Topic: What a Shock

[goldshirt*9]

http://www.thisisleicestershire.co.uk/Leicester-man-jailed-having-animal-sex-extreme/story-18400645-detail/story.html#axzz2NcmkMCa4

This news broke on Monday 11/3/13. The above accused worked where i work. although not a close friend, and as many do you speak at work exchanging peasantries and such.
O M G then this came out.
What makes it worse is his son works with him as well.Needless to say he is off with stress.
CAt 5 is the strongest offence for this type of activity.
My immediate boss's wife works with the police and more information appears everyday.
Apparently he logged into a site under his mistresses name and info firstly accordingly to find more sites and information.She had a shock when the police came a knocking.
According to Boss, the police track the 3 main sites for this activity ( including other illegal sex sites under UK law) and log your IP address and follow what you do.A couple of visits they ignore you , mistake and such but then they follow you.Apparently he was followed for 2 years.
You hear and read about it but to work with someone is shocking.
As a Union rep I am being constantly asked about whether he can come back to work as his job is being held open.As i am about to finish a employment law course you can guess, I have had a few arguments about this.
Rightly or wrongly the company have in law to keep the job open, just a nightmare in law trying to release someone from his contract who is in prison. ( if interested its called Frustration of Contract )

This is the second time where i work this has happened.The first was worse what the father did.

Spoiler (hover to show)

If this is moved / deleted then i understand why

[6pairsofshoes]

There must be something wrong with his brain.  How else to explain why someone would do this?

[mishca09]

wow. I can't even imagine what his son is going through. I wonder why governments can't shut these sites down… do they leave them up to just to catch others? . stories like these always make me cringe...

[smokester]

That is heavy poo! the bestiality is available even on TPB so that (although vulgar) isn't much to talk of, but the child related stuff is just abominable.

At a shop steward so to speak, could you refuse to defend him like a someone in the legal profession could? 

[xtopave]

Even the thought of children being sexually abused is so abhorring it makes me physically ill. I'd go with the severest of punishments for those people.

the bestiality is available even on TPB

 

[goldshirt*9]

At a shop steward so to speak, could you refuse to defend him like a someone in the legal profession could?

I'm not sure, I would imagine I could refuse and would.
He got 8 months in prison, the same as hume and ex wife  something wrong here dont you think.
apparently he started to go to counselling when he got caught, so the judge gave him a lenient sentence. 

[Discover99]

it's good though that people get exposed and sent to prison. 8 months doesn't seem like a long time in prison though.. I mean counseling should be a given in this situation

[smokester]

Am I right in understanding that all this chap did was look at pictures in the privacy of his own home?

He didn't touch a horse, a child or a duck?

The crime is what, precisely?

It's illegal to possess child porn (that's a law) but far worse it promotes exploitation. 

[townie2]

that's where the real crime is, the more people watch child porn, the more demand for it, therefore more children are sexually abused, this doesn't really have to do with what you do in the privacy of your home.

[goldshirt*9]

Am I right in understanding that all this chap did was look at pictures in the privacy of his own home?
He didn't touch a horse, a child or a duck?
The crime is what, precisely?

He looked and downloaded them including video's, which then became illegal.
Not sure, The printed news paper had more information written of what he actually did abroad ??
Possession of illegal pornography "  Protection of Children Act 1978, " and for Animals
" Sexual Offences Act 2003"

As for 'did he actually do it himself  ?' I have no idea, just rumours and they are not worth listening to.
More information is forthcoming. 
But the actual act does repulse people.

From the boss's wife, he actually went abroad and committed said crimes

[goldshirt*9]

That bit wasn't in the paper - for that he deserves to be shot, but I still can't quite get my head round what is wrong with looking at pictures.

The on-line edition missed a lot of things out.
Wasn't the fact he looked, He Downloaded them !


'10 counts of making indecent photographs of children, by downloading them'
can someone explain this ??
did he take the photos and edit or download and edit photos ?

[mishca09]

I found this http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/s_to_u/sentencing_manual/indecent_images_of_children/

seems like it demands on the age and what is being done in the photo...

[smokester]

From the boss's wife, he actually went abroad and committed said crimes

That bit wasn't in the paper - for that he deserves to be shot, but I still can't quite get my head round what is wrong with looking at pictures.

It's illegal to ... 

illegal <> wrong: we have some really stupid laws, especially populist ones, that are passed because no one has the courage to point out that they are stupid.

... it promotes exploitation. 

This appears to be the nub of it, but buying Nike sneakers, DELL (or Apple) computers, or anything made in the far east also promotes exploitation but yet no-one is jailed for buying sneakers, are they? The law appears to be inaccurately targeted. I also note that he had "... 58 prohibited cartoon images depicting sexual activity with children", and I fail to see how a cartoon "promotes" anything.

I think that, in truth, the law is aimed at the distaste of the masses - he does stuff that i find distasteful, therefore he should be jailed. This is not good law.

(Please note: I agree that people that exploit children, adults, dogs, geese or goats deserve punishment, and the harsher the better - I simply cannot make the leap between "viewing on the internet" and "doing to kids").

Personally, I will never buy Nike because of their behavior in S.A during apartied,  I won't buy DELL because they're crap (but now I know they are also exploiting folk I'll add that to the list), and I wouldn't buy and iPhone because of the exploitation it would do to my bank balance.

I also note that he had "... 58 prohibited cartoon images depicting sexual activity with children", and I fail to see how a cartoon "promotes" anything.

Actually, I was in Japan in the mid 90's when the cartooned depiction of schoolgirls being molested and whatnot were commonplace, while the public seemed oblivious and didn't seem to understand the implications.  4chan, /b/ and pedobear later...

[goldshirt*9]

Japan has funny laws on sex 

[6pairsofshoes]

There was a group of radical feminists in the U.S. who were trying to pass stringent laws on pornography that depicted women in bondage, being tortured, etc. on the basis that such imagery promoted degrading attitudes toward women and posed a de facto threat to their equal protection under the law.

I think that laws against child pornography have the same intention, protection of groups that either cannot protect selves, or that are already in a practical status of inequality that the pornography helps bolster.  This is more problematical in the case of children or animals in that they cannot make decisions in their own best interest (under the law).  It's harder to make the argument against women who are complicit in making pornography in which they are mistreated.  As for what one does about the consumption of such images is another odd question.  I'd prefer not to have the government tell me what I can and can't watch on tv, but at the same time, I can understand how a private entity like Disney might not want porn shown on their networks.  Customer groups are self selecting, they go to the purveyor of the entertainment they want.

It's hard to demonstrate conclusively that violence in video games results in crime any more than bondage videos causes disrespect for women.  However, the link between fantasy and preparatory intent can be powerful evidence as was the case in this recent trial against a police officer in NYC who fantasized about killing women, dismembering and eating them.  The causal link there was sufficiently grave as to result in a conviction. 

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/13/nyregion/gilberto-valle-is-found-guilty-in-cannibal-case.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0