Woman accessed child abuse images from hospital bed

[KayakingOnDown]

Haven't seen a thread on this.

Julie Marshall looked at some of her 80,000 child abuse images while recovering from a heart attack. Presumably on a women's or mixed ward.

Julie Marshall admitted three counts of making indecent images of children. 677 of the images downloaded were of the category A, most serious, type.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/uk-england-lancashire-53410019?__twitter_impression=true

Making images doesn't refer to taking photos. It means downloading them ie deliberately choosing to have a copy in your possession

Possession of images: offenders will be placed in this category if they possess images but there is no evidence of distributing, possession with a view to distributing, or involvement in the production of the image. ‘Making’ of an image by downloading should be distinguished from the category ‘production/taking’ which is discussed below. If ‘making’ is charged in relation to downloading and does not involve production/taking of the image then for the purposes of sentencing ‘making’
by downloading should be treated as possession.

And we don't have to call him she in MN. MNHQ have confirmed that preferred pronouns do not need to be used for men convicted of sexual offences so please let's not call this scum she

Whose prison male or female?

No crimes under this name what about the birth name?

[quote ThePurported]This piece by James Kirkup is worth reading. It's two years old, but nothing seems to have changed at the BBC
www.spectator.co.uk/article/is-the-bbc-scared-of-the-transgender-debate-15-august-2018[/quote]
www.google.com/amp/s/www.spectator.co.uk/article/the-bbc-failed-the-facts-over-a-crime-concerning-gender-identity/amp

What was it that gave her away? Is it her genitals, her XY chromosomes, her propensity to download images of child abuse to view in a public setting around vulnerable people?

Coming to a women’s prison with mother & baby unit in 3, 2, 1...

I await Jameela Jamil giving us a good ticking off for not accepting Julie as a woman because Julie 'doesn't fit the cis normative expectations of femininity'.

I agree, can we stop calling this piece of shit 'she' - it is a man.

Just imagine if all these men identifying as female identified as black instead. What sort of response do you think there would be to 'black man downloaded child abuse images' accompanied by pictures of a clearly white man. And if all these crimes were recorded as committed by black men?

A few days ago, some journalist or other tried to compare being transgender with adoption. It's just occurred to me that one of the things that annoys me in life is that adopted children are always described as adopted even when irrelevant.

For example, 'Respects were paid yesterday to Joe Bloggs, who died this weekend. Bloggs, who had two adopted children, was 75 and had held his seat in the House of Commons for 40 years.'

If the person has multiple biological children and one adopted child, they get that factoid in even it makes the sentence a little clumsy.

Always.

But they drop the little word 'trans' to avoid hurting a sex offender's feelings with all haste!

Trans should refer just to transitioning women (ie those who are waiting for surgery to become a woman and who may be living life as a woman in the meantime). It doesn’t (and should never have) refer to pedos who ‘come out’ after getting caught with child pornography

But who is to say how anyone really identifies, especially once you have self ID? You can no longer pick and choose. That is one reason why it should be more difficult to achieve a gender recognition certificate, not easier.

Also, you should not be able to receive such a certificateuntil you've undergone the full surgery. Supposedly changing one's sex and as a resuly moving into the protected spaces of other groups is not, and should not be, like shopping for a new outfit. It should only happen if the individual cannot function otherwise.

And none of that addresses, either, than many young women have committed to, and undergone gender -re-assignment surgery, and taken hormones, and have then decided to detransition. The fact is that 'being trans' is not an actual material reality ( like sex or race) but dependent on internal perception and feeling.

To me, and to most GC people 'being trans' is not a material reality, but an identity, a feeling...most often resulting from dysphoria. and when it comes to 'feelings' who is to judge?

Exactly. It's not helpful to claim that TWs can't be sexual predators. The 'no true trans' idea is a nice sentiment but ultimately meaningless, like all those 'real men don't do x' phrases.

I'm with clymene

They believe it's more important for a prolific paedophile to have his pronouns recognised than it is to record the truth. That's how morally deficient transactivists have become.

The people who hold this view are bad people.

Where they on a women's ward?

@xsquared

Except it's not a woman at all.

Certainly doesn't look like one.

Will the person be in a men's or women's prison I wonder.

This piece of shit is a bloke.

Trans should refer just to transitioning women

Tbh I wouldn't have had a problem if Marshall was referred to as a Transwoman. It's the woman part I object to.

Coronary Care Units are usually mixed sex as specialist units are exempt from single sex guidance. Not so stepdown/rehab wards.

I have complained to the BBC about their lack of factual reporting.

When they push back and defend themselves, as they always do, I will escalate to Ofcom. If BBC are going to continually deny there's any issue or problem then Ofcom needs to be aware.

I'm actually disappointed in the James Kirkup article - it's uncharacteristically wishy washy for him. The BBC have repeatedly offended over several years now they do not deserve to be given the benefit of the doubt in any shape or form.

Kayaking, I have complained too, including asking who the complaint should be escalated to (at the BBC) and I agree that if (when) they pretend it’s okay I will escalate to Ofcom. Unlike a lot of the articles I’ve seen lately which are biased or don’t give the full picture, this one is just wrong.

I too thought the JK article was wishy washy, although it’s an approach that might win over waverers I suppose, as itcan’t be characterised as ‘phobic’ by a disinterested reader.

I’ve already mentioned this on the other thread about the Spectator article.

I have complained about the article on the basis that the reporting discriminates against people with a visual impairment. Nothing in the text of the article indicates that this is a male bodied person. The photo, however, clearly shows this to be the case. The audio tag for the photo just reads ‘Marshall was found to have a vast library of more than 80,000 images’.

A visually impaired person accessing the article using text to speech software would be denied information that a sighted person would be implicitly given - that the perpetrator is male-bodied.

I can’t see them (no pun intended) being able to wriggle their way out of that one.

It also discriminates against women by imposing crimes on them they are not theirs, affecting how women are seen. Imagine if these individuals described themselves as black and the BBC said ‘Black man downloads child abuse images’ or ‘Black man attacks children in supermarket toilets’ - it would be painting a picture of black men as abusers and embedding that in the public’s mind even though the perpetrators are white. There would be an outcry, rightly so. It is no more acceptable for the BBC to do this to women.

@TheRealMcKenna unless they just disingenuously say that the picture is of a woman, Julie Marshall? After all, transwomen are women. If they truly are sticking with the position of TWAW then they can't logically admit that the pic is of a man.

We'll see what they say.

unless they just disingenuously say that the picture is of a woman

Well, legally ‘Julie’ is a man. The court and police records show that. By calling ‘her’ a ‘woman’ they are making a political decision with no basis in law.

The fact remains that the photo clearly shows a male and everyone knows it. The only people that don’t are the ones that aren’t able to access the photo.

If they didn’t want to send the message that ‘Julie’ is trans then they shouldn’t have included a photo at all.

In 2016 when I complained to them about the murderer 'Claire' Darbyshire being reported as a female murderer and the 'daughter' of Brian Darbyshire - the murder victim - their reply was that Chris had changed their name to Claire and was now Claire and a woman. That was different however as Chris had changed his name to Claire before the murder took place.

images.app.goo.gl/qcgqsuj2kkDcGzJY7

KayakingOnDown The article the image you have linked to is attached to reads Darbyshire, who was born male but has lived her life as a female, has already spent five months on remand in a men's prison awaiting trial.

They have clearly stated that Derbyshire was male-bodied. That’s the fundamental difference in this case.