The CPS dropped a prosecution under the extreme porn law last week when it apparently accepted that the soundtrack on a clip of a tiger apparently having sex with a woman rendered the video comical rather than pornographic. Andrew Robert Holland of Coedpoeth near Wrexham appeared at Mold Crown Court on New Year's Eve to answer …
i for 1
am glad our police / court time is spent so well... thank god there is nothing better for them to do.
I wonder if...
...the bloke had suspect viddies because he came from Coedpoeth, which means Hot Wood in Welsh?
@Anonymous Coward 16:01
"...the bloke had suspect viddies because he came from Coedpoeth, which means Hot Wood in Welsh?"
Hey, I had a seriously hot girlfriend from Coedpoeth. The place itself is a bit 'orrible though - lots of smack addicts and bugger all in the way of jobs.
Naah, it's because Coedpoeth looksa bit like paedophile.
At least to our boys in blue.
This post title stuff got old years ago...
No seriously. What the hell.
Does the CPS have way way too big a budget or something?
"she claimed that when the case was previously reviewed the film had no soundtrack"
Translation: I didn't turn on the speakers.
"The CPS did the job that it is required to do"
No they didn't - their job is to decide if a prosecution should happen at all, which is why they get involved right at the start of cases.
"the lawyer was not told at that time there was a soundtrack"
The lawyer should have looked for himself. That's his job. How can you be a prosecution lawyer without looking at the evidence of the case, that makes no sense.
He did look...
He just didn't listen :p
The title is required, and must contain letters and/or digits.
Great - country's almost bust & the state spunks money on crap like this.
Not to mention the dubious "fishing" aspects of the article
Not proud to be living in Coedpoeth right now...
Police selectively withholding evedence
I don't believe it!
You shouldn't believe it either
Your inferring that the Police had enough knowledge to actually remove the soundtrack from the video, now I find THAT hard to believe ;)
As a previous poster said, numpty didn't have speakers turned on/volume turned up.
Wrong Audio Codec
Seems they didn't have the right audio codec...
Bit odd that extreme porn with a comedy sound track is fine... seems that Benny Hill had the right idea all along... who'd a thunk it.
This was a test case, then...
"...The CPS is adamant that no soundtrack was given to it when charges were considered and the lawyer was not told at that time there was a soundtrack..."
Somehow this just doesn't surprise me. This is how the cops play these games. Most people think of the police as acting in their best interests, somehow above dirty tricks and the like, but it seems clear (and thank God the CPS soon cottoned-on) they were trying to pull a fast one here. Perhaps they were just testing the water for their new offence - we can certainly expect a lot more of that in the near future. I'm waiting for the first attempt to bring someone to court for looking at 'indecent cartoons' of wholly fictional 'minors'. Should be fun. You just know they are going to try it.
Such dreadful times we are forced to live through.
Frosties...... They're Greattttttttttt
Prosecuting users for Joke emails.
Obviously a crime they can prosecute from the warmth of their office.
Will he get his DNA back and will this bar him from working with Children.
I bet it will. Not so funny now eh.
The Police on somebody's side..... Just not ours
Does that mean if I watched it with the sound off it would be "extreme porn".... but not if I turned it on? What if I can't hear? Can I be arrested, charged and convicted for being deaf?
BTW... since it's all above board now, can you get hold of a copy so that we can see just how idiotic the whole situation is (as though any further evidence were necessary....)
Can they really be so thinc they didn't think to turn the volume up?
And - if it is not extreme with the sound track - then how could it be extreme with no track - this just does not make sense.
Paris - because she knows about soundtracks on porn
It's quite incredible just how much this government has turned against it's own people.
I tried to find the vid using "tiger apparently having sex with a women"
All I got returned were pictures of a bloody golfer!!
The police and CPS need more useless laws like this..
..to avoid the prospect of meeting any real criminals and ensure they are further isolated from the population who pays their wages.
No doubt he's been fingerprinted, had his DNA and photograph taken and stored...
