Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us $3,400 per month for bandwidth bills alone, and since we don't believe in shoving popup ads to our registered users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
«99 »
  • Locked thread
Serotonin
Jul 14, 2001

The history of all hitherto existing society is the history of *blank*


goddamnedtwisto posted:

That's pretty much exactly what the situation with these particular images is. I emphasise that because there's a load of other weird poo poo about this case, but basically there's a better than zero - in fact a better than 50% - chance that you, I, and everyone else in this thread has images on our hard drives right now that would qualify as CAI if he's convicted.

Speak for yourself

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

goddamnedtwisto
Dec 31, 2004

"goddamnedtwisto" (not his real name) is banned from the isle of wight for trying to overthrow the democratically elected mps there to set up bradley from s club 7 (now s club 3) as the island's new communist dictator. think about that when reading his posts



Fun Shoe

Serotonin posted:

Speak for yourself

While he got them from a site that I won't name here but is basically where all the Reddit jailbait creeps went, 8 or 9 of the images were originally taken from a newspaper's website (not named in court but I think we can all draw our own conclusions). This was the point I was making, that under the current case law simply having the images in your browser cache is making of an indecent pseudophotograph, meaning a fair proportion of the population of the UK would have been guilty of that offence.

Now certainly saving any of these images for your own gratification should be a red flag the size of Wembley Stadium, allowing precedent to stand that "visiting a national newspaper website" is now grounds for a custodial sentence should Plod decide to look at your hard drive would have been a clusterfuck.

The images on which he was convicted were from those dodgy "child model" websites, where it's considerably clearer-cut that they're provided for sexual gratification - he was actually given a sentence at the high end of the scale for such a small amount of grade one images, which suggests either they were right on the edge of the grade or the judge was just sick of his poo poo with some of his defence.

Kaislioc
Feb 14, 2008


quote:

Now certainly saving any of these images for your own gratification should be a red flag the size of Wembley Stadium, allowing precedent to stand that "visiting a national newspaper website" is now grounds for a custodial sentence should Plod decide to look at your hard drive would have been a clusterfuck.

Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. National newspapers and their readers spend years supporting increasingly broad and ill-defined legislation banning huge swathes of pornography and supporting precedents that make almost every single person in the country a criminal, find themselves very suddenly on the sharp end of said precedents.

edit: Well poo poo I didn't actually mean to hit submit. Oh well. I'll add in the caveat that I find it really hard to talk about pornography legislation without talking about all pornography legislation and I'm definitely referencing more than just child related things, so this post might have been more suited for the other thread.

Kaislioc fucked around with this message at Jun 2, 2016 around 17:40

Guavanaut
Nov 27, 2009

Teach the Controversy!



Kaislioc posted:

Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. National newspapers and their readers spend years supporting increasingly broad and ill-defined legislation banning huge swathes of pornography and supporting precedents that make almost every single person in the country a criminal, find themselves very suddenly on the sharp end of said precedents.

edit: Well poo poo I didn't actually mean to hit submit. Oh well. I'll add in the caveat that I find it really hard to talk about pornography legislation without talking about all pornography legislation and I'm definitely referencing more than just child related things, so this post might have been more suited for the other thread.
Even then there was the whole thing about an 'indecent pseudo-photograph of a child' which could include anything that is not an actual photograph but appears to depict an indecent act. So you had legal scholars debating whether renaissance art or greco-roman reliefs depicting dudes touching boy dicks were child abuse images.

For me, the most important factor to consider is "who is the victim?" In the production of child abuse images, there is clearly a victim, it is the child who is being abused for the production of said images. I am more than fine with that being criminalized. In the distribution of child abuse images there is also a victim, in that there is demonstrable harm from such things circulating without the subject's consent (see 'revenge pornography' laws) and as the subject is a child they cannot legally consent, again, fine with that being criminalized. In cases of possession, there was a large legal debate at the time as it was one of the first things where simple possession of information would be a crime. As with revenge porn, hell, even as with a deeply personal document, there is evidence here that simple possession is harmful to the victim, and child abuse is far worse than those. It gets a bit more abstract, but so does the precedent around it. I'm fine with it being illegal as long as there's some kind of protections to stop 17 year olds being prosecuted as sex offenders for sexting each other, while still allowing the law to be invoked against teens having indecent photos of younger kids or distributing revenge porn.

But by the time they're talking about things that did not even involve real children and the British Museum is asking for legal advice about their collection of classical baby dicks it all starts to get a bit metaphysical. Often weird and gross, but I figure there should be a difference between weird and gross and criminal, and traditionally for many jurists that has revolved around the wronging of another (the victim) or the perpetuation/exacerbation of their suffering. I don't want anything to do with a system where Correggio's Leda and the Swan (a wonderful painting btw) becomes a most serious category pseudophotograph of bestiality with naked infants in frame just because some pervert finds it arousing.

