To wonder if sexual abuse is even a crime anymore?

[GeidiPrimes]

25,000 indecent images of children, incl many cat A. And "extreme" images of animals being sexually abused/tortured also. £300 towards costs and placed on a SHPO. And that's it! Not even banned from keeping animals.

Like many sex-offenders, he's changed his name by deed poll and started afresh in a new area.

I have some thoughts on this, (he was a prominent businessman in the area and knows the right people ) Our court system sees it fitting to send vulnerable women to prison for petty offences like soliciting or non-payment of household bills. Musn't kink-shame a man though because we must Be Kind.

There has been no mention of his victims that I can see.

Link

@Toomanyradishes wow!

Financial crimes like not paying bills are WAY below CSA and animal abuse in my opinion. And most people’s I should think.

Who makes these ridiculous rules?

I do not believe it is the case that viewing images of sexual abuse is in and of itself sexual abuse.

Really? You don't think getting a sexual thrill out of viewing an image of a child being abused is sexual abuse? Those children are well aware that there images are out there being wanked over and it is an additional separate trauma to them.

It's okay, he admitted he had indecent images of boys as young as 12 and that he is into teenage boys, he didn't attempt to hide it and cooperated with police, so it's all good. 🙄

This worries me, they actually say his sentence was more lenient because he cooperated and admitted guilt. If he was looking at and getting kicks out of indecent images of boys under 16, he is by definition a paedophile. Whether he admits it or not, he shouldn't be walking free.

@GeidiPrimes

*Sentenced to 18 months suspended for 24 months I really don't understand these suspended sentences*

If he re-offends in the next 24 months, then in theory he would do the 18 months prison. Probably not in practice though.

Funnily enough I had a similar order for possession of class A drugs many years ago. Mine was much stricter, with the rehabilitation order to run for 24 months, not 60 days. This involved having my mouth swabbed every day and providing urine.

Court system, designed by men for men.

This. I had similar experiences with class A possession, obvs drugs are classed as a way worse offence than contributing to the sexual abuse of children and animals. The system is so weighted against women it's unreal.

There are lots of factors for the court to consider when sentencing but looking at the guidelines his sentence was very lenient. This is someone with a long offending history even if they haven't been caught. You do not acquire thousands of images overnight and extreme pornographic images involving animals is an escalated behaviour, not a starting point.

www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk/offences/magistrates-court/item/possession-of-indecent-photograph-of-child/

It's a f#####g joke and absolutely no incentive to change their depraved ways. Absolutely vile! And the fact he gets a new life in a new area is a bloody joke too

YANBU @GeidiPrimes, rape and sexual abuse is practically legal now.

In the year to September 2021, just 1.3% of rape cases recorded by police resulted in a suspect being charged (or receiving a summons).
www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-48095118.amp

Somebody must know why the conviction rate is so low!

How does it compare to say burglary for example?

@AnyFucker

I do not believe it is the case that viewing images of sexual abuse is in and of itself sexual abuse

I’d wager your hard drive is very…interesting

Really? Because I don't think watching videos of child abuse / rape / beheading is materially the same as committing said atrocities, I must be a paedophile?

Come on @AnyFucker, you used to be so much better than this.

@ Lockheart Sorry to be such a disappointment to you but if you think watching such material is not as bad as making it, you are part of the problem

They are different crimes, but to me they are both very serious crimes. For one thing, being a consumer of such gross indecent material, which an individual knows involves victimisation of innocents unable to protect themselves, or consent, shows a dangerous prediction, and possible propensity to offend if the opportunity arises. I don't think it's a coincidence that rates of abuse seem to have gone up as ease of consumption has increased.

Secondly, downloading such material creates the market which generates the actual abuse of children, and animals.

Thirdly, 'once on the internet, always on the internet' means these children already so cruelly victimised live their lives in fair of those images popping up and being reidentified, and revictimised.

Who is this about?

in fear - not fair. Honestly. . . I blame it on the cough med's.

@AnyFucker

@ Lockheart Sorry to be such a disappointment to you but if you think watching such material is not as bad as making it, you are part of the problem

Who said anything about "as bad" or better / worse? I said not materially the same.

Such pedantry is how these fuckers get away with it. Don’t you see ?

@AnyFucker

Such pedantry is how these fuckers get away with it. Don’t you see ?

It's not pedantry, it's material reality. Watching a video of a crime is not the same as committing that crime. It is a different crime, but it is not the same crime as in the video.

Do you agree with the “sentencing” this man got ?

@AnyFucker

Do you agree with the “sentencing” this man got ?

Not particularly, it seems quite light to my mind, but I wasn't present for the trial so I'd also say I'm not qualified to give an opinion.

But you are arguing for mitigation, so you are offering an opinion

Even when they are found guilty
They hardly even get sent to prison
It’s so so wrong

Sentences for possessing/ downloading CSA are lower than committing the actual offence - the law treats these offences as less serious so I don’t think this is a controversial view. Partly that is because if possessing an image was treated as as serious an offence as raping a child it would incentivise some offenders to actually commit rape - why stop at images if the risk in committing rape is the same (or perhaps even lower as it is probably more difficult to prove rape than possession of indecent images). I don’t know about the case in question here but I’d say that time frame over which images are downloaded is a bigger factor than number of images - there have been cases where teenagers downloaded thousands of images in one go sometimes alongside adult porn, looked at a couple and were still prosecuted for making indecent images and given custodial sentences. I’d say that a pattern of regularly downloading images over time is a greater offence and shows a more dangerous offender. There is a big range of offending behaviour within these offences and I don’t think all should receive a custodial sentence.

A suspended sentence for CSA can still really ruin someone’s life. The offender will often lose their job, not be allowed to be around children, have restrictions on travel for the time they are on the register etc so it isn’t just about prison time. It is an offence which will probably restrict the rest of a person’s life in a way which offences which might result in similar prison time don’t necessarily and there is (rightly) huge social stigma.

I think there is an interesting moral argument about whether possessing images is as bad as creating them - I get the argument about harm to the victim of knowing people are viewing them. I’m not so sure about the supply / demand theory - I suspect that most people who abuse to create CSA images would do so even if no one else wanted to view them and as I understand it it’s rare for offenders to pay for images. The comparison with other violent offences is interesting- plenty of people will watch violent assaults or even murder on the news but I suppose that is usually with condemnation rather than pleasure. People certainly watch mock rape or murder with pleasure.

There was quite a good programme on the BBC recently about why it is so hard to successfully prosecute rape given the need to convince the jury beyond reasonable doubt. I think part of it is inherent in the crime - it often happens in private and the only evidence may be “he said / she said”,. The question of whether the defendant had a reasonable belief in consent is very difficult evidentially. No one consents to being murdered or burgled but people do consent to sex so the burden of proving what you need to is that much higher. There are clearly huge issues with the system too - a lot of victims report initially but don’t proceed to court for example. But I do think it’s always going to be hard to prosecute under the current law.

Possession of CSA images is actually quite easy to prosecute so I suspect we do better with that than rape and sexual assault.

@AnyFucker

But you are arguing for mitigation, so you are offering an opinion

I'm not arguing for mitigation. Until you asked me directly I haven't expressed a single personal opinion on this case. I am saying the crime of watching a video of abuse is treated differently from the act of committing abuse under UK law, but that's not offering an opinion any more than saying that a dog is not a cat.

@duskyspringfield

Somebody must know why the conviction rate is so low!

How does it compare to say burglary for example?

@duskyspringfield, the 1.3% isn't the conviction rate, it's the percentage who ended up in court. Some of that 1.3% will have been found Not Guilty.