Source: leaderpost.com 8/26/21
Three women shared with the court the long-term impacts child pornography has had on them and their children.
“Lily” has never stopped being victimized by child pornography.
As a child, she was sexually abused by her stepfather, the acts recorded and shared online.
Although Lily is now an adult with children of her own, she continues to suffer from more than just the psychological impacts of her abuse.
“Some of these perverts have contacted me,” she said. “I’ve received emails suggesting making porn with these strangers. One has stalked me and another created a slideshow of me on YouTube …
“I feel totally out of control. They’re trading around my trauma like treats at a party. It feels like I’m being raped all over again.”
Lily was one of three women to provide a victim impact statement for a court proceeding to determine whether a convicted sex offender and child porn user might be deemed a dangerous offender.
Sentenced 13 years ago for sexually abusing a young girl and sharing the images online, James S. Millie has since pleaded guilty to non-“hands-on” child porn offences which came to light during a 2019 investigation. The convictions spurred the Crown to launch dangerous offender (DO) proceedings against him.
But first, the Crown has a hurdle to overcome. While hands-on sex offences are considered “serious personal injury offences” (SPIO) — a requirement for a DO finding — Queen’s Bench Justice Catherine Dawson needs convincing that child porn offences in which the user didn’t physically touch a victim should count as such.
Crown prosecutor Roger DeCorby laid out his case on Thursday, which included video-recorded victim impact statements from the women — Lily (not her real name) and two mothers whose children were victims of child pornography.
Victims in all three cases were among those whose images were in Millie’s possession.
I call total BS on this “witness.” She is an adult, but people are somehow knowing her from online childhood images, they are pedophiles, but for some reason they want to make adult porn movies with her, and someone put a slide show on Youtube which doesn’t allow explicit nudity and accounts can easily be traced. Even if this was all true, it would be such a rare and extreme occurrence that her testimony should be irrelevant. The only possible scenario where all this could be true is if it were the people who abused her and were still in her life. In that case it seems like judges are failing her. Why doesn’t she have restraining orders on these people, and why wouldn’t they be arrested for contact with her. No, sounds like she is a coached actor helping some group fill an agenda.
Well, I feel left out. I was a victim of child sex abuse. There are pictures and video. Not a single person has ever contacted me about it ever. I haven’t heard about it from strangers ever. And I haven’t had to deal with it since then (except when I brought it up in forced government “therapy” decades ago). I guess all that is just because I’m lucky? Or because I’m a male? Too ugly? I don’t know.
No matter the case, I’m certainly not a victim today. Haven’t been since I was a teenager. I certainly wouldn’t blame any problems I have on that.
I will say that solely because of the Oppression Lists (OLs) that when I read things like this I just don’t care. This doesn’t matter to me. People are scum. If this prior victim supports the OLs then I’m glad she is suffering. I’m good with it.
Wage war.
I was so angry when I read this article that I had to wait to comment. Then read The Other Eric’s and Will Allen’s comments only to see that they have said most of the things I would say.
With respect and empathy for all victims of abuse, I am dubious that someone has recognized “Lilly” from childhood photos, found her, and harassed her without being caught. I am also outraged to see that because this happened (if it did) it might justify making someone convicted of a non-contact CP crime a “dangerous” offender.
I believe there is profit for someone in pushing this into law. I can only hope that Justice Dawson is not swayed by her (possibly) upcoming reelection or some sort of arrangement with someone in the Canadian Legal Industrial Complex.
Sorry, not sorry – ridiculous and unconvincing. As if someone could identify you as an adult by a childhood photo. 🙄
I don’t believe it. Too improbable. 🤨
(But wait – did the Crown [prosection] verify that “Lily” had, indeed, been a child victim of sexual abuse and CP production?? If she’s stretching this tale as an adult, it certainly brings into question if the original allegations were ever actually confirmed. Is she’s suffering from a sort of “CP Munchausen’s syndrome” and enjoying all the attention she’s getting for something that never actually occurred. 🤨)
Just my thoughts. FWIW. 🤷🏻♂️