As you say though, pornography (much like terrorism and drugs) is an area where the media and public often lose their poo poo and jump further than even the precautionary principle and straight into "drat the consequences, ban it all and let the courts sort it out". Which would be poo poo even if the criminal justice system wasn't falling apart under immense pressure.

duz
Jul 11, 2005

Excellent. The Arkham Asylum shower cam is operational once more.


Are non famous paedos ok to discuss in this thread? Cause there's this guy.

DailyMail posted:

Huckle bragged of the attacks in online blogs and penned a sick 60-page 'handbook' titled 'Pedophiles & Poverty: Child Lover Guide'.

Huckle, originally from Ashford, faces up to 22 life sentences after admitting to 71 charges, including surprise sex, sexual assault, and sexual activity with a child.

He turned to online paedophiles to crowdfund the abuse, allowing those who paid him in Bitcoins access to videos of him raping his victims.

'Would love to make a small income off selling child porn.'

Police found 20,253 indecent images of children on his laptop and hard drives, many of them showing Huckle abusing children.

Malaysia is also slightly upset the UK police took 16 months after his arrest to let them know about it. I'm not sure how long of a wait on that would be normal though. The Australian officials who tipped off the UK about him didn't tell Malaysia either, but that could just be because of flight issues.

Guavanaut
Nov 27, 2009

Teach the Controversy!



I do wish they'd use Caribbean bearer shares or something instead of bitcoin, so some other pseudocurrency gets associated with pedos.

Non-wealthy pedos I mean.

OwlFancier
Aug 22, 2013

Much I marvelled this ungainly fowl to hear discourse so plainly,
Though its answer little meaning, little relevancy bore.


Bitcoin is a dumb currency for dumb lovely people so I think it's fine.

Guavanaut
Nov 27, 2009

Teach the Controversy!



Caribbean bearer shares are a dumb currency for rich lovely people so I think it'd be funny to have them associated with that.

Not that they aren't every week, but y'know.

boom boom boom
Jun 28, 2012

by Shine


Guavanaut posted:

I do wish they'd use Caribbean bearer shares or something instead of bitcoin, so some other pseudocurrency gets associated with pedos.

Non-wealthy pedos I mean.

Yeah, the damage this is going to do to Bitcoin's reputation is the real shame in all this

jabby
Oct 27, 2010



Guavanaut posted:

Even then there was the whole thing about an 'indecent pseudo-photograph of a child' which could include anything that is not an actual photograph but appears to depict an indecent act. So you had legal scholars debating whether renaissance art or greco-roman reliefs depicting dudes touching boy dicks were child abuse images.

For me, the most important factor to consider is "who is the victim?" In the production of child abuse images, there is clearly a victim, it is the child who is being abused for the production of said images. I am more than fine with that being criminalized. In the distribution of child abuse images there is also a victim, in that there is demonstrable harm from such things circulating without the subject's consent (see 'revenge pornography' laws) and as the subject is a child they cannot legally consent, again, fine with that being criminalized. In cases of possession, there was a large legal debate at the time as it was one of the first things where simple possession of information would be a crime. As with revenge porn, hell, even as with a deeply personal document, there is evidence here that simple possession is harmful to the victim, and child abuse is far worse than those. It gets a bit more abstract, but so does the precedent around it. I'm fine with it being illegal as long as there's some kind of protections to stop 17 year olds being prosecuted as sex offenders for sexting each other, while still allowing the law to be invoked against teens having indecent photos of younger kids or distributing revenge porn.

But by the time they're talking about things that did not even involve real children and the British Museum is asking for legal advice about their collection of classical baby dicks it all starts to get a bit metaphysical. Often weird and gross, but I figure there should be a difference between weird and gross and criminal, and traditionally for many jurists that has revolved around the wronging of another (the victim) or the perpetuation/exacerbation of their suffering. I don't want anything to do with a system where Correggio's Leda and the Swan (a wonderful painting btw) becomes a most serious category pseudophotograph of bestiality with naked infants in frame just because some pervert finds it arousing.

As you say though, pornography (much like terrorism and drugs) is an area where the media and public often lose their poo poo and jump further than even the precautionary principle and straight into "drat the consequences, ban it all and let the courts sort it out". Which would be poo poo even if the criminal justice system wasn't falling apart under immense pressure.

