D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
I imagine it's the lack of deleting that's the issue!
I imagine it's the lack of deleting that's the issue!Tbf and I can't stand nonces, but from reading it someone sent them to him. How is that his fault? As long as he deleted it and didn't forward, surely they should go after whoever sent it to him however much lower profile they are.
That's the thing.Years ago we had someone at work done for similar. First we knew was when a couple of my work colleagues got letters from him in prison! It did however explain why they took all the PCs away one day for 'virus software updates' when it was our job to do said updates!
Anyway he claimed it was his first tiime and he regretted it, he'd just surfed onto the wrong web page and then left and to begin with you thought well maybe unlucky but... I'm sure if it really was as he said, then anybody would have worked that out.
You don't go to prison for clicking on the wrong thing and hurrying away, do you. It's more repeatedly doing so and downloading the images.
Years ago we had someone at work done for similar. First we knew was when a couple of my work colleagues got letters from him in prison! It did however explain why they took all the PCs away one day for 'virus software updates' when it was our job to do said updates!
Anyway he claimed it was his first tiime and he regretted it, he'd just surfed onto the wrong web page and then left and to begin with you thought well maybe unlucky but... I'm sure if it really was as he said, then anybody would have worked that out.
You don't go to prison for clicking on the wrong thing and hurrying away, do you. It's more repeatedly doing so and downloading the images.
They continued sending each other pictures after that.Tbf and I can't stand nonces, but from reading it someone sent them to him. How is that his fault? As long as he deleted it and didn't forward, surely they should go after whoever sent it to him however much lower profile they are.
Pleading guilty may mean no custodial sentenceHuw Edwards pleads guilty to making indecent images of children
The former BBC newsreader will be sentenced in September after pleading guilty to three charges.www.bbc.com
In fact I’d say it’s likely
The Crown Prosecution Service said most of the category A images were estimated to show children aged between 13 and 15. Two clips showed a child aged about seven to nine.
Doubt it; will probably be a suspended sentence.He's going to jail. Hopefully for a long time.
I'm sure there's worse ways of finding out your old man's a sex case!Blokes got 5 kids. Gotta feel for them, can't be many things worse than finding out your old man is a raging nonce.
Sent from my SM-G973F using Tapatalk
Having been sent some frankly fucking disgusting stuff he kept up his correspondence with the person and it would appear did absolutely nothing to report that person either. I get what you are saying but there's clearly enough to show that he was not exactly hostile to seeking out and receiving that kind of stuff.Tbf and I can't stand nonces, but from reading it someone sent them to him. How is that his fault? As long as he deleted it and didn't forward, surely they should go after whoever sent it to him however much lower profile they are.
Ridiculous. I expect Edwards will get the same if not worse.How the hell has the bloke sending him the images, who also happened to be a convicted paedophile, only got a suspended sentence?!?
Surely the other guy is worse. He was the one distributing the photos.Ridiculous. I expect Edwards will get the same if not worse.
I would have thought so tooSurely the other guy is worse. He was the one distributing the photos.
And has a track record!Surely the other guy is worse. He was the one distributing the photos.
I’m sorry it’s just the sentencing lawsPleading guilty may mean no custodial sentenceHuw Edwards pleads guilty to making indecent images of children
The former BBC newsreader will be sentenced in September after pleading guilty to three charges.www.bbc.com
In fact I’d say it’s likely
He’s in for a rough time. If he’s out he’ll become a reclise and suicide candidate . If he’s in prison he will be very risk for both suicide and a battering anyway.Pleading guilty may mean no custodial sentenceHuw Edwards pleads guilty to making indecent images of children
The former BBC newsreader will be sentenced in September after pleading guilty to three charges.www.bbc.com
In fact I’d say it’s likely
Most persons convicted off a sexual offence serve their time in a prison solely of sex offendersHe’s in for a rough time. If he’s out he’ll become a reclise and suicide candidate . If he’s in prison he will be very risk for both suicide and a battering anyway.
Really? Fucking madness. Especially if he had already been convicted of it.How the hell has the bloke sending him the images, who also happened to be a convicted paedophile, only got a suspended sentence?!?
I agree but he’s higher profile.Surely the other guy is worse. He was the one distributing the photos.
I'd hope that automatic deletion and not soliciting more would be sufficient mind you! As you say there's clearly a difference.Been this way forever, as I say it was a topic on conversation in my CS degree in 2002, but as a techie this law really doesn’t sit right with me. I could make you all criminals with one DM on here. No defence of Edward’s who was clearly happy receiving “barely legal” stuff even if you take his defence as gospel, which you shouldn’t.
View attachment 37309
You’d like to think they’d be a fair bit of pragmatism around that.Been this way forever, as I say it was a topic on conversation in my CS degree in 2002, but as a techie this law really doesn’t sit right with me. I could make you all criminals with one DM on here. No defence of Edward’s who was clearly happy receiving “barely legal” stuff even if you take his defence as gospel, which you shouldn’t.
View attachment 37309
You’d like to think they’d be a fair bit of pragmatism around that.
But surely, any right minded person would immediately reply saying that's inappropriate, and also forward immediately to the police?Been this way forever, as I say it was a topic on conversation in my CS degree in 2002, but as a techie this law really doesn’t sit right with me. I could make you all criminals with one DM on here. No defence of Edward’s who was clearly happy receiving “barely legal” stuff even if you take his defence as gospel, which you shouldn’t.
View attachment 37309
He’s in for a rough time. If he’s out he’ll become a reclise and suicide candidate . If he’s in prison he will be very risk for both suicide and a battering anyway.
Only if the judge makes an example out him. Typically he’d have got more if he climbed a gantry on the M25 to protest about climate change.He's going to jail. Hopefully for a long time.
Only if the judge makes an example out him. Typically he’d have got more if he climbed a gantry on the M25 to protest about climate change.
I'm absolutely baffled by the notion that this wouldn't result in a custodial.
Please God, it's bad enough in one thread!These days mate, you say you’re Rwandan, they let you out of jail.
If you go on some of the addiction web sites you’d get an idea of the level of activityI'm absolutely baffled by the notion that this wouldn't result in a custodial.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?