Man remanded for extreme porn offences

  carver 10:57 05 Sep 2009
Locked

I've just been reading about this click here
and can't help thinking that some where the law in this country is going slightly wrong.

If you mug someone, commit shoplifting, break into some ones house you just might get a community sentence, or a verbal warning.

You might not agree with the porn this man had on his PC but have we really come to a time when even having porn on your PC, or on a disc is punishable by being locked up before you even come to trial.

And we are not talking about child porn, or images of extreme violence, this is some thing that in a lot of places you can get quite easily, it might not be to every body's taste, but then we are all different.

One other worrying thing is the fact that under the Serious Crime Act 2007 if you knew about some one who had this stuff on their computer you can also be charged, relevant sentence "encouraging or assisting an offence believing it will be committed".

  tein 11:03 05 Sep 2009

carver im with you on this one! this country's getting mental! the goverments are tightening the grip with everything! porn comes in several stages & the one mentioned is in my eyes quite "The ordinary" provided its NOT accessed at work or any "Untowards stuff" like child then i see no issue here with the person in the story!

its about time the goverment gave us some freedom instead of watching us all & monitoring EVERYTHING we are doing!"

  Jak_1 11:37 05 Sep 2009

I think there may be more than a few Lords and MP's checking their hard drives!

  OTT_Buzzard 11:57 05 Sep 2009

Why? Does getting into bed with the devil class as beastiality?

  Jak_1 12:07 05 Sep 2009

There is much hypocrisy in both houses of parliament, though that is not to tar them all with the same brush!

  Forum Editor 12:25 05 Sep 2009

before you even come to trial."

Well, that's not quite the situation, is it?

Bail is refused for a number of reasons - the police may convince the court that a defendant is likely to abscond before coming to trial, or (as in this case) is likely to act in a manner that will interfere with an ongoing investigation.

The locking up is not intended as a punishment, and if the defendant subsequently receives a custodial sentence the time spent on remand is deducted.

  GANDALF <|:-)> 13:03 05 Sep 2009

'but this case, it appears, involves bestiality and, clearly, there can be no question of consent on the part of the animals involved'..I'm guessing here that animals being led to slaughter are probably not consenting as well. The act of subjective consent implies some understanding of a course of action. In both cases an animal is hardly likely to understand any actions.

G

  newman35 13:12 05 Sep 2009

I take issue with your final sentence:-

'One other worrying thing is the fact that under the Serious Crime Act 2007 if you knew about some one who had this stuff on their computer you can also be charged, relevant sentence "encouraging or assisting an offence believing it will be committed".'

Simply knowing of the existence can, in no way, be construed as 'encouraging or assisting'. I know of someone who does not have a TV licence - am I encouraging or assisting the offence, and can I be prosecuted? I think not.

  GANDALF <|:-)> 13:27 05 Sep 2009

The son of a friend of mine lives on a large council estate near Oxford. His house has been regularly targeted by the local brain-dead for 12 months. They scratch his car, yell obscenities at him and destroy anything in his garden. He knows who they are and has told the local Plod on many occasions. Nothing has been done yet in spite of the fact that he has tried not to 'encourage or assist'. If the police cannot do anything about this does anyone really think that if one of us knew a serious criminal, that we would willingly go trotting off to see Plod?

G

  interzone55 13:40 05 Sep 2009

I think there's more to this story.

It seems he's being held on remand whilst police investigate other matters, they're using the Extreme Porn laws as a stepping stone, just like the Chicago police used Tax Evasion offences to lock Al Capone up.

One final point - re-read the story, the bestiality films were on DVD, not his PC...

  Chegs ®™ 15:47 05 Sep 2009

I have no interest in the type of material alleged to have been found in this mans possession,so cannot understand why he wanted to have DVD's of such material as there's hours of this type of material available online.I expect that the police will be wanting information from him as to where he sourced the DVDs,so they can then instigate a prosecution against the suppliers.Many years ago I was in the cells having been arrested for drunkeness(released once sober without charge)and could hear police officers in fits of laughter as they had arrested a man trying to have intercourse with a cow next to a local club(now demolished)The local paper was also used to continue the mirth as in the "Engagements" section was several "Congratulations Cedric on your recent engagement to Daisy" & other similar comments.He wasnt prosecuted 20+ years ago for trying to have intercourse with a cow,so why are the police now charging people with possessing DVDs of such things? A friend of mine delights in showing me many perverse things he has been sent to his mobile phone,am I expected to report him for possessing them and if I dont am I likely to be arrested if ever he is caught with these videos?

This thread is now locked and can not be replied to.

Elsewhere on IDG sites

Alienware 17 R4 2017 review

These brilliant Lego posters show just what children's imaginations are capable of

Mac power user tips and hidden tricks

Comment réinitialiser votre PC, ordinateur portable ou tablette Windows ?