Ridiculous child porn sentence

[ukwill]

This sick human being admitted to making, possessing and distributing child porn of the most serious nature. How can our supposedly most learned people assist in the production of such abysmally lenient sentencing?

I find it fking disgraceful that we live in country where Karen from Coventry can do several years in jail for stposting on social media, whilst scum like this do no time at all. How can this sit right with anyone? There is absolutely nothing remotely "progressive" about this. It is a complete travesty of justice.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14086177/...

[otolith]

Couple of years suspended is standard for this, I'm afraid. Compare to the sentences Huw Edwards and the man who supplied him with the images got for their crimes - much the same.

[ukwill]

otolith said:

Couple of years suspended is standard for this, I'm afraid. Compare to the sentences Huw Edwards and the man who supplied him with the images got for their crimes - much the same.

I know. I'm just at a loss as to why.

What stops the market for this kind of filth if pedophiles know they will likely receive no jail sentence if caught.

What is stopping us from reevaluating such ridiculous guidelines for such heinous crimes?

[otolith]

Don't know. It does seem lenient. We probably need to look at what sort of prison population we can afford and then reappraise the whole sentencing framework to make best use of it.

[ChocolateFrog]

That or something mildly offensive written on Social Media, which one ends up in prison?

Can someone try to make that make sense?

Someone got jailed for selling firesticks the other day.

[MrBogSmith]

Good to see the Lucy Connolly offence mentioned again. Only gets mentioned 500 times a week. Especially relevant since she's in a womans' prison...


You can make the case for a whole range of offences to receive custodial sentences, not suspend sentences, longer sentences.

Need somewhere to put them, though.

[valiant]

If you want to change sentencing guidelines then start lobbying/annoying your MP and get others to do the same.

Complaining on here or in the comments section of the DM won't do dick.

If you're so angry then do something.

[ukwill]

valiant said:

If you want to change sentencing guidelines then start lobbying/annoying your MP and get others to do the same.

Complaining on here or in the comments section of the DM won't do dick.

If you're so angry then do something.

The same could be said for pretty much every single thread relating to legislative matters in the UK. This subforum is where we discuss NP&E.

You don't have to respond to this particular topic. And I'll post whatever content I wish, within the confines of the forum rules.

Such a weird response.

[Dingu]

ukwill said:

valiant said:

If you want to change sentencing guidelines then start lobbying/annoying your MP and get others to do the same.

Complaining on here or in the comments section of the DM won't do dick.

If you're so angry then do something.

The same could be said for pretty much every single thread relating to legislative matters in the UK. This subforum is where we discuss NP&E.

You don't have to respond to this particular topic. And I'll post whatever content I wish, within the confines of the forum rules.

Such a weird response.

Valiant has a point (if expressed somewhat bluntly) and it’s on topic. If you want change that passionately then make sure you use those avenues. We can also discuss it here as you point out and that might motivate others to use those channels too and change might happen!

[Muzzer79]

ukwill said:

valiant said:

If you want to change sentencing guidelines then start lobbying/annoying your MP and get others to do the same.

Complaining on here or in the comments section of the DM won't do dick.

If you're so angry then do something.

The same could be said for pretty much every single thread relating to legislative matters in the UK. This subforum is where we discuss NP&E.

You don't have to respond to this particular topic. And I'll post whatever content I wish, within the confines of the forum rules.

Such a weird response.

I think the point is with these threads is that there's very little to discuss.

Is anyone going to come on an disagree with you, saying that the sentence seems about right? I would hope not.

So it becomes a collection of outraged people all agreeing the same thing

[otolith]

ukwill said:

What stops the market for this kind of filth if pedophiles know they will likely receive no jail sentence if caught.

Just on that bit - I'm sure that there are people creating this stuff for commercial gain, but even if you removed that factor, the fkers would still be making it to share with their fellow perverts or hoard for themselves. Seems to be a compulsion to collect it, people get caught with tens of thousands of images.

[Derek Smith]

ukwill said:

valiant said:

If you want to change sentencing guidelines then start lobbying/annoying your MP and get others to do the same.

Complaining on here or in the comments section of the DM won't do dick.

