Sunday, 19 August 2012

Why Owning Indecent Images of Children Is Not A Sexual Offence, In Reality (Part 2)

Or even in law ...

A reply, from me, in a forum thread:

When is a sex offender not a sex offender?

"The main point M, I believe, is that the offence is not sexual (see the SOA definition of 'Sexual') at all.

Prosecution is under POCA and CJA. The SOA is only an issue of notification, for offences under those acts.

(1) There is no legal requirement for an IIOC to be sexual at all !!! It need only be I and of a C,

(2) What someone 'does' with those images, is irrelevant, in law,

(3) Only a passing, schedule, definition, in the SOA makes us 'Sexual Offenders',

(4) The 'knock-on effect' then becoming punitive, persecutory and prejudicial, in many ways.

The description of any image owner, as a 'Sex Offender', is offensive, incorrect and dangerous; and I keep telling them so.



No comments:

Post a Comment