BIL charged indecent images. DH's favourite person

[LotinLife]

Need some advice on how to 1. Save our marriage 2. Whilst protecting our young children 3. Living with the fact that you're the only one that suspects.

So, BIL, who I've known for 15+ years and has always been a close relative. Knew him since he was a young teenager. My DH (older by 9+ years) loves him and has quoted on a number of occasions that he is his favourite person and has unconditional love for him. DH of course loves his children and they too are his favourite persons. Anyway, DH and BIL relationship is extremely close and has been commented on how close they are by all members of family and friends.

However, in the past year we were contacted by SS that he was charged with possession of indecent images and that he was to have no unsupervised visits with our children. Of course that came as a shock. SS apologised that in fact they should've contacted us earlier.
BIL hadn't told us anything.

But being a family we wanted to hear both sides (SS didn't go into the details). BIL broke down to DH via call and said that there was a couple of files to believed were found and he had no awareness of them because he had a large amount of neutral pornography all together. Now at the time I accepted this answer, if you had a couple of images out of thousands you could be innocent of not knowing they were there. We gave him the benefit of the doubt. we also understood why he didn't tell us and believe he was working up the courage to do so. I've know him since he was younger so I didn't suspect anything and I'll admit his is he abit of coward especially about tarnishing the image my DH has of him. We continue to back him up and allowed supervised visits.

Until the court charges were brought to light and the extent of the images. This was a year later. A couple of images (BIL said) turned into hundreds (plural) , all different categorises. He didn't me and my DH this was released but it was my FIL who said to us off handed. I read them and my heart fell. I also had questions, what does inaccessible mean etc? So those hundreds of images were inaccessible but a couple weren't and so I did a quick search and took the first answer that inaccessible meant the accused didn't have access to them... Which in our eyes matched the original story: that BIL didn't know they were there and how they got there. Again we believed him yet annoyed again he didn't inform us (so that we as a family could prepare to protect him).....
A month past since that revelation and I felt things didn't start to add up anymore.
2 files is not closer to a thousand files... Does inaccessible really mean that? There was no mention about malicious software to create those images out of thin air.... Surely the investigation team are the best to consider search results and parameters? How does someone even come across these?!
That's when I looked again at what inaccessible means and from definition it's simply that they were deleted or moved... But had left an imprint on the device, which the team can see what the file was and recover it. So unfortunately I dont know for sure if they were viewed before or simply deleted because they were mass deleted..... But again, that does not (in my opinion) equate to the original story.

I have now my suspicions. I worry for my children. I feel BIL, being the baby of the family, is grooming them all and that he could in fact groom my children when he is able (when his sentence is up/lifted).

My DH, I love him, but I have strong belief he will never believe my suspicions and quite frankly believe BIL is no threat.

I'm stuck in the position that it really is me against his family and he'll choose his family.

I've accepted that I may never convince him but then how can I ensure that BIL is not able to be a threat? If I divorce can I demand full custody to ensure they can not see BIL without supervision? Would that be guaranteed? Or should I maintain the marriage (which honestly was fine before this massive upheaval) but be that always vigilant hovering mother and manipulate events so that BIL is never alone with the children without offend DH. I know I would like to have the cut all ties off, but am I doing that to spite my face or, although more stressful and long term, be the one in control... Keep your friends close keep your enemies closer phrase comes to mind.

Still awaiting on BIL final sentence but if he's still allowed supervised visits am I able to anonymously ask SS to apply stricter rules without DH knowing so I can at least not have to start this vigilante/passive aggressive action to block BIL interaction immediately?

@LotinLife this is not a witch hunt in relation to your DH whatsoever. The purposes of my posting was to open your eyes to each and every possibility given your husband's lack of appropriate safeguarding concern for his children. It was only two pictures (initially) now it's more and so it goes on.

You don't need to come on here and find ways to persuade your husband to see your point of view. You both need to attend the trial so you hear it out of the horses mouth, after all if he's innocent why wouldn't he deserve his family supporting him. You carry on defending and deflecting and finding excuses that suit you.

I'm trying to share the voice of the innocent victims here and if the way I do that isn't to your liking when you tolerate your BIL my job here is done. Deaf ears hear no evil!!