Revenge porn is another one where clearly the distribution should be illegal, but can a naked picture possessed by an ex be considered 'revenge porn' if it's never shared? Should you be able to retroactively revoke consent to appear in pictures? If you can do that with naked pictures, why not other pictures? Could you retroactively order your ex-wife/husband to destroy any picture you ever appeared in together? Should you be able to 'block' people like that one episode of Black Mirror?

Lord of the Llamas
Jul 9, 2002

I Am A Lonesome Hobo

jabby posted:

Revenge porn is another one where clearly the distribution should be illegal, but can a naked picture possessed by an ex be considered 'revenge porn' if it's never shared? Should you be able to retroactively revoke consent to appear in pictures? If you can do that with naked pictures, why not other pictures? Could you retroactively order your ex-wife/husband to destroy any picture you ever appeared in together? Should you be able to 'block' people like that one episode of Black Mirror?

Black Mirror crossed between the Thick of It is where we're headed regardless of "should" or "shouldn't" it seems!

In fact I would definitely watch a Black Mirror Thick of It crossover...

Guavanaut
Nov 27, 2009

Teach the Controversy!



jabby posted:

Revenge porn is another one where clearly the distribution should be illegal, but can a naked picture possessed by an ex be considered 'revenge porn' if it's never shared? Should you be able to retroactively revoke consent to appear in pictures? If you can do that with naked pictures, why not other pictures? Could you retroactively order your ex-wife/husband to destroy any picture you ever appeared in together? Should you be able to 'block' people like that one episode of Black Mirror?
This is going to be a weird one as devices like Kindle do allow publishers and governments to retroactively remove content. I figure with possession where everyone was overage and consented to it at the time shouldn't be criminal. The person downloading CAI knows they're violating someone's consent with what they're doing at the moment they're doing it.
Sexts that were okay to keep at the time but then you got much older are a weird one along the lines of "does taking a picture of your wiener as a kid and looking at it as an adult constitute child porn?" I would say it would be for the court to establish exactly why you kept a photo of your 17 year old girlfriend 10 years later on. All edge cases, but maybe ones that will get seen more as time goes on.

boom boom boom posted:

Yeah, the damage this is going to do to Bitcoin's reputation is the real shame in all this
I think you're misinterpreting what I was getting at. (It was a Panama/rich fucks/pedos reference.)

Lord of the Llamas
Jul 9, 2002

I Am A Lonesome Hobo

From a legal perspective it seems to make sense that you should be able to post pictures under license for certain purposes, just as software is.

boom boom boom
Jun 28, 2012

by Shine


I'm not googling for the details, but there was a middle school girl who got arrested for distributing child porn because she sent pictures of herself to a classmate

tdrules
Jan 12, 2014


Pretty interesting to look at the many gushing articles about Clement Freud when he died in light of this allegation:


EDIT

quote:

Detectives investigating the disappearance of Madeleine McCann have been alerted to the fact that Freud had a villa in Praia da Luz, Portugal, the resort where the three-year-old went missing in 2007.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...e-urged-to-pro/

tdrules fucked around with this message at Jun 14, 2016 around 22:10

Joseance
Jul 24, 2007



https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news...gn-group-jailed

a member from PIE has just been convicted and sentence to 24 years

Dabir
Nov 10, 2012


Is davey cameron a PIE?

OwlFancier
Aug 22, 2013

Much I marvelled this ungainly fowl to hear discourse so plainly,
Though its answer little meaning, little relevancy bore.


I doubt he's the whole PIE but tories seem to be disproportionately fond of PIE.

Cat Mattress
Jul 14, 2012

I don't find this sort of thing funny


In Cameron's case, would it be PORK PIE?

goddamnedtwisto
Dec 31, 2004

"goddamnedtwisto" (not his real name) is banned from the isle of wight for trying to overthrow the democratically elected mps there to set up bradley from s club 7 (now s club 3) as the island's new communist dictator. think about that when reading his posts



Fun Shoe

Chris Evans (allegedly) upholding the finest traditions of the BBC

90s Cringe Rock
Nov 29, 2006


At least it's adults?

That's progress!

serious gaylord
Sep 16, 2007

The Man From P.I.T.U.A.E.


chrisoya posted:

At least it's adults?

That's progress!

A klaxon should have gone off when he married Billy Piper.

Brown Moses
Feb 22, 2002


Exaro News has shut down, apparently losing £3 million for it's owner.

goddamnedtwisto
Dec 31, 2004

"goddamnedtwisto" (not his real name) is banned from the isle of wight for trying to overthrow the democratically elected mps there to set up bradley from s club 7 (now s club 3) as the island's new communist dictator. think about that when reading his posts



Fun Shoe


Not really a surprise - their business model was "We will take stories the mainstream press won't publish, publish them, then charge the mainstream press for the right to re-publish them". I mean even if there weren't an inherent contradiction in that, it's unfortunately true that nobody is willing to pay to read proper journalism any more. Maybe if they'd published their stories in the format of "This major political figure went into a flat in Dolphin Square - YOU WON'T BELIEVE WHAT HAPPENED NEXT" they might have been able to stay afloat.

