ACSOL’s Conference Calls

Conference Call Recordings Online
Dial-in number: 1-712-770-8055, Conference Code: 983459


Monthly Meetings | Recordings (6/12 Recording Uploaded)
Emotional Support Group Meetings

Click here to sign up now for ACSOL’s Online EPIC Conference: Empowered People Inspiring Change Sept 17-18
Download a PDF of the schedule

International

UK: Shanklin sex offender had cartoon-porn depicting child sex abuse

[countypress.co.uk – 4/4/21]

A REGISTERED sex offender who had cartoon-pornography depicting child abuse on his hard drive has appeared in court.

Hilary _______, 79, of Grange Road, Shanklin, appeared before the Isle of Wight Crown Court on Thursday.

At a previous hearing at the Isle of Wight Magistrates’ Court on February 9, he admitted possession of a prohibited image of a child.

Prosecutor, Kelly Brocklehurst, told the court Hilary _______,’ case was an unusual one, in that the images found were cartoon-like ­— pseudo images.

He said Hilary _______,, subject to an indefinite sexual harm prevention order since 2016, was not permitted to use a device capable of accessing the internet unless inspected by police.

Mr Brocklehurst said 15 images were found on a hard disk drive belonging to Hilary _______,.

He said no one else had access to it, he did not recall downloading them, but said they may have been part of a bulk download.

Mr Brocklehurst said Hilary _______ admitted to police he had occasional sexual fantasies involving children, but knew the difference between fantasy and real life.

Hilary _______, representing himself, told the court the images had been buried inside a game.

He said it was one of as many as 100 games, and the directory was created in 2015 ­— before he was sentenced for making indecent images of a child.

He said he had no idea the images were there ­— the computer was returned to him by police and he was under the impression there was nothing prohibited on it.

Read the full article

 

We welcome a lively discussion with all view points - keeping in mind...  
  • Your submission will be reviewed by one of our volunteer moderators. Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  • Please keep the tone of your comment civil and courteous. This is a public forum.
  • Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
  • Please refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
  • Please take personal conversations off this forum.
  • We will not publish any comments advocating for violent or any illegal action.
  • We cannot connect participants privately - feel free to leave your contact info here. You may want to create a new / free, readily available email address.
  • Please refrain from copying and pasting repetitive and lengthy amounts of text.
  • Please do not post in all Caps.
  • If you wish to link to a serious and relevant media article, legitimate advocacy group or other pertinent web site / document, please provide the full link. No abbreviated / obfuscated links.
  • We suggest to compose lengthy comments in a desktop text editor and copy and paste them into the comment form
  • We will not publish any posts containing any names not mentioned in the original article.
  • Please choose a user name that does not contain links to other web sites
  • Please do not solicit funds
  • If you use any abbreviation such as Failure To Register (FTR), the first time you use it please expand it for new people to better understand.
  • All commenters are required to provide a real email address where we can contact them.  It will not be displayed on the site.
  • Please send any input regarding moderation or other website issues to moderator [at] all4consolaws [dot] org
ACSOL, including but not limited to its board members and agents, does not provide legal advice on this website.  In addition, ACSOL warns that those who provide comments on this website may or may not be legal professionals on whose advice one can reasonably rely.  
 
Subscribe
Notify of
16 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

This article as it serves as a warning that even though police inspect and return your electronics you could still be charged with a crime much later for something on that device. Also, don’t assume CP not involving actual people won’t end you up in prison.

Very true. There is a case in Michigan where an inmate who is a pretty good artist was found to have pictures of children in pornographic poses and acts that he drew. He was charged and convicted for CP.

Shall we redefine the term child porno now that King George has a database?

My God, what a joke. How do they define cartoon images of children?
I mean, what if it’s Boss Baby gettin’ it on with the Powder Puff Girls? How do we know how old they actually are? Maybe they look young for their age.

And I love that the ad at the bottom of the article is for a video game based on Loony Tunes cartoon characters. No doubt, the game is embedded with tantalizing imagery of cartoon children engaged in cartoon sex with Bugs Bunny, Wile E, Coyote and that obvious sexual deviant, Elmer Fudd. And let’s not forget Porky Pig and Donald Duck who are allowed to perform in front of our children while not wearing any pants! What a sick world we live in.

“Th-th-th-that’s all folks!”

3E676F12-6BF3-4130-B117-1F7CDE92B5F1.jpeg

I guess I’ll need to destroy my pictures of Jessica Rabbit since I have not verified her age. Especially since nudity is not a requirement for pornography. Her version of Patty-Cake with Rodger Rabbit is clearly sexual.