@redambergreengo

please don't use the term 'deaf ears hear no evil' - Deaf people are fully capable of knowing right from wrong

@girlmom21 why should she ignore comments suggesting her DH may be involved? If it safeguards her children it's a valid point. It doesn't mean anyone is saying he will be but it needs consideration given the stance of the DH.

As someone who is the parent of a survivor, who has worked in safeguarding and shared a similar concern I was accused of creating a "witch-hunt" scenario. Some people don't want to see what is right in front of their nose.

Personally if I was the mother of a survivor or not the minute it was a choice between a family I'd married into or a child I'd birthed I'd have cut the none bloods off dead. End of. Simple to me and every other person with a shred of decency.

@Shtfday deaf ears cannot hear is what I said!

It's likely BIL has been involved in a network of nonces which has been infiltrated by the police, causing him to try to delete the images.

I think DH needs to be sat down to hear from police exactly what sort of a person you are all dealing with here. Go to court. Sit there for the trial. Compare the evidence with what you've been told by BIL. Tick off all the lies.

Apart altogether from the horror of downloading images of the rape of children, your BIL has betrayed his entire family. Perhaps it's hard for DH to wrap his head around that on a personal level, but he needs to get up to speed very quickly.

Ultimately, this is not about DH's feelings though. It's about a stark choice he has to make - his brother or his children. Is he willing to make a sacrifice for the sake of the children's safety?

If DH refuses to listen to an expert on this crime, if he won't go to court, if he insists this is all about his feelings for his brother and won't deal with the question of safeguarding his own children, then you will have to report him to social services and take legal advice.

Make it clear to him that the longer he takes to decide to do the right thing the faster your respect and love for him is dwindling.

@redambergreengo

Um no you didn't. I get the point you were trying to make but I find it offensive to use the term 'Deaf Ears' in this context

A lot of English sayings are really oppressive and derogatory to minority groups. People use them without realising how offensive they are

You mustn't allow any contact between your children and brother in law.if your husband has problems with this you should run for the hills

Shtfday, your interpretation of what that phrase means is way off the mark.

@2bazookas he may of had a PSR at court or given OP and childrens details to the police who have then passed it on to social services. He’ll be required again to provide these details to probation once sentenced to pass on to social services.

I am shocked that social services allow supervised contact

I'm going to leave this thread. This is my last post about it. For you @LotinLife.

When you can admit to yourself, your friends, your children's cousins, aunts, uncles, grandparents et all that your DH brother is a pedophile and hopefully a heavily convicted one at that. When you have found out everything there is to know about his crimes, how they started, when they started, how he was discovered. When you have realised that every single photo won't just have been viewed and wanked over once and when you can acknowledge and recognise that, then you might be some way to getting near to a full understanding of how to safeguard yourself from being groomed and also safeguard your children too.

Hopefully this thread has given you enough food for thought with the diverse comments, advice and help that it makes you step back and reconsider your complicity and silence since you've known.

BIL doesn't deserve privacy, confidentiality, protection, his crimes affected all his victims and now you and your family too. He didn't think about that when he was getting his sick sexual pleasures. Stop putting his needs before your DC.

Do yourself one last favour, show your husband this thread. His reaction to it will tell you all you need to know. Your DH is also a victim but he's not acting like one.

The fact that the OP's DH has made the bizarre statement of loving BIL unconditionally suggests to me that he's aware that, for others, "conditions" would exist.

Please don't let BIL near your children, supervised or not. And DH really needs to face up to reality. As a CSA survivor, with what happened to me enabled by family (who have also laughed about it), I could list endlessly the ways that it has destroyed my life. This isn't the place for that but - I BEG you - please don't let BIL anywhere near your children. I don't know how - but DH has got to be made to realise this.

I'm so sorry. Best wishes to you.

@mathanxiety

Please elaborate?

What exactly does deaf ears have to do with evil??

I work with young adults who have been sexually abused as children. This isn't about you "being in pain either way", it's about protecting your children.

