I'm sure in a recent sexting case its not illegal to receive such images but the onus is on you to delete them as soon as you realise what they are (as how can you tell pic0047.jpg is hard kiddy fiddling or a picture of a cat) and the longer you hang on to the image (assuming you are not on the phone to plod and asking them to remove your computer etc) the more you're going to be seen as a naughty person
Pictures appearing on your timeline is nothing like having child pornography pictures downloaded on your computer.
You would not get arrested for it as thats just plain ridiculous. If someone has 1000 facebook friends and they post a child porn picture do you really think their 1000 friends would all be arrested?
You dont download facebook images, they are just there. Its the same thing as saying that if you saw child porn by accident eg if your computer had a virus that flashed up images you would be arrested.
Pictures appearing on your timeline is nothing like having child pornography pictures downloaded on your computer.
You would not get arrested for it as thats just plain ridiculous. If someone has 1000 facebook friends and they post a child porn picture do you really think their 1000 friends would all be arrested?
You dont download facebook images, they are just there. Its the same thing as saying that if you saw child porn by accident eg if your computer had a virus that flashed up images you would be arrested.
I'm afraid you do, or should I say your computer does. They are on your hard-disc.
Just because the powers that be will probably not prosecute in these circumstances doesn't mean the law isn't broken. The law is so sweeping that you could be prosecuted for having an old black and white photo of yourself in the bath from the 50s (assuming your old enough) taken by your parent.
I'm afraid you do, or should I say your computer does. They are on your hard-disc.
Just because the powers that be will probably not prosecute in these circumstances doesn't mean the law isn't broken. The law is so sweeping that you could be prosecuted for having an old black and white photo of yourself in the bath from the 50s (assuming your old enough) taken by your parent.
Didn't Townsend allegedly pay to access images and found under the ore sting? Can't remember the exact details so apologies if wrong?
It's a bit different to Facebook pictures coming up and someone not being happy about it.
Didn't Townsend allegedly pay to access images and found under the ore sting?
One of the most bizarre stories to come out of operation ore was that of Terrance Bates. A prosecution forensics expert for operation ore, who was later found to have lied about his qualifications.
On 6 March 2008 he was convicted at Leicester Crown Court on 4 counts of making a false statement and 1 count of perjury. The charges related to untrue statements that he had made over a number of years as to his qualifications. He was sentenced to 6 months' imprisonment suspended for 2 years and ordered to pay £1,000 towards the prosecution costs.
His relationship with the prosecution soured somewhat at this point .
He continued to attempt to work as a forensic expert for the defence but In one case, that of Graham Harris...
In April 2008 the defence in the Harris case informed the prosecution that they wanted an additional expert to look at the Harris case and named Bates as their preferred choice.
The prosecution at Bristol Crown Court on 7 April 2008 stated Bates was not acceptable to the Crown as an expert witness.
On 30 May 2008 Chris Magee of Cyber Forensics was instructed by the defence as their expert.
On 3 June 2008 Magee attended the Avon & Somerset Constabulary High Tech Crime Unit at Kenneth Steel House Bristol to 'clone' a hard-drive in the Harris case for examination. Magee was accompanied by another male who was introduced as 'his driver'.
Both men were at the premises for a number of hours and left with a 'cloned' hard drive, it wasn't until the following day that it was discovered that Bates was the male with Magee.
Bates submitted a 30 page plus report in the Harris case where he states that he has examined the hard drive in the case, at the request of Magee of Cyber Forensics.
This hard drive contained a quantity of Child Abuse Images.
At this point Avon & Somerset police went after Bates for possession of child porn - because he had the cloned disk
No bspace is right, if you've viewed the picture then technically you are guilty of making child pornography, as a new copy of the image has been created on your computer in the cache. The police would probably be unlikely to prosecute someone for that, but I guess if they were investigating someone for another crime they might chance it or tack it on as an extra offence to try and get the prosecution to proceed.
No bspace is right, if you've viewed the picture then technically you are guilty of making child pornography, as a new copy of the image has been created on your computer in the cache. The police would probably be unlikely to prosecute someone for that, but I guess if they were investigating someone for another crime they might chance it or tack it on as an extra offence to try and get the prosecution to proceed.
It makes sense really, otherwise people could simply bypass the law by keeping their porn in the cloud
Comments
^ this
https://www.ceop.police.uk/safety-centre/Parents/
Try telling that to Pete Townshend.
I'm sure in a recent sexting case its not illegal to receive such images but the onus is on you to delete them as soon as you realise what they are (as how can you tell pic0047.jpg is hard kiddy fiddling or a picture of a cat) and the longer you hang on to the image (assuming you are not on the phone to plod and asking them to remove your computer etc) the more you're going to be seen as a naughty person
You would not get arrested for it as thats just plain ridiculous. If someone has 1000 facebook friends and they post a child porn picture do you really think their 1000 friends would all be arrested?
You dont download facebook images, they are just there. Its the same thing as saying that if you saw child porn by accident eg if your computer had a virus that flashed up images you would be arrested.
I'm afraid you do, or should I say your computer does. They are on your hard-disc.
Just because the powers that be will probably not prosecute in these circumstances doesn't mean the law isn't broken. The law is so sweeping that you could be prosecuted for having an old black and white photo of yourself in the bath from the 50s (assuming your old enough) taken by your parent.
No, you are wrong and Tt88 is right.
It's a bit different to Facebook pictures coming up and someone not being happy about it.
One of the most bizarre stories to come out of operation ore was that of Terrance Bates. A prosecution forensics expert for operation ore, who was later found to have lied about his qualifications.
His relationship with the prosecution soured somewhat at this point .
He continued to attempt to work as a forensic expert for the defence but In one case, that of Graham Harris...
At this point Avon & Somerset police went after Bates for possession of child porn - because he had the cloned disk
http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2009/942.html
No bspace is right, if you've viewed the picture then technically you are guilty of making child pornography, as a new copy of the image has been created on your computer in the cache. The police would probably be unlikely to prosecute someone for that, but I guess if they were investigating someone for another crime they might chance it or tack it on as an extra offence to try and get the prosecution to proceed.
It makes sense really, otherwise people could simply bypass the law by keeping their porn in the cloud