Friday, 16 May 2014

Why 'Making' (Downloading - POCA 1978)/'Possessing' (CJA 1988) Indecent Images of Children Is Not A Sexual Offence And Never Can Be (Well, Not In A Rational World)

(1) From Home Office Classification


Trending - Trends of indecent images of children and child sexual offences between 2005/2006 and 2012/2013 within the United Kingdom

Released: 17 October 2013 

Sexual Offences in England and Wales - year ending June 2013 

Part of Crime Statistics, period ending June 2013 Release ...

With effect from April 2014

Home Office Counting Rules For Recorded Crime


(2) From The SOA 2003

2 (a) The Requirement To Notify


Trending - Trends of indecent images of children and child sexual offences between 2005/2006 and 2012/2013 within the United Kingdom

i.e. for the purposes of notification requirements (i.e. the, so-called, 'sex offender registration') ...

Part 2: Notification and orders; Notification requirements

80 Persons becoming subject to notification requirements

(1) A person is subject to the notification requirements of this Part for the period set out in section 82 (“the notification period”) if—

(a) he is convicted of an offence listed in Schedule 3;

(b) he is found not guilty of such an offence by reason of insanity;

(c) he is found to be under a disability and to have done the act charged against him in respect of such an offence; or

(d) in England and Wales or Northern Ireland, he is cautioned in respect of such an offence.

(2) A person for the time being subject to the notification requirements of this Part is referred to in this Part as a “relevant offender”." 


Sexual offences [sic] for purposes of Part 2

For the record, not only those who are required to notify, are subject to SOPOs. 

2 (b) What is 'Sexual' About A 'Sexual' Offence? 

7 February 2003

Sex, crime and seduction - The new Sexual Offences Bill could screw us all. 

"A striking feature of the proposed new legislation is its reliance on the concept of ‘a reasonable person’. According to clause 80: ‘penetration, touching or any other activity is sexual if ..."

1st August 2015 

Kissing a woman’s hand was ‘chivalry’ not sexual assault – the case of Vidas Cernevicius 

"Does this create a precedent? Can I go and kiss womens hands and not get in trouble?

In a word ‘no’. In a few more words ‘of course not, don’t be ridiculous’.

Firstly, as stated above – even if you were to not be convicted of sexual assault, you would still be liable to be found guilty of common assault. This is a serious offence in its own right, for which you can go to prison.

But more importantly, a future court may well not find that there is was no sexual motivation in it all.

In any event, a decision of a Magistrates’ Court is not binding on anybody. It is wrong to see this as anything other than what it is – a decision on its own facts, based on the evidence that Mr Cernevicius gave.

I am not suggesting in any way that Mr Cernevicius is guilty, but he clearly has his own set of beliefs about the world and it is far from guaranteed (to put it mildly) that a different Court would come to the same conclusion with a different person."

More to follow.


(3) From Reality

Why Owning Indecent Images of Children Is Not A Sexual Offence, In Reality (Part 2)

Why Owning Indecent Images of Children Is Not A Sexual Offence, In Reality (Part 1) 


click to enlarge


I Looked 

"I looked at the vicious crowd, pushing and jostling, and I did nothing, now I am a hooligan.

I looked at the calm soldier, slicing his enemy with his bayonet, and I did nothing, now I am a war criminal.

I looked at the disembowelled refugee children, and I did nothing, now I am a participator.

I looked at the stick-like bodies, as they were pushed into the trench, and I did nothing, now I am Nazi.

I looked at the shattered remains of the crash victim, and I did nothing, now I am a manslaughterer.

I looked at the voluptuous body of the seductive model, and I did nothing, now I am a rapist.

I looked at the distant scientists, collecting the remains of the murdered schoolgirl, and I did nothing, now I am a murderer.

I looked at the taboo sexual practices of others, and I did nothing, now I live the rest of my life as a child sexual offender,

... and then, I shutdown the computer."


December 26, 2010

"“However, what he didn’t turn his mind to at the time is that merely having possession and viewing images such as this does victimize and hurt the individual portrayed in the image. He appreciates that now.” Senior gets jail time, probation for having single image of child pornography 

We at fail to appreciate that. Maybe we are too humanly-stupid to understand. Or maybe we do not fall prey to mystical superstitious thinking that is the driving force of the child porn witch hunt."


 click to enlarge



The Madness of 'Gillotti' (USA)

July 11, 2014 - 7:14 PM 

Sex offender loses bid to reduce rating 

Decided on June 10, 2014;

People v. Gillotti 


"Both Defendants in this case were required to register as a sex offenders pursuant to the Sex Offender Registration Act (SORA).

At issue in these cases was the SORA risk assessment guidelines promulgated by the Board of Examiners of Sex Offenders.

The Court of Appeals held:

(1) guidelines factor 3, which is based on the number of victims [sic] involved in an offender’s crime [sic], permits the scoring of points based on the number of different children depicted in the child pornography files possessed by a child pornography offender;

(2) a position statement issued by the Board on the evaluation of child pornography cases under SORA does not prohibit a SORA court from assigning points to an offender under factor 3 and factor 7 (which accounts for the increased risk of sexual recidivism posed [sic] by an offender whose crime is directed at a stranger [sic]);

and (3) where an offender requests a downward departure in a SORA case the offender must prove the facts supporting a downward departure by a preponderance of the evidence." 


Posted on June 29, 2014

9 Reasons Why Child Porn Laws Are Evil

1. Child abuse images are completely legal, while child porn images are not
2. Child porn is not child abuse
3. Child porn is a thought crime
4. Criminalising any image is an affront to democracy
5. Banning one thing leads to the ‘slippery slope’ effect of banning everything
6. Child porn laws undermine the rule of law
7. Child porn laws are so excessively broad that they effectively rape children of their childhood
8. Banning child porn allows child rapists and child abusers to walk free
9. Those who seek to ban child pornography are all paedophiles themselves anyway


21 August, 2014

Banning us from watching this video of a criminal act is a step too far 

"There is a difference between individuals exercising their right not to view or share a video, and companies such as Twitter -- or indeed the police force -- denying people the right to view it."
(Embedded Tweet - click date)


More to follow.

No comments:

Post a Comment