Celebrity child abusers - Graham Ovenden

[PatPig]

No prison for Mr. Ovenden:

www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2013/jun/04/graham-ovenden-judged-no-threat

Shades of celebrity child rapist Roman Polanski.

What is the point of putting abuse victims through trials if the abusers are not going to be given any kind of punishment?

I don't know who is worse, him or the judge

appalling

Awful.

that's my first reaction too, obviously the judge doesn't find this as shocking as normal folk, makes you wonder why

crikey - I really do think some of these judges are so out of touch, or senile, past it, or in some way even sympathising/siding with the guilty party or something. sickening. utterly sickening.

Ovenden certainly has many powerful fans. For instance, Lord McAlpine (he of recent libel victory fame) had a collection of Ovenden photographs: theneedleblog.wordpress.com/2013/03/11/lord-mcalpine-nothing-disappears-from-the-web/

If you look on Amazon, there is lots of this sort of stuff - expensive suggestive photographs of pre-pubescent children in the guise of art books. If it costs £500 a copy then it must be art, you see.

Here's another from McAlpine's collection: www.smh.com.au/entertainment/art-and-design/topless-teenage-moss--is-it-art-20130208-2e3th.html

Oh good grief.

So the people who testified are basically being told that their experience, courage in testifying and their subsequent feelings mean nothing. Surely he is being convicted on what he did not whether he will do it again. Most murderers only do it once. Should we not bother locking them up because they aren't a risk any more?

How does one complain about overly lenient sentencing again? I'm normally the one arguing for lighter sentences but this one is hideous.

I think you're right MrsTP, we should do something about it. How should we complain formally?

Here is a link. I don't know if it's the right one.

agree with all the comments, it's disgusting

disgusting but not surprising for celebrities . at least complaints to atoorney general have led to a review

Poor victims. Just googled some of his images and feel I may have to clear and re- clear my phone. They are v sick.

I think the most pertinent points here are:

1. The judge highlighted the term he could/may have received had he committed those offences today.

1. The crimes were committed 25-40 years ago and sentencing guideline are not (iirc) retroactive - the judge cannot sentence as would have had the crimes been 'modern' as opposed to historic.

I'm sure even 25 years ago there would have been scope for more than a suspended sentence though.

The David Icke forum has highlighted other work of his and how he has been investigated several times in the past. It is disgusting how he has got off with it so far.

Hope they can review and give him an appropriate sentence.

See the Jimmy Savile thread page 3433.

Well he has had his sentence reviewed and has now been sentenced to two years, three months.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-24464975

good!

His work is creepy as fuck. Talk about hiding in plain sight...

well that's a good development - what happens to the first crap judge though - anything?

Good.

What BOF said.