This type of thing doesn't reach court without it being a pretty huge deal. You're being ridiculous and your husband even more so. If your husband can't see that protecting his children is more important that his relationship with a peadophile then you should leave him anyway, and make sure you get full custody so he doesn't causally let this man around them when you're not around. Madness!

You and H need to go to that hearing, OP.

Doesn't matter how much it costs or how it inconveniences you.

Until you and H see BIL in the court you both enjoy the luxury of a familiar picture of him in your mind's eye - family man, lifetime of memories - and it will be much harder for you to see him as he really is.

Your excuse about travel makes me really concerned for your children, I have to say.

@Shtfday the phrase means wilfully refusing to accept the truth.

It doesn't mean that deaf people can't tell right from wrong ffs.

It would be one thing for him to maintain a relationship with his brother, acknowledging what he has allegedly done (just being polite, if the imprints were on his computer and he has mentioned having some then occams razor suggests he is guilty); but quite another to be in denial and risk your children being around his brother. It is interesting to note that people have commented on how close they are, I mean a lot of siblings are close so given they must be super close unfortunately I expect you are right and if push came to shove he would prioritise him. Sorry you're in this situation OP, there's some good advice on this thread amongst the gumph- hope it helps.

aree.
saying it's difficult to travel there so can't be done shows you have the wrong priorities.
you and your husband both need to go for the full hearing.
and get there early to ensure entry.
this needs to be your priority.
both your attitudes sound cock-eyed.

[quote Shtfday]@redambergreengo

please don't use the term 'deaf ears hear no evil' - Deaf people are fully capable of knowing right from wrong[/quote]
You really have misunderstood that saying.

It has nothing to do with deaf people. It has everything to do with people who refuse to listen, to hear the truth.

Can we step away from purity spirals and just accept that language is rich, malleable and that many words can have more than one meaning.

BIL doesn't deserve privacy, confidentiality, protection, his crimes affected all his victims and now you and your family too. He didn't think about that when he was getting his sick sexual pleasures. Stop putting his needs before your DC.

This is what it comes down to for me to.

*too, ugh ...

[quote redambergreengo]@girlmom21 why should she ignore comments suggesting her DH may be involved? If it safeguards her children it's a valid point. It doesn't mean anyone is saying he will be but it needs consideration given the stance of the DH.

As someone who is the parent of a survivor, who has worked in safeguarding and shared a similar concern I was accused of creating a "witch-hunt" scenario. Some people don't want to see what is right in front of their nose.

Personally if I was the mother of a survivor or not the minute it was a choice between a family I'd married into or a child I'd birthed I'd have cut the none bloods off dead. End of. Simple to me and every other person with a shred of decency.

[/quote]
I was telling her to ignore the suggestion the images are of her children - I didn't see 2bazookas second comment about her husband at that point.

yes. that saying is akin to:
there's none so blind as those who will not see.

One of my friends DH was convicted of making and possessing indecent images of children in particular young girls and had about 100 highest category, similar in the middle and nearly 1000 of the 'least' serious . He is on the SO Register and has a SHPO both I think for 7 years and banned from working with children for life. With support from the Lucy Faithful foundation and family testimonies the judge decided he could be rehabilitated so was spared jail and his wife and two teenage daughters (then 11 & 13) continued to live with him.

Un-fucking-believable.

His oldest daughter was always overtly sexualised from a young age and there's a couple of incidents I can recall in years gone by that were a bit off (not at the time but with the benefit of hindsight) - sexy dances, parading in her swim suit that sort of thing I didn't think for a minute he'd escape a prison sentence and certainly didn't realise he'd be allowed to continue living with his children and didn't know until I saw them all walking the dog one evening!! there is absolutely no doubt in my mind something awful has happened to those girls who are now completely off the rails. The minute my friend told me she was sticking by her husband I walked away, spoke to my children (not easy as they were only 10 & 12) and will never speak to her whilst she in with him.

When we first heard about it, she massively downplayed his involvement and it wasn't until it was reported in the papers that the true extend of his depravety came out.

Op that man would never be anywhere near my children ever again. I sincerely hope you are stopping all visits from now.

Your dh needs to get a fucking grip and decide if he wants to be complicit in this or not.