If you're so angry then do something.

The same could be said for pretty much every single thread relating to legislative matters in the UK. This subforum is where we discuss NP&E.

You don't have to respond to this particular topic. And I'll post whatever content I wish, within the confines of the forum rules.

Such a weird response.

He didn't suggest banning your from posting. He merely pointed out that frothing won't change anything. It seemed to me a perfectly reasonable response.

I'm all for modifying the sentencing guidance, but most people seem to want everyone to be banged up, and tend to ignore the other penalties. We already imprison more, many more, that most European countries, suggesting that imprisonment as a deterrence doesn't work. Mind you, there's a lot of research that supports this.

The only point I'd raise about Valiant's post is that MP's won't do a thing about it.

[wc98]

ukwill said:

I know. I'm just at a loss as to why.

What stops the market for this kind of filth if pedophiles know they will likely receive no jail sentence if caught.

What is stopping us from reevaluating such ridiculous guidelines for such heinous crimes?

Far too many of the great and the good are kiddy fiddlers to ever see any meaningful change in the laws under the current system.

[Maxf]

MrBogSmith said:

Need somewhere to put them, though.

House arrest without full internet access (depending on the crime) could be a middle ground, with mandatory education classes. Break the terms and you go to actual prison.

Wouldn’t that be sensible for lots of ‘lesser’ crimes given the lack of prison spaces - freeing up spaces for the worst crimes (which I include this in, for clarity!).

Perhaps the courts already do this, but I don’t think so.

[MrBogSmith]

There's tagging and different ancillary orders that can fulfill that to some extent. I don't think the courts could order someone to stay in their home 24/7 though. More like a curfew.

[grumbledoak]

wc98 said:

Far too many of the great and the good are kiddy fiddlers to ever see any meaningful change in the laws under the current system.

^^^ that.

Don't assume the state is going to protect you and yours

[jdw100]

I could be wrong but I recall ‘making’ in these offences does’t mean he actually took the photos.

I think by downloading them he commits an offence of ‘making’.

That’s why you can read these report and think ‘the guy took photos and hasn’t gone to prison for life?!?!’

One of those bits of law terminology that can confuse.

[rohrl]

jdw100 said:

I could be wrong but I recall ‘making’ in these offences does’t mean he actually took the photos.

I think by downloading them he commits an offence of ‘making’.

That’s why you can read these report and think ‘the guy took photos and hasn’t gone to prison for life?!?!’

One of those bits of law terminology that can confuse.

They also can add up thumbnails and cached images as well as actual images, so exaggerating and distorting the actual number of images on a device. It’s deceptive, the same way that they quote ludicrous amounts of money for “street value” when catching people with drugs.

The offences are bad enough as they are without over-egging the pudding and potentially losing trust in what the police and prosecution are saying.

[jdw100]

rohrl said:

jdw100 said:

I could be wrong but I recall ‘making’ in these offences does’t mean he actually took the photos.

I think by downloading them he commits an offence of ‘making’.

That’s why you can read these report and think ‘the guy took photos and hasn’t gone to prison for life?!?!’

One of those bits of law terminology that can confuse.

They also can add up thumbnails and cached images as well as actual images, so exaggerating and distorting the actual number of images on a device. It’s deceptive, the same way that they quote ludicrous amounts of money for “street value” when catching people with drugs.

The offences are bad enough as they are without over-egging the pudding and potentially losing trust in what the police and prosecution are saying.

Did not know that. Learn something every day.

I guess you hear ‘was found with 50,000 images on his laptop’. I’ve always assumed they just had a huge collection.

You’d be an idiot surely to have this laptop in your house and be using your own wifi.

I’d buy a second hand laptop, store it out of home and be using Starbucks wifi to download.

You read about the owners of these sites with servers in their houses. Sometimes with a kill switch (?) that erases all the data. Again, surely you’d set up away from home. Pay for a unit/flat in cash, set up there.

I guess it depends on how much money these guys make. Given the risks of doing the actual abuse and filming, then selling and distributing; needs to be lucrative.

All paid for in bitcoin I suppose.

Crazy world.