Will childbirth become illegal because babies are born naked?

Actually, the police want to talk to you about this. You mentioned the words “naked” and “babies” which means you created images of naked children aka child pornography in your head and the heads of those who read your words. Oh shit, now I did it, too!

BRB – Someone’s pounding on my front door.

It boggles the mind how drawn cp can ever be considered a crime. Cp is illegal because there’s a victim, but where is the victim in a case like this?

And where do they draw the line, pardon the pun? What if it’s abstract impressionist kinda stuff where you gotta tilt your head and squint to see what they tell you it is? Or does it have to be photo realism to qualify as CP?
For the sake of discussion, imagine a person drew two stick people making boom boom and we agree that it is pornography. If someone then drew numbers and arrows to indicate that their ages are under 18, would that become criminal CP production? Imagine the snickers as the DA holds that image up to the judge and jury as evidence. At least, I hope they’d laugh, but these days, probably not.

You stole my idea! 🙂

Well…

The whole “victim” element on paper seems logical, in reality, it is extremely easy to go too far. One case comes to mind in the United States where a teenage boy took a picture of himself with an erection and sent it to his girlfriend who was also under eighteen. Unfortunately someone found out and reported it to the police and the boy was under investigation for production, distribution, and possession of CP (of himself). As if that wasn’t bad enough his face wasn’t visible in the picture so the cops had the genius idea to go to a judge and write a court order to take the boy to a hospital or medical clinic so a doctor could give the kid some drug to make him have an erection so the cops could prove he was the one in the picture of concern.

1. Yes that actually happened.
2. Yes there was an uproar about it.
3. I don’t know the outcome.

Now imagine someone taking a picture of a naked adult and digitally altering the photo so the face is that of someone under eighteen. That too would be CP. In fact if someone put an adult face on the body of a person under eighteen and the underage person is depicted in a way that equals sexually explicit conduct it is also CP. Granted since nudity isn’t even required for CP there’s a whole range of situations, positions, environments, and circumstances which could be considered CP as a result of face/body swapping regardless if the original content was pornographic.

Taking it a step further let’s say someone sees another person somewhere and uses that individual as inspiration to draw, paint, sketch, sculpt, 3D model, etc… a youthful human character in a way that would be inappropriate if it was real. Even without any clue this was what occurred in some places it is just as illegal. With evidence of this being true that’s possibly much more problematic in some places.

Better yet there’s a case of a very young looking adult star whose material was obtained legally by someone in another country and this individual was accused of possessing CP. Word got to the adult star and she went to the country, proved she was an adult and saved the guy from prosecution.

I remember that case about the kid they were going to force to have an erection and the utter disgust I felt at what they put him through. How do so many people go along with this criminal nonsense with impunity? Just want to rip my hair out when I read about such insane government overreach. Are they all taking crazy pills!?

Anyway, I did a little research and I’m happy to say the case against this kid was dismissed and I hope to God he won a massive lawsuit. The cop involved, a deeply disturbed individual, capped off his illustrious career by eating his gun when accused of molesting two other boys. Well done, detective.

https://casetext.com/analysis/ca4-officer-who-obtained-court-order-for-minor-ptf-to-be-detained-and-to-get-an-erection-so-police-could-photograph-it-gets-no-qi-this-isnt-remotely-reasonable

https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/teen-sexting-case-revealed-how-judges-let-police-invade-children-ncna830306

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/public-safety/manassas-city-police-detective-in-teen-sexting-case-commits-suicide/2015/12/15/de88f7c4-a356-11e5-9c4e-be37f66848bb_story.html

I thought the Supreme Court decided that possession of cartoons constituted a thought crime only, because there is no victim?

You don’t see this kind if foolishness in non-registry countries. The insanity is unreal. If the hackers in the world really wanted to ruin the US political system, forget about election fraud, now all they would have to do is plant some cartoon CP on every target incumbent and notify the proper authorities.

We are settings ourselves up to be the undisputed laughingstock of the world, if that hasn’t already happened.

Would the episode of Everybody Loves Raymond, where Marie sculpts something that resembles part of the female body? Might as well ban Family Guy and The Simpsons when characters say a little some, some or get some action.

On a different note–why is this in the newspaper? Has he been found guilty? If he is found innocent, will most people still think he is guilty.

In my opinion, newspapers should not be allowed to report on crimes until there has been a resolution.

16
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x
.