Low sentence for Eton student **Title edited by MNHQ**

[winkywinkola]

I was utterly amazed to read how this man has got away with such disturbing behaviour. Unbelievable.

Apparently the judge found the images so disgusting he couldn't bring himself to deliver justice describe them. Wtf? Really? Why?

However, I've discovered there is a petition going around requesting a review of this sentence.]]

SueLawley, Atenco, DFODs. If you read my post properly you would see that I clearly wasn't trying to whip up sympathy for this person, simply pointing out that the perception that he was walking away from this because he has money is inaccurate. But don't let the facts get in the way of a good knee-jerk posting, will you.

TeaIlove, he may be able to work in his father's office, though to be honest I think that's unlikely - I doubt they'd risk losing their clients if they found out, and I suspect the staff and the other partners would object strongly also. However, he wouldn't be allowed to become a solicitor, for example, because the Law Society checks people's records and a criminal conviction of this type would be viewed as an absolute bar. So he'd never get a partnership.

No I suspect not.
I imagine he will go abroad after its died down. Then let it die down even more. He won't have to work he will be financed. He will still get a GF I bet.
The money will soften the blow for him immensely. He will have a v different experience to a poor person having committed this disgusting crime.

Well, yes, but rich people get very different experiences to poor people in every context. It is at least gratifying that he gets the same sentence as they do for this type of offence.

Signing a petition once maybe not, but continuing to bleat about how his privilege has swayed this when the actual facts say otherwise suggest you have a very strong agenda against people from that kind of background.

Going on and on about his school and father sounds a bit crusade like to me.

neuroanthropology.net/2010/05/10/inside-the-mind-of-a-pedophile/

Evidence seems to suggest that Paedophile's brains have abnormalities and therefore going on a course isn't going to cure them. Going to prison removes them from society and protects our children but once release they are then a danger again.

augusta - if you took the time to read my posts, you would note that I am not interested in his background. I feel he should not be free. His brain is wired up to enjoy videos of toddlers being tortured. No amount of psychotherapy is going to remove that.

SueLawley, you're still not reading mine. I didn't anywhere suggest you were interested in his background.

? Yes you did - At midnight.

"[I am] simply pointing out that the perception that he was walking away from this because he has money is inaccurate."

While you are asking us to "bear in mind" that he won't get a school reference and how likely or otherwise he will be able to get into university, I am frankly more concerned about how the two year olds are going to be healed emotionally as well as physically from having grown men and dogs penetrate them. His money is irrelevant.

7days I agree. I also agree with the sadist comment.

PortobelloRoad you have spent the first half defending his sentence. I get your point about his sentence being comparable.

Now the conversation has moved on to the reality of his privilege cushioning him for the rest of his life despite the conviction for this crime at 17, and you want to argue the toss about that too?

You can't see into the future any more than us. But I will take an educated guess that his privilege will be of immense help to him. We'll see.

So we shouldn't mention his background? Really? Otherwise it's a crusade? Odd connection there.

His family will have been able to secure the best barrister. He goes to a school that has produced 19 prime ministers and is lauded for being the school of the elite.

Where did it all go wrong? His background IS important.

So you can bleat on about the law being consistent (naive) and how his background doesn't matter. But you're quite quite wrong.

The defence says he sought treatment. I don't imagine he got it on the NHS. The cost of private treatment would have been easily affordable to the family. This was used as leverage to reduce the punishment.

Therefore his wealth is pertinent as your average Paedophile may not have those kind of finances and would therefore be sent straight to prison unlike Picard.

Whether he is "remorseful" or not is completely irrelevant.
This case is living proof that you can get away with anything as long as you come from the right pedigree
If an 18 year old lad from the council estate I grew up on had committed the exact same crimes, I would bet my life on the fact he would be doing a lengthy prison sentence

A quick and simple google search shows that teens found guilty of the same crimes as this guy also get suspended sentences.

I have no sympathy for this young man and hate this crimes he has committed but he has been treated in the same way as others committing similar crimes. Why on earth does the school he attended and his fathers job mean he should receive a different sentence?

Please give a link of the Google search results.

I am on my phone at work. No idea how to copy and post links on this device. Just google ' teenagers online images children sentencing' and you should get a few.

I've only skimmed the thread, but a) you say " this man has got away with such disturbing behaviour. Unbelievable"
Incorrect. He was 17 and therefore a child at the time of offence.

And b) are you also going to start a petition for tougher sentences for any of these teenagers who also received suspended sentences?
This does feel awfully like a witch hunt because of where he went to school and the fact his dad has a good job (but not a job where he calls the shots on employing everyone and can therefore give him a job)

www.crawleynews.co.uk/Broadfield-teenager-sentenced-hacking-making/story-28647064-detail/story.html
www.eastgrinsteadcourier.co.uk/Copthorne-teenager-sentenced-possessing-utterly/story-28663433-detail/story.html
www.portsmouth.co.uk/news/crime/portsmouth-teenaged-girl-avoids-prison-term-despite-having-child-abuse-pictures-1-6944901

Sparecharge - the case in the OP was more serious than all those you've linked to. Not only did the case in the OP have over 1000 extremely graphic images, they were actively distributing them to a wide audience via Skype.

Also,

The defence says he sought treatment. I don't imagine he got it on the NHS. The cost of private treatment would have been easily affordable to the family. This was used as leverage to reduce the punishment

This is probably very relevant too.

The defence says he sought treatment. I don't imagine he got it on the NHS

From the 2nd link I posted:
^"Judge Anthony Niblett said the images were “utterly repellent” but because of his young age and progress made in counselling sessions with a psychotherapist, he would be spared jail.
You have a previous reprimand for similar offences which is an aggravating feature. But to your credit, with the assistance no doubt of your mother, you have sought treatment with a psychotherapist who records that you have made good progress.^

Taking into account your age, I hope this sentence will give you the ability to get on with your life in your mid-20s without any court order hanging over you. But if you reoffend, the sentences will get longer and more serious.”

The court heard Handscomb had been given a previous reprimand in July 2013 for making and distributing images of children and this was taken into account during sentencing."

So had also sought treatment, it wasn't even the first time he had been caught with these images, he is an adult when he offends, he comes from a very average area, and get also got a suspended sentence.

Where if your petition for an increase in his punishment? The judge even explicitly said he wants this to be something that doesn't hinder his ability to get on with his life...

Spare change - you start one and I'll sign it.

A 17 year old from York got a year for a similar crime. Or was it more severe because he blackmailed his victims? www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3303193/Boy-17-jailed-year-blackmailing-younger-boys-Snapchat-collecting-indecent-images.html. Even if the crime was considered more severe there was no mention of prison being a bad idea and suspending his sentence for him to be "fixed" with therapy. Or what about this boy crimeandjustice.co.uk/2014/06/05/maximillian-coughlin-sentenced-to-18-months-in-prison-for-possessing-indecent-images/, was it because he was 19 that he got longer for the same crime? Again no rehabilitation and therapy for him either. So this Eton lowlife is the only teenage pedophile in the UK that can be fixed by therapy. The possibility of prison would damage the poor little sweetheart and make him into an even worse pedophile than he already is money and power will most likely do that. For all the rest it's off to prison you go. That smacks of class inequality so I signed.

On the link that Sparechange posted the broadfield teenager got 2 years and one of the others got was given a community order for two years and ordered to undergo supervision by the probation service. This boy got just 10 months! I think that just highlights that the sentence needs review!

As for a seventeen-year-old sadist being just a child, words fail me.