The Sword and The Stone
It's on iplayer at the moment - things get hot and bothering between female squirrels and humans temporarily shape-shifted into squirrels (one of them a minor) as quite a long sequence of the movie - is this suspect?
I don't like somebody, and I send them this video clip to their mobile (without the sound track of course)? Even if they don't get convicted, the prosecution will do more than enough enough damage to their reputation, job, and family life. Obviously they may still go on the sex offender's register and will never pass a CRB check again.
Great law if you have axes to grind. Anonymous just in case you didn't like me...
they haven't installed k-lite on the police systems yet..
The other clip
What's in the second clip, a woman having an orgy with Snap, Crackle and Pop?
Can I just say.
"....still faces a charge of possession of extreme porn in respect of the second video clip..."
Smutty video, or it didn't happen.
The long brown mac with the ice cream stains please.
So if there's no case to answer...
Where's the link then???
Penguin because there's no tiger icon.
Here's eagerly waiting on March 17th..
'Following the reviewing of CuniculusHunt.avi, our rating of 'beastility with the inappropriately headweared underclass' has been downgraded following analysis of the soundtrack where the animated participant is heard to utter 'ehhhh What's up Doc?''
When asked for a reaction, Andrew Robert Holland said
What's the bet that the government will automatically see this as some sort of "loophole" to be closed?
The only way they could do that is if they effectively remove the requirement that the image in question be "pornographic" as defined in Section 63 of the Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008:-
"(3) An image is “pornographic” if it is of such a nature that it must reasonably be assumed to have been produced solely or principally for the purpose of sexual arousal."
To close the "loophole" (but is it really a true loophole?), they'd have to at least water this down to something that could then cover stuff that isn't really pornographic, but which isn't proved not to be pornographic.
Such an expansion of the extreme porn law would move the law still further into the realms of thought crime, as well as establishing guilt on the basis of speculation. And, of course, the burden of proof would shift away from the prosecution and onto the defendant.
What does "justice" minister Maria Eagle, MP, have to say?
"The tiger, according to Mr Holland, was an animated image"
Are the police and prosecution blind too?
Doesn't matter - animated images create a demand for real tigers to be abused in this way.
Won't somebody think of the cubs
Lack of Evidence Control
"she claimed that when the case was previously reviewed the film had no soundtrack"
That implies that they mustn't have very good control of "evidence" if a piece of criminal evidence can suddenly be "replaced" with something different - or (as others have pointed out) the CPS are just muppets.
So the police and CPS f**k a law-abiding citizen. Sounds like extreme porn to me.
Is a video of a tiger having sex with a tiger legal ?
(assuming one of them isn't a minor)
April Stevens in trouble too?
A woman having sex with a tiger is outlawed unless it is comical? Oh no! I am done for!
My wife has sex with a real tiger every night, but during intercourse she really hates me being funny at the same time.
No really, this isn't funny any more.
Oh - a different one...
I thought it was going to be about that other video that the UK judge said we wern't allowed to talk about.
The CPO for the area should now face prosecution or dismissal
The CPO should face prosecution as they are, unless they can identify the specific persons responsible, guilty of:
1) Wasting police time
2) Wasting the time of the CPS
3) Perverting the course of justice
4) Conspiracy to pervert the course of justice
5) Malicious prosecution
Futher all of the police involved should be immediately dismissed without benefits or pension as they are guilty of;
1) Gross misconduct which brings the force into disrepute
Which is all that is necessary for dismissal.
Of course there won't be so much as a slap on the wrist for the biggest serious and organised crime organisation in the UK, the police farce, but sooner or later their empire will collapse under the weight of its own corruption.
Oh, God! Wetting my pants!
Words almost fail me, but I suppose "Tiger again getting his wood out, and his balls in the (t)rough" will have to do for now.
Will Tigger have to give a DNA sample, unless he's given one (or two, lucky girl) already?
Chortle! I can barely type....
