Family member under investigation re images on work PC - any advice/info?

[doubletrouble2015]

Hello,

I'm very new to posting on forums so please forgive the longhand or lack of information, I'm also hoping this is the right place to post judging by other threads in this topic!

I had a visit from SS this morning to inform me that a very close family member is being investigated by the police for accessing and storing illegal images on their work computer. DH and I have 2 DDs who will now only be allowed supervised access to this family member, hence the SS visit. I cannot believe it's true, it just completely goes against everything the individual believes and DH and I are flabbergasted to say the least that it's happening to our family. I'm not sure of the details as I haven't spoken to other family members and I'm waiting for DH to get home from work before making contact.

Does anyone else have experience with this kind of thing? What are the repercussions of being accused/investigated/charged? Is it possible it's malicious? If so how can it be proven and what happens then?

I just can't get my head around it and am hoping to find someone who's been in a similar situation if possible.

Thanks.

If these images were found on a work laptop/computer by the IT, then why would they report explicit adult pornagraphy to the police?

They would report images of child abuse. SS would only get involved if there was a child protection case because of this.

I know it has come as a shock, but follow all instructions SS have given you in regards to your children and this person.

"Some adult "porn" involves coercion, rape and sexual slavery."

Yes - but the viewer could use the defence that they did not know. That defence is not open to them when it is images of child sexual abuse. That's why there's an important distinction being made (and the reason it's important to keep repeating this can be found here:
Rotherham case

Language matters massively - because the police saw the victims as "prostitutes" rather than "children" they didn't bother to investigate. The same goes for the "porn"/"images of abuse" distinction.

OP - I have a relative who has a record for child sex offences. I am no contact on the advice of his offender management team. I'd suggest you listen to what they are advising.

I also have no idea why the police would be investigating "storing of images" if it's not child abuse related, and why SS would be involved.

OP did SS say they were being investigated because the images themselves were illegal, or that the images portrayed illegal activity? (An example of the latter would be drug taking, or something like animal abuse e.g. dog fighting.)

we had a similar experience with someone we know. there was a call/allegation made against the person about images on their PC - SS nor police said they were images of children as they weren't allowed to tell us that much but said our child was not allowed to visit them at all - turned out it was malicious because after going through everything the police didn't find any images and he hasn't been charged with anything... does make you wonder though.

hopefully it will turn out to be nothing - devastating for the person concerned if it is a malicious rumour though.

pocketsaviour I don't believe SS will give out that information - they told us it was about images and that was it - they wouldn't answer any more questions and just said we wouldn't hear any more from them but if the allegations turned out to be true it would likely be in the local news.

It could have been picked up as part of a wider investigation which included child abuse images. Such as if he had been liaising with others online who were already identified offenders. Think of the Plymouth nursery case for example.

Yes Peggy, but the OP said "definitely not pertaining to child abuse" so that's why I'm confused - it seems like they have given some info but only enough to throw the OP into a panic, which is less than helpful

I had a similar situation some years back with DSS's bio mum's current husband. He was arrested for storing images of child abuse. However thinking back, we were (eventually) informed by DSS's mum, not by social services. So I don't know if they would have given us a full explanation or not.

(He was eventually found guilty and given a suspended sentence. In the meantime before we found out, bio mum (non-resident parent) had continued to have DSS down to stay in the school hols and gone out to work herself, leaving this man to look after DSS all day, including getting him dressed and bathing him. Brilliant.)

Did you find out what the nature of the images was?

If I were OP I would be contacting them again and asking them to clarify. If it's illegal though it is bad.

I wish SS had visited me and warned me to keep DD away from man who visited my home. Everyone thought he was lovely. He wasn't.

And we don't use 'porn' for child abuse because the sick fuckers that do it like to catagorize it as 'porn' to normalise it.

OK Cheersmedea maybe you're right re coercion, rape and slavery but there was no need whatsoever for the FFS and grow up comments.

Personally I would define coercion, rape and slavery images as abusive also.

Yes, but adult porn may or may not be abusive. It may be fully consensual.

Sexual images of children are guaranteed images of child abuse 100% of the time. They are never porn. Calling them that minimises what is happening and suggest children could consent to taking part, which they can't.

I'm a social worker and can only echo the posters who have said it must be related to child abuse or there wouldn't be a specific issue about contact with your children.

I think if the images included your DC then you would have been told and the children would have been spoken to.