AIBU to think that downloading hundreds of sexual and abusive images of children should mean jail?

[Countdowntowinter]

YABU - there should not be jail time for some who download hundreds of images of child abuse

YANBU - downloading hundreds of images of sexual abuse of children should mean jail

This is a typical "sentence". Eric Joyce is the partner of India Knight, who has defended his behaviour.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/aug/07/ex-labour-mp-eric-joyce-gets-suspended-jail-sentence-over-child-abuse-image

I’m sure the s persons gender identity would have been a mitigating factor.

Oh so someone who wants to look at CSA images isn't any danger to the population? Of course they are!

They are feeding demand, which means supply increases, especially if they are paying.

We need to be making it clear, really, really clear that it is utterly unacceptable to make, view or distribute these images. I don't see why that's so hard.

Mind you, rape has effectively been decriminalised so I don't know why I'm surprised.

The reason it's the fastest growing crime is that its more nuanced than a person actively seeking images of child abuse. It's also;

1. A person viewing what they think is legal porn but it transpires that its a 17 year old
2. It's a person being sent images in kik or discord or twitter, even WhatsApp that they did not request, but that automatically cached on an inaccessible part of their phone
3. A person clicking on a file or pop up that they thought contained legal porn that saves thousands of images to your cache as thumbnails without your knowledge

All of those things are crimes. Whether you are aware of the images or not - all of those things will guarantee that you and your family will be put through hell and an investigation that routinely lasts 2 years + .

That's why you can't just automatically put everyone in prison who accessed or received images of child abuse. They may not have asked for it, intended to receive it or even be aware that they did - it is still a crime, they will still be guilty of it and you'll still see it reported in local news as a paedophile "making" images.

That's in no way intended to defend those who actively seek or produce these abhorrent images - but there is a cohort of people going through the justice system right now, for a long torturous period of time, and with the fear of vigilante activity who committed the crime unintentionally.

11 years for possession alone seems very unlikely. I imagine there were other offences on top such as distribution.

A length of rope works out cheaper, they can't do it again.

It does seem that the sentencing guidelines are wrong for this crime. So many get light sentences.

BUT the part of the story of it being a trans woman that enrages me is not the sentence but the fact that this will be recorded as a sex offence as though a woman committed the act. This skews the data suddenly there has been an increase of sex offences committed by women.

Similar with this story, the Police and BBC seem to be at pains to report a 6ft 3 person who made a child unconscious whilst committing a sexual assault on the child as a woman. At the moment they are trying to apprehend this individual and their friend. It would be very helpful if they would tell the truth about the person they are looking for and stop reporting violent sex offences as though a woman is the perpetrator.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-sussex-66107716

Sorry it should have said what enrages me 'as well as the sentence' .

People who view indecent images should have a custodial sentence. What is currently happening is an inadequate deterrent.

Will this crime be recorded as perpetrated by a man or a woman?

The bullshit offered in mitigation angers me.

He added that at the time of these offences Howes was "in a very dark place" but was now in a "stable, loving relationship" and has the "full support of her children".

We're being told that without a stable, loving relationship and family support that this man copes with difficult periods in life by watching children being raped and abused and somehow that's understandable.

WTF is wrong with us, how gullible is our judiciary. No one finds themselves watching children being raped because they had a hard week at work.

I work in the criminal justice system, it's not unusual not to go to prison for indecent images.
No comment on whether that's appropriate or not, just saying it's not unusual.

I’d put them under the jail op

"A very dark place" is not the same as "having a bad week at work".

Periods of mental illness should be taken into account when considering sentencing of offenders.

He will have to live with it and that's supposedly enough of a punishment? What about the poor victims in all those images living with much worse?

Custodial sentences don’t act as a deterrent. Heck even the death penalty in countries that have that doesn’t act as a deterrent, as those who commit crimes often don’t pause the think before acting, and those that do won’t acknowledge the risk of being caught

I know someone who was downloading and also distributing images of sexually abused children and they still didn't get jail so I doubt it is highly unusual for no prison or anything to do with this person being trans.

I think that there is a lot more pre-meditation in these crimes than some others though.

A community sentence and SOR is not adequate. These are not victimless crimes. The abuse the children in the images must suffer is beyond comprehension.

The stable loving relationship and family support were offered as reasons why this man was less likely to offend in future, that's a lot of other people playing a part in preventing reoffending. If mental illness was a factor then his treatment would have been mentioned.

I do not think mental illness should be a mitigating factor when deciding sentencing for these kinds of offences, our first priority should be protection of children. I do not distinguish between those who actually abuse children and those who watch it, both are harming children and we should have zero tolerance for it. He should be on the sex offenders register for life.

even when premeditated the risk of being caught is very unlikely to cross someone’s mind

There is a lot of work in this area, it’s pretty well known and understood the threat or even guarantee of a custodial sentence isn’t a deterrent for crime

It amazes me that the lawyers representing this evil still spout nonsense about ‘difficult place’ ‘ashamed’ ‘won’t do it again’ etc. I thought everyone knew that nonces were the most manipulative scum on the planet? Once a nonce, always a mince. They don’t change, they just find better ways to hide.

The courts/powers that be etc don't care about the abuse of children. My former teacher was found guilty of offences against some of us in his class and against his own children. He got a suspended sentence for the huge impact he caused so many of us.

They find prison spaces for people selling drugs but can't manage to lock up paedophiles. Also it's disturbing how some posters seem to think viewing the sexual assault of children is minor. They are real children who have been abused in real life. Not just images behind a computer screen.

Nonce not mince 🙈 can you tell I’m sleep deprived cooking the tea 😩

It's well known that having a good support network around you helps prevent reoffending for a lot of crimes. That is not a particularly odd comment from the judge.

Your opinion on whether mental health should be taken into account or not specifically in relation to child sex offences is irrelevant - at the moment a person's mental health will be taken into account by the judge when passing sentencing guidelines. So it's not an odd thing for the judge to comment on either re the "very dark place" line.

Totally agree with all of this. God forbid you deprive the crown of 50p, watch the rape of a child? We’ll let you off this time. And the next time. And the next time. And the next time. Oh you’ve progressed to offending? Gosh what a surprise. 3 years in nick for you. Tell us children do not matter, without telling us children do not matter.