A man has been warned he faces a custodial sentence after pleading guilty to possession of what prosecutors described as "extreme porn" at Mold Crown Court last week. Campaigners against the extreme porn law are now waiting with some concern to see what the court decides when the accused, Andrew Robert Holland, of Coedpoeth, …
How exactly was he caught ??
Did he take the PC to be repaired ?
This country is going to pot... If like the article says the 2 people agree to do the porn film which the clip came from why the hell should it be wrong to watch?
IMO the people in charge need to get a life... Good luck to the guy and I hope he gets off. (Excuse the pun)
You know how it works...
Video or it didn't happen.
Yes, yes, I know, I'll see myself out.
So does that mean we're all in danger of imprisonment come election time, what with it being a bunch of dicks and arseholes trying to fuck each other?
These laws and the politicians that dreamed them up need removing. Now.
are you quoting from team america???
Gary Johnston: We're dicks! We're reckless, arrogant, stupid dicks. And the Film Actors Guild are pussies. And Kim Jong Il is an asshole. Pussies don't like dicks, because pussies get fucked by dicks. But dicks also fuck assholes: assholes that just want to shit on everything. Pussies may think they can deal with assholes their way. But the only thing that can fuck an asshole is a dick, with some balls. The problem with dicks is: they fuck too much or fuck when it isn't appropriate - and it takes a pussy to show them that. But sometimes, pussies can be so full of shit that they become assholes themselves... because pussies are an inch and half away from ass holes. I don't know much about this crazy, crazy world, but I do know this: If you don't let us fuck this asshole, we're going to have our dicks and pussies all covered in shit!
well done sir!
Durka durka, bakalakalak
Well, I'll confess it passed through my mind while typing.
What exactly is extreme porn?
And what could you see in those 6 seconds that justified sending someone in jail for it?
I believe the phrase is "money shot", though I don't know if it justifies a jail sentence.
Paris. Well, do I need to explain?
@AC - What exactly is extreme porn?
well we could answer your question but then we'd have to arrest you because it's illegal to even know that.
Excuse me I'm taking my en-of-shift brainwash now so i can go home safely from my job at the Ministery of Safety.
@What exactly is extreme porn?
It is where the gentleman removes his socks or his lady partner is seen to enjoy herself. I apologise for the frank and ugly truth of the necessary evil.
liberal pinko "victorian father"
Sir, I draw the line at a table-leg visible underneath a too-short tablecloth.
It was always going to happen, but fuck do I feel safer now!
No photography, no hardcores, no bad public behaviour, no drawings, no more then one phone or laptop, no reporting from terminal 5, a big button for kiddy safety, no writing in public and, beware the mp3 player. I'm sure there are more things to think about but I think that's a good start, I wonder how much safer we can become?
Thanks CEOP, Police and, Government, for protecting innocent people from harm and persecution, you're doing a great job and the country is obviously better for it.
You forgot one!
Don't forget no writing song names down in public, especially in front of Rent-A-Cop train security guards!
You certainly can thank CEOP
This is just one more grubby, ill-thought-out law they have their mucky fingerprints all over. And this WAS the intended outcome. Nobody can stop them; they are impervious to criticism and beyond all rebuke. Who would dare?
A conviction on 6 seconds is ridiculous. Well, in addition to the fact that convictions based on material you didn't make are also a tad ridiculous.
Obligatory: oh, but all the violent media we consume is fine and won't do us any harm. Yes, It's the 6 seconds of 2girls1cup that'll send you over the edge.
put him to death
"The second and more serious charge alleged that Holland had downloaded and viewed a six-second clip of human-on-human extreme porn."
Well if the argument is that his mind is now dirty, why don't we just put him to death? What's seen cannot be unseen. Or will putting him in jail somehow cause him to forget the images that put him there? No, didn't think so.
To take a rational approach... maybe we should do nothing and not attempt to convict people of what are essentially thought crimes through a process that implicitly makes the despicable, slanderous and completely *unproved* accusation that possessing images of violent pornography somehow proves or otherwise creates a high propensity to commit a sex crime.
The ruling class like to think of themselves as a different species to us mere mortals and I'm starting to think it's true. They are an inbred, backwards, feckless group of morons so dense that brain surgeons in the hospitals they visit use sledge hammers rather than scalpels.
Would this ruling-class mob include the latest batch of political whores caught on camera indecently exposing themselves at a going rate of £3000/day for a massage job?
...if the people who made the clip did so with consent, then who exactly has had a crime committed against them here? Who is the victim? Is prosecuting this chap in the public interest? If so, why?