Brown Moses
Feb 22, 2002


This is kinda why with Bellingcat I'm seeking out grants and running it as an NGO rather than trying to run it as a for profit organisations. I'm also focusing on developing our expertise in online open source investigation, and working with other organisations with different expertise so we can support their work with our expertise. We've been doing it informally for a while, and it's been successful (even won an award for it and assisted with the win of two DuPont awards), so I want to make that Bellingcat's thing going forward.

Joseance
Jul 24, 2007



Goddard has resigned from the investigation

Arsenic Lupin
Apr 11, 2012

This particularly rapid unintelligible patter isn't generally heard, and if it is, it doesn't matter.



The Guardian reports (non-paywalled) that a paywalled Times article says she took 74 working days outside the UK last year, 30 as personal leave that was part of her contract, and 44 days working on inquiry business in NZ and Australia.
e:

quote:

A year on from the opening statement in July 2015, however, no evidence has yet been taken and only three out of an expected five regional offices to take testimony from victims in the part of the inquiry known as the truth project have been opened.

Arsenic Lupin fucked around with this message at Aug 4, 2016 around 20:22

Pesky Splinter
Feb 16, 2011

A worried pug.


Jose posted:

Goddard has resigned from the investigation

It looks like some MPs wish her to elaborate further on her reasons for leaving.

goddamnedtwisto
Dec 31, 2004

"goddamnedtwisto" (not his real name) is banned from the isle of wight for trying to overthrow the democratically elected mps there to set up bradley from s club 7 (now s club 3) as the island's new communist dictator. think about that when reading his posts



Fun Shoe

The semi-official line that's being settled on now is that the remit was just too large and too vague. Now that might well be true, but I strongly suspect we'll see the whole thing being abandoned on those grounds and instead multiple small enquiries that have some suspicious lacks of overlap being set up in it's stead.

Pesky Splinter
Feb 16, 2011

A worried pug.


Crosspost from UKMT:

They've elected a new chairperson for the Child Sex Abuse Inquiry,

quote:

Professor Alexis Jay will lead the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse, taking over as chairwoman of the investigation.
Professor Jay, who has 30 years of experience in child protection will become the fourth person to lead the probe, following the resignation of Dame Lowell Goddard last week.
The child protection expert led the Rotherham abuse inquiry that revealed at least 1,400 children were subjected to sexual exploitation in the town betwen 1997 and 2013.

[...]

Following the announcement, Ms Jay said: “I am committed to ensuring this inquiry does everything it has set out to do and does so with pace, with confidence and with clarity."
”Be in no doubt - the inquiry is open for business and people are busier than ever working hard to increase momentum."
"The panel and I are determined to make progress on all parts of the inquiry's work, including speaking to victims and survivors," she added. “I am determined to overcome the challenges along the way."
“I will lead the largest public inquiry of its kind and together with my fellow panel members we will fearlessly examine institutional failures, past and present and make recommendations so that the children of England and Wales are better protected now and in the future.”

quote:

Home Affairs Select Committee chairman Keith Vaz said Prof Jay was a “suitable candidate” but that he would still seek a full explanation from Justice Goddard for her sudden resignation.
He said: “I am sure the Home Secretary will have noted that Professor Jay will be the first chair of the inquiry without legal or judicial qualifications."
“I hope it will be fourth time lucky, as we must not let the victims and survivors down.”

Source: Indy

Scaramouche
Mar 26, 2001

SPACE FACE! SPACE FACE!

I'm expecting a recall vote in Venezuela before any convictions come of this (eg a long long time, possibly never)

TomViolence
Feb 19, 2013

PLEASE ASK ABOUT MY 80,000 WORD WALLACE AND GROMIT SLASH FICTION. PLEASE.



We'll wait till they're all dead, then we'll punish them.

Joseance
Jul 24, 2007



I don't know who Chris Denning is but he was a BBC DJ who has plead guilty to 21 child sex offences

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

thespaceinvader
Mar 30, 2011

The slightest touch from a Gol-Shogeg will result in Instant Death!


Jose posted:

I don't know who Chris Denning is but he was a BBC DJ who has plead guilty to 21 more child sex offences

Fixed that for you. He's already in prison for the first batch according to the news.

  • Locked thread
«99 »