Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
News
Original poster

9 years for "peadophilia" - too harsh?

85 replies

SenoraPostrophe · 22/06/2006 18:36

here ...am I the only person to think this is a bit harsh? he's only 21. I know a couple of girls who had 20 yr old boyfriends when 13 or 14. and I'm pretty sure there wouldn't have been a prison sentence at all then (remember Bill Wyman and Mandy thing?). have we gone over the top?

OP posts:
waterfalls · 22/06/2006 19:14

The court heard that one of the images was of the most serious levels of abuse of a young girl.

The judge told Costi he had seen images on Costi's computer that showed a depraved interest in girls very much younger than 13.

So no I dont think 9 years is too harsh

waterfalls · 22/06/2006 19:16

JoolsToo

Thats what I think too, you would have better luck convincing a straight man to become gay or vice versa.

Cod · 22/06/2006 19:17

Message withdrawn

Cod · 22/06/2006 19:17

Message withdrawn

NotAnOtter · 22/06/2006 19:21

when ones dd is around 13 one may feel differently

trinityrhino · 22/06/2006 19:24

good point notanotter

Cod · 22/06/2006 19:24

Message withdrawn

waterfalls · 22/06/2006 19:27

My dad met his current wive when she was 12, he was 37, they were caught in a field together, and he served a prison sentance, when he was released they ran away together, she was pregnant at 15 and they married when she was 16, they have now been married 26 years, but dont be fooled, it is no love story, he is a paedophile and has commited it since, but not convicted, they all need shooting IMO.

waterfalls · 22/06/2006 19:27

WIFE..............EVEN

Original poster
SenoraPostrophe · 22/06/2006 19:35

I'm not saying he should have got away without a prison sentence, I just think 9 years is harsh. for posession of porn plus sex with two girls who were both over the age of 13. Especially when abduction of a 5 year old only gets you 5 years.

The grooming of 100s of children is kind of beside the point because that isn't damaging in itself.

OP posts:
waterfalls · 22/06/2006 19:37

SenoraPostrophe

But dont you think the grooming gives a fairly good idea at what he is capable of, he is only 21, and look what hes done already, paedophiles get braver and sicker over time.

zippitippitoes · 22/06/2006 19:39

I think grooming even if it hasn't progressed is dangerous..it is intent and we don't know the nature of it from that report

Original poster
SenoraPostrophe · 22/06/2006 19:39

he's probably a bastard yes, but when we start giving sentences for what people are capable of, or for what they "are" rather than what they've done, we've crossed a very very bad line imo.

OP posts:
Next · 22/06/2006 19:41

not in this sort of scenario I don't think SP

Original poster
SenoraPostrophe · 22/06/2006 19:43

god have I out-liberal'd mumsnet? (if that's what it is)

OP posts:
waterfalls · 22/06/2006 19:44

I doubt anyones gonna start a petition for him anytime soon.

Rowlers · 22/06/2006 19:51

I was surprised at this story at first glance.
(I know it's daft but) I didn't think he looked like a paedophile when I saw him on the news. How daft is that? Just a young lad.
And at 21, I too thought well, 13 girls at my school have been dropped off at their 30 year old boyfirend's house by their own dad.
But looking at the grroming and child porn photos on his pc, I think the sentence is quite right.
Teenage girls are often daft and wouldn't see him for what he is.

Callisto · 22/06/2006 20:19

He got what he deserved just for possessing the images of very young children being subjected to god knows what sexual abuse. No sentence is too harsh for a paedophile and this sentence (of which he will probably only serve half) may make others think before they access child porn on the internet.

Original poster
SenoraPostrophe · 22/06/2006 20:34

but it won't though. sentences do not deter.

as it goes it makes a huge difference imo whether he paid for the porn or not. if so then perhaps the sentence is justified (all together). if not then I still think it's harsh.

OP posts:
magnolia1 · 22/06/2006 20:38

The sentence of 5 years for abducting a 5 year old is wrong!! But 9 years for 'child porn' and Sex with young girls is not too harsh by a long shot!

I know in comparison to other recent sex offence sentences it seems harsh but in my opinion it is the other short sentences which are not harsh enough

magnolia1 · 22/06/2006 20:39

I meant wrong as in the sentence was not long enough not meaning you were wrong to say that

Elf1981 · 22/06/2006 20:40

SenoraPostrophe - sorry, cant rememeber much info about you, do you have ds's or dd's?

Kathlean · 22/06/2006 20:40

You really think it makes a difference if he paid for a picture of say a 10 year old being abused rather than if he just downloaded them for his own sexual gratification?

JanH · 22/06/2006 20:47
plummymummy · 22/06/2006 20:47

No way is it too harsh. IMO all sexual crimes attract far too lenient sentences.