Snap, crackle and er, pop.
Lester - Please remove Playmobil set out of Mission Control - NOW!!!
Dis-as-semble! (spoken in a 5-is-alive voice, natch)
What's The Betting....
...they had the volume down, or just no speakers?
Why did it even get to an arrest, never mind court?
So we're going to keep seeing people arrested for joke videos that have been sent to them, are we? This is what happens when we let the politicians think they're in charge.
Or no speakers?
The Police where attempting to pervert the course of justice.
If the original clip submitted to the CPS had been tamperd with to remove the sound track the officer/officers involved where attempting to pervert the course of uststice and should have been arrestet their and then in the court room.
Go on - you know you want to!
Did the even read their own bloody law...???
From the Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008:
Section 63 Possession of extreme pornographic images:
An image falls within this subsection if it portrays, in an explicit and realistic
way, any of the following—
(d) a person performing an act of intercourse or oral sex with an animal
(whether dead or alive), AND A REASONABLE PERSON LOOKING AT THE IMAGE WOULD THINK THAT ANY SUCH PERSON OR ANIMAL WAS REAL!
Forget about the sound-track, how the F**K can anyone be so stupid as to try to prosecute for an ANIMATED image under this law???
How much public money has been wasted on what appears to have been an act of sheer childish pettiness on the part of the Police? "Ok, so we can't do him for what we arrested him for, let's trawl through his computer and see if there's anything we can stitch him up for..."
This sort of fishing expedition is just one of the many potential abuses of this law that some of us were pointing out to MPs and Lords before the Government forced this nonsense through Parliament.
Real Person? What About ZOMBIE PORN?!?
As you quoted, "and a reasonable person looking at the image would think that any such person or animal was real."
How did the police and CPS interpret "person or animal"? If the person portrayed as having sex with the animated tiger appeared to be real, would that then mean the "person" part applies?
"... a person performing an act of intercourse or oral sex with an animal (whether dead or alive), and a reasonable person looking at the image would think that any such person ... was real."
If that's how they're interpreting it, then they might similarly attack zombie porn:-
"(c) an act which involves sexual interference with a human corpse".
Does a human corpse count as a person? What about the person sexually interfering with that corpse? If the person interfering with the obviously fake corpse appears to be real...
Can we take this case as evidence that the police and CPS are trying to interpret and apply this law as broadly as possible?
Given what happened to myself, which basically was an attempt at a stitch up, I am not at all surprised by this current matter. Of course the Police knew of the soundtrack ,but would not bother to tell anyone,not least the defence. So what they NOW seem to be saying is, "if you have the soundtrack on the clip you are NOT committing an offence, BUT if you do NOT have the sound track on you ARE committing an offence" . Totally ludicrous and shows me yet again how F'd up this Country is.
It's strange .....
that considering the effort the police put in to detect "sexual" offences that in the past 25 years they haven't managed a single prosecution for FGM, although several thousand girls suffer this barbaric "cultural" mutilation in the UK every year.
BS Corporate 'law', not Common Law!
The bloke should have declared himself a freeman, explicitly not consented to the statute(s) for this victimless 'crime', and refused to sign anything!
Anything done by a consenting adults cannot be classed as a genuine crime, unless the Common Law requirements of harm, hurt, or loss are caused by their actions.
Statutes only _contractually_ apply, if you consent to them, period!
Any time now they'll be a new law along...
Possessing Extreme porn offensive to deaf people.
Paris, no explanation required.
I wonder if...
This kind of article really angers me. As someone pointed out, there is a lot more really bad stuff going on in the country that the police would do well to turn their attention towards. But, I wonder if the only reason that they paid attention to the tiger video was because the other video that he is still being prosecuted for had something very wrong going on in it.
Obviously just speculation, but it might be the explanation.
... by a bad government in a knee jerk reaction to a crime that is so rare it's inconsequential.
A complete waste of time. The word "Bandwagon" comes to mind.
Roll on the election.