Last 40 Messages
Last 100 Messages
Last 250 Messages
Last 400 Messages
Days prior to yesterday:
phantom [30409. Posted 21-Oct-2014 Tue 20:15]
"If there`s a time to argue about what the scope of the law should be it`s before it`s enacted, rather than after the first prosecution."
But the time should never arrive where we stop shouting it from the roof tops, that what the law is being used for is not what they actually said these laws would be used for.
According to the politicians who introduced the statue this was not its supposed purpose.
Damn the statute and what it says in the fine print. For it is a wicked law.
Over to Spencer Tracy:
"I say that you cannot administer a wicked law impartially. You can only destroy. You can only punish. And I warn you, that a wicked law, like cholera, destroys everyone it touches - its upholders as well as its defiers."
It is my firm conviction that these laws are a pure evil. They are a poison. To my mind the lying, deceitful vipers who introduced them ought to be incarcerated for a great length of time. Not merely for the injustice they have foisted upon others, but so too for the lies and deceits by which they have corrupted the political process which produced such laws.
But so too do I think that the police and - even more so - the legal profession must also bear responsibility for this. They cannot brush this off as someone else`s law which they are merely enforcing.
Want it or not, they bear a moral responsibility for their actions.
After all, the judges at the Nuremberg show trials also would have argued they were merely enforcing the law. Someone else`s law. Nazi law.
But at some point one cannot simply abrogate responsibility for destroying people`s lives, whatever part within this destruction one plays.
And yes, I cannot believe that anyone involved in this case could credibly claim not to know what the politicians claimed this law was meant for. To play out a lie like this is to partake in the lie itself.
Harvey [30408. Posted 21-Oct-2014 Tue 15:53]
You surely don`t need the "Wow".
It`s no surprise to me that there has been a conviction for posession of prohibited images. We said at the time that thiswas aimed directly at catching anime and manga, rather than "closing the loophole" whereby images of acual childreen were being rendered as drawings.
And so it has proved. The first sucessful prosecution is for posession of Anime cartooons.
The comments from Angelus, miss the point. Firstly he`s referring to the wrong Act. This was not a prosecution under the DPA (otherwise know as Section 63 of the Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008). This was Section 62 of the Coroners and Justice Act 2009.
Now, whatever was claimed at the time - that this was about catching those who possessed images which would be caught by the OPA if published - that was NOT what was actually enacted. For s.62 says a "prohibited image" is one which is "pornographic", focuses on a (imaginary) child`s genitals or anal region, and is; "grossly offensive" or "disgusting" or "otherwise of an obscene character". It is very clear, that it will catch the merely disgusting (whatever that means) and not the criminally obscene.
If there`s a time to argue about what the scope of the law should be it`s before it`s enacted, rather than after the first prosecution.
phantom [30407. Posted 21-Oct-2014 Tue 15:30]
re: Is it all politicians can do, dream up new ways to imprison anime fans?...
Wow. There we have it.
We`re now knowingly convicting people for things for which the laws supposedly weren`t meant.
Just like good Nazi henchmen, who were `only following orders`, our law enforcement agencies have got a good excuse; they`re `only following the law`.
No matter that the law is patently unjust. No matter that it clearly was never meant to catch comic book collectors and the likes.
What matters is solely that a law exists that says that possession should be punished. So punish we do.
So there you go. Nobody need think for themselves. Courts need show not an ounce of wisdom. They need only partake in the wild-eyed witch hunt.
If anything symbolises the bankruptcy of the legal system, it is this case. We now find guilty people who we know were never intended as the target. Just because we can.
phantom [30406. Posted 21-Oct-2014 Tue 15:19]
Yes, the 50`000 figures seems to wonderfully round and convenient.
But that`s why a grew a little suspicious.
It may well be the police spokesperson explaining why his force can`t do any more, but that in itself might be an indirect bid for new powers/rules/laws.
After all, who believes that going on the media and announcing 50`000 paedos are getting away with it will not cause a stir?
So if you`d want to cause a stir, that`s what you`d do, right?
On the other hand, there may be another, somewhat oblique angle on this subject. For every paedophile prosecution, how many front doors get bashed down? Given that the police appear never to smash the door down of anyone innocent (i.e. one always finds `something`), how many charges and convictions on such things such as `extreme pornography`, etc would the justice system have to cope with in order to catch 50`000 paedophiles?
In short, might it in fact be that the system simply can`t cope with processing another 250`000 folks in order to `get` those 50`000 paedos?
Perhaps creating those catch-all offences by now coming actually hinders catching the paedophiles.
I wouldn`t be surprised.
Harvey [30405. Posted 21-Oct-2014 Tue 12:21]
The 50,000 figure is a bit ingenuous.
It`s an esitmate of how many people accessed indecent images last year. I`ve no idea how the esitmate was arrived at, but let`s be clear that these are not 50,000 known individuals.
What the cop is actually having to excuse is that he doesn`t have the resources to investigate the much smaller number of named suspects which the NCA are aware of. In recent weeks it came to light that two individuals who have been convicted of more serious offences, were suspected of having accessed indecent images as a result of being on the Operation Spade list, but were never investigated. Spade was the investigation by Toronto police of a company called AZOV which had been selling `naturist` videos as streamed downloads and DVDs by mail order.
The problem with Operation Spade is that it produced a lot of names (thousands) in up to 50 countries, but yet again, not all the names had been buying material which could be classified as indecent images of children.
There was a big fuss when it emerged that one on the list was a German MP, who had had his home raided by police, when he had only purchased legal material.
Thee was a similar fuss, but on a bigger scale in the US where a nude (i.e. non-sexual) image of a child is legal to possess. The cops had riaded purchasers of the `naturist` videos, but then found actual pornographic, sexual images with which they obtained prosecutions. Big debate about whether the search was illegal, as it was based on the purchase of legal material, and therefore whether material found in the search should be ruled inadmissible as evidence. It wssn`t and there have been a huge numer of convictions.
Any way back to the UK cop. He needs to explain the embarassment as to how a couple of paedos have apparently slipped through his net. His explanation is that there are so many suspects, he can`t investigate them all. He must prioritize. Which is true, as there are hundreds of names on his list and no way of separating the paedos from the rest. But not the 50,000 which is the figure he`s got the press to run with. Which is the art of spin.