feel the (short) jail terms is worth it to carry out these hideous crimes. Probably because it's better to them than to never again get their "pleasure"

They have also learned that their crimes will result in short term and that feeds their perception that what they do is "not that bad"

The children who then become adults are forever damaged by what happens to them. they serve a full life term they never get released from the impact of these crimes. In my mind it's akin to murder.

lemonpie35 · 03/01/2018 21:58

Hello I read MN a lot and wanted to come and post a different pov. 18 months ago my DF was investigated + prosecuted for downloading indecent images on his computer receiving a community order. I don't want to discuss other than to say it shattered M, B + I but there were reasons linked to his health we understand and forgive. My DH however has taken the view many of you have here, now branding him a "paedophile" and refusing to have anything to do with him, or let my parents come to see us and DD. We've been happily married for 5 years but Xmas + NY was a total washout and I didn't see my family at all. After countless rows with DH he won't forgive and I'm left wondering if our marriage will last much longer, but he's done nothing wrong and neither have I. It's a huge strain for both of us. Sad

Anaiis · 03/01/2018 22:08

Lemonpie your post perfectly illustrates that this isn't and shouldn't be a black and white issue. I find it infuriating that supposedly intelligent men and women become a pitchfork waving baying mob at any mention of these types of crimes.

On this very thread several posters have conflated the viewing of images with actual acts of grooming and indecent exposure. These are entirely different offences. Surely that is obvious?

Anyone found with images of child sexual abuse is unlikely to get a custodial sentence. Indeed in several counties the police are working with offenders, issuing a warning and advising them to seek treatment. So no arrests, no court, no conviction. And if you ask senior police officers they say that is the way forward, allowing them to focus on contact crimes which pose a much greater threat.

MrsFionaCharming · 03/01/2018 22:18

LemonPie, I think your DH is in the right there. If no one downloaded images of child abuse, there’d be no market for them. So by downloading them, your DF increased the market, leading to more children being abused.

And you think it’s ok to expose your DD to such a man?

UnitedKungdom · 03/01/2018 22:21

In an ideal world all these unique users of child abuse images would be caught and charged and imprisoned appropriately.

But who can build enough prisons for the estimated 500,000 people that would need a cell......

FabulouslyGlamorousFerret · 03/01/2018 22:30

lemonpie accept that your DH has every right to stop you Dc seeing your father, he is also totally entitled to go NC.

Try not to talk about it and definitely don't minimise what your father has done. Agree to disagree.

Please don't let this split you up. The wider ramifications of the actions of these people are huge.

Anaiis · 03/01/2018 22:31

That's not a sustainable argument.

People aren't paying for these images. You know that right? So there's no market as such. Sometimes people stumble on them half by accident (I believe they have been found on downloads from mainstream porn sites like xhamster for example).

Also lemonpie mentions health issues
I'm not going to speculate as she has said she doesn't want to discuss, but there are conditions which can lead people to behave uncharacteristically and highly inappropriately.

Also there are many other factors, such as early sexualisation/ exposure to porn, mental health issues, which can lead to an offence like this.

Beyond the police forces I mentioned above, it is very difficult for potential offenders to access help until there is a criminal investigation underway, which benefits no one.

MrsFionaCharming · 03/01/2018 22:43

I don’t believe anyone should be prosecuted for accidentally downloading or clicking on something. But I do think it’s probably pretty obvious to the police based on search history and number / types of downloads whether it was an accident or not.

And I don’t just mean a financial market. People put the images online for a reason, whether that’s due to making money off them, or by getting off on the idea of others looking at them, if you take away that incentive, there would be less abuse.

Think how many times an investigation into a sexual criminal who’s attacked a women has turned up that he’d started off by watching violent porn, and had been recreating his favourite ‘scene’. Given how common that is, I imagine that images of child abuse have a similar effect, leading the people who view it to go into abuse children themselves.

Anaiis · 03/01/2018 23:02

No.

Some people who start off smoking an occasional spliff become class A drug users. Most don't.

Most of those who come to court for image offences have not committed a contact offence nor are they likely to.

One is not automatically a gateway to the other.

It would serve more purpose to target the producers of these images, for police, government and the big internet players to work together on this. But there doesn't seem much appetite for this at present.

Ginkypig · 04/01/2018 01:55

By consuming these images wether it being for free or by paying for them they help create and sustain a market for them which needs fed, so others who will do more than look at pictures will go out and abuse a child so as to create these images.

People who view images such as these are in effect creating a market and fuelling the abuse of children.

These are actual small human beings not just images on a screen.

Eltonjohnssyrup · 04/01/2018 02:00

We don't have enough prison space is the argument always used.

My argument back is that they should use financial penalties. Huge ones. Leave them with a rented flat and enough money for a month then tell them to sign up at the job centre.

safariboot · 04/01/2018 02:33

I am very serious about prisoners paying their way, not just spending pocket money in the tuck shop. What's wrong with that?

What's wrong with that is if the government can earn revenue by imprisoning people, it has an incentive to imprison more people, regardless of whether or not they have done anything wrong. If private business run prisons for profit, they will lobby the government to imprison more people. A prison-industrial complex would become established in Britain as it has in the USA, which has one of the highest percentages of its people imprisoned in the world, over four times that of the UK. (And yet their willingness to imprison more people for longer hasn't brought the USA significantly lower crime rates.)