Tweet
"You and child pornography
I know this forum is primarily about False Accusations, but I want to raise the issue of child pornography because it may apply to you. I am constantly reminded on the comments pages of the Daily Mail that people are largely ignorant about what child pornography actually is.
If you are arrested on a false accusation allegation, every single media in your possession capable of storing images will be seized and the police will go through your adult porn stash looking for what they deem are child abuse images, which is very different from what you may think are child porn images.
We all have this mental picture in our heads that child porn/child abuse images involves images of pre-pubescent children aged around 6 years old. Abhorrent child abuse images do indeed include images of that age range - but you will rarely encounter it unless you actively search online for it; you are very unlikely to accidentally trip over it - but be aware that legally a "child" means any person up to the age of 18 years old. Meaning that you could regularly browse adult websites or have a collection of adult porn images and still find yourself convicted of a child porn offence.
What this means comes in two strands:
1. The "ladies" on the website you visit look to be about 18-23 but are in fact a bit younger, around 16-17. This is often true of Eastern European-based websites.
2. Someone aged 16-17 is legally a child and liable to have you charged with possession of child pornography.
You cannot tell from looking at an image of a naked 20 year old if that person actually is 20 and legal, or if they are 16 or 17 and child porn.
What is particularly scary is that once your porn stash/browsing history has been analysed for images (of anyone who is clearly pubescent and under 40 years old) the police and CPS will determine if your images are worthy of a charge and prosecution, their method of determining the ages of those in the images is no more technical than merely looking at them and saying "we think this person is x years old."
There is no attempt made, forensic or otherwise, to verify the age whatsoever. It is purely guesswork. From experience, the only forensic involvement is to ascertain when the images were downloaded and last viewed.
Were you also aware that "downloaded" does not mean you have to Right Click and Save? The downloading aspect is getting it to your computer. In other words, once it has appeared on your screen, you have downloaded it. Whether you choose to Right Click and Save or not is irrelevant.
Many adult porn websites carry a USCC disclaimer at the foot of their pages, stating that all content is of over-18s, but many do not. It is not a get-out-of-jail card.
What I am trying to say is that yes, child abuse images of 6yr olds are disgusting. But you can be charged with, and convicted of, possession of child porn images of teenagers that you thought were young women.
Be very careful about what sites you visit."
I know this forum is primarily about False Accusations, but I want to raise the issue of child pornography because it may apply to you. I am constantly reminded on the comments pages of the Daily Mail that people are largely ignorant about what child pornography actually is.
If you are arrested on a false accusation allegation, every single media in your possession capable of storing images will be seized and the police will go through your adult porn stash looking for what they deem are child abuse images, which is very different from what you may think are child porn images.
We all have this mental picture in our heads that child porn/child abuse images involves images of pre-pubescent children aged around 6 years old. Abhorrent child abuse images do indeed include images of that age range - but you will rarely encounter it unless you actively search online for it; you are very unlikely to accidentally trip over it - but be aware that legally a "child" means any person up to the age of 18 years old. Meaning that you could regularly browse adult websites or have a collection of adult porn images and still find yourself convicted of a child porn offence.
What this means comes in two strands:
1. The "ladies" on the website you visit look to be about 18-23 but are in fact a bit younger, around 16-17. This is often true of Eastern European-based websites.
2. Someone aged 16-17 is legally a child and liable to have you charged with possession of child pornography.
You cannot tell from looking at an image of a naked 20 year old if that person actually is 20 and legal, or if they are 16 or 17 and child porn.
What is particularly scary is that once your porn stash/browsing history has been analysed for images (of anyone who is clearly pubescent and under 40 years old) the police and CPS will determine if your images are worthy of a charge and prosecution, their method of determining the ages of those in the images is no more technical than merely looking at them and saying "we think this person is x years old."
There is no attempt made, forensic or otherwise, to verify the age whatsoever. It is purely guesswork. From experience, the only forensic involvement is to ascertain when the images were downloaded and last viewed.
Were you also aware that "downloaded" does not mean you have to Right Click and Save? The downloading aspect is getting it to your computer. In other words, once it has appeared on your screen, you have downloaded it. Whether you choose to Right Click and Save or not is irrelevant.
Many adult porn websites carry a USCC disclaimer at the foot of their pages, stating that all content is of over-18s, but many do not. It is not a get-out-of-jail card.
What I am trying to say is that yes, child abuse images of 6yr olds are disgusting. But you can be charged with, and convicted of, possession of child porn images of teenagers that you thought were young women.
Be very careful about what sites you visit."