Re: Langham out already....

On Fri, 16 Nov 2007 13:28:00 -0000, "The Todal" <deadmailbox@xxxxxxxx>
wrote:


"Cynic" <cynic_999@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:q95rj3ddrvvoqer4fu9o4lk3khfgatdjgv@xxxxxxxxxx
On Thu, 15 Nov 2007 19:05:33 -0000, "The Todal" <deadmailbox@xxxxxxxx>
wrote:

I was intrigued by this statement from the COA jusdge:

<...> L's explanation for his making of the photographs
was highly improbable, but was not an issue the court could make a robust
decision upon. The real mischief was the horrifying sexual abuse inflicted
on the children contained in the images and the images being downloaded
only
served to encourage the continuance of that abuse, whatever the motivation
of the recipient.

So child abuse is encouraged, according to that judge, by downloading
images of child abuse *whatever the motivation of the recipient*.

That seems to be the thinking, yes. One suspects also that they want to
firmly discourage defendants from putting forward complex non-sexual
explanations for the downloading of images.


That would mean that police officers and people in the IWF who
download images for investigatory reasons are also "encouraging the
continuance of abuse"

Yes. However, the thinking presumably is that the public interest in
detecting child abuse outweighs the harm they do.


I am also still unclear as to why downloading images of that
particular crime would serve to encourage more being committed, whilst
downloading images of other types of crime are not considered to have
a similar escallating effect.

And I'm unclear why the crime is such a secret one - in the sense that I am
convinced most members of the public don't know that it's illegal to
download indecent photos of children and that they could go to prison for
it. I'm sure most usenet readers know. But I think most members of the
public would think "oh, it's illegal if you're a paedophile but not if
you're just having a peek out of curiosity".

Quite apart from what counts as indecent, anyway? The Nan Goldin
picture of Klara and Edda was deemed NOT indecent by the CPS, although
I am sure that there have been many internet users who were convicted
for downloading far "milder" pictures than that one. For instance,
it's now pretty much recognised, after Somerville, Gearon et al, that
a parent's snaps of its toddler in the bath naked is perfectly
acceptable, but *download* the very same pictures and the parent would
be bang to rights.

MM
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Langham out already....
    ... on the children contained in the images and the images being downloaded ... So child abuse is encouraged, according to that judge, by downloading ... particular crime would serve to encourage more being committed, ...
    (uk.legal)
  • Re: Blocking picture
    ... > pictures or other content automatically in HTML email is ticked.. ... > outlook keeps downloading the pictures any ideas. ... Linked images make the size of the e-mail smaller so the sender can spew ...
    (microsoft.public.outlook)
  • Re: Langham out already....
    ... on the children contained in the images and the images being downloaded ... So child abuse is encouraged, according to that judge, by downloading ... for downloading far "milder" pictures than that one. ...
    (uk.legal)
  • Re: Langham out already....
    ... on the children contained in the images and the images being downloaded ... So child abuse is encouraged, according to that judge, by downloading ... for downloading far "milder" pictures than that one. ...
    (uk.legal)
  • Re: Precluding the Downloading of Pictures
    ... I bet that stops the images from loading in the previous page. ... and it will stop downloading them. ... "Is there some way to prevent pictures of a web page from being displayed?" ...
    (comp.lang.javascript)