Henry the Axe Murderer
Let's just revisit the scene of the crime. A raving lunatic works a sedentary job signing laws into being such as the buggery law of England_and_Wales.com
Then he pays a visit to one of his mistresses and gives her a dose then he goes home to tell his wife they are through and she should pack her bags, she's on her way to the Tower of London.
And the kicker is that after disposing of more wives than Harold Shipman, he gets to be the new defender of the faith and passes laws that have no definitions. Like said buggery law.
And centuries later people can go to prison for watchin digial reproductions of not them doing it?
Of course without a definition of extreme sex acts it is difficult to say for sure if this person has done or not done, not done that .
We need a real disaster
We need a real disaster, a war, a famine, or whatever else is really important to make the governments (in a lot of countries) and the anal-retentive bigots stop thinking about how to find a new way to protect people from themselves, and start thinking about how to protect people from REAL menaces.
Sad, but true.
If only it were so
We've had a couple of wars, an ongoing risk from terrorism, an energy crisis and financial collapse and a hundred other more important things - and this lot *still* found time to pass this sort of legislation as well as banning squirrel trafficking and DIY nuclear explosions.
No, they will appoint a new committee
to deal with the disaster. Can't let the hunt for filth slip because of this tsunami that took out the home counties, no? And best to keep the people who were on the filth hunt doing that; they have the experience.
Only six seconds?
Now there IS someone who could do with following up one of those Viagra spams.
This is the point of all these new laws from New Labour - criminalise almost everything so that if the state wants you put away they will be able to find _something_.
So the Tony Tiger prosecution didn't work out and the Police/CPS have to justify the ridiculous amount of money spent so they dug through his inbox until they found something to nail him with (and their arrest-conviction stats are safe).
Phew, we can all sleep soundly in our beds tonight knowing this evil scum is off the street.
What was in the 6 second clip?
What did the video show?
Welshman in "animal love shocker"
Would ewe believe it....
It's important to report this kind of thing, rather than let the Man (bastards) sweep it under the rug. But, bugger me, does it ever get me depressed.
Without filming it, I presume?
The Puritans are well and truly in charge of the UK. We managed to export them last time to the US but some how they sneaked back in via Scotland.
So much for prison being full if they can send you there for 6 seconds of a download.
This is the product of the do-gooding pro-nanny state types (Hariet Harmen's etc) of this world combined with North Wales Police's total inability to focus on preventing real criminal activity that actually pose a threat to the rest of us.
What is deeply worrying here is that he said the clip was emailed to him as a joke and he just forgot to delete it. And it is just ONE six second clip! It's not like he had a massive stash of the stuff, surely that supports his claim that it was simply emailed to him? If he was really into extreme porn he'd have mountains of it hidden away on his hard drive.
So does this mean that all you need to do to get someone arrested is email them an extreme porn clip from an anonymous email address and then call the police? Even if they have deleted it I'm sure their email client will still have it tucked away in a cache file somewhere.
I remember when I was at uni it was an almost daily competition to see who could shock their mates most with something they found on the Internet. Not for any sexual excitement, purely to see the look on your their faces. Many a time I'd switch on my computer to find the backdrop changed to something unspeakable!
Anon for obvious reasons ;)
... the person who emailed it? Surely they are being investigated and/or charged as well?
I remember when I was at uni...
...and I lost at that game. Never again will I look at creme eggs the same way.
I once remember being emailed a clip about a women sucking off a cow and having it put creamy milk in her mouth, I was shocked....then laughing my head off, and forwarding it to everyone on the campus i knew.
anonymous? you big girl, have some balls.....thats the only way you'll win, civil disobedience
Re cache files etc - how do you define possession of the offending material? If he delete's it, but doesn't permanently delete it, then a savvy defendant could argue that he had deleted it, DESPITE the fact that in reality, this fictional defendant happened to be into that kind of thing, and knew he could just delve into his 'deleted items' in Outlook in order to view it again.
Sucking off a cow???
...sounds like bull to me
re: find the backdrop changed
I fondly remember a coworker coming in one morning and knowing when he'd logged in by the yell "Oh my God, that's fucking disgusting!"
"women sucking off a cow and having it put creamy milk in her mouth"
you know the rules: No video, it didn't happen.....
So if I get this right...
...then you can email this clip to someone and they get locked up for possession of it.
Does anyone have Gordon Brown's email address?
@So if I get this right..
How about that Harriet lass? think her email address needs to get spammed with some extreme porn!
If by "spammed" you mean beaten round the head with a 12 inch rubber cock ala LSTSB and "extreme porn" to mean till she exhales no more, then yep.
Couldn't agree more.
Not anonymous because i truly dont give a fuck. They will have to remove my extreme porn collection from my non fingerprinted hands.
Twunts. Bye new liebore. Thanks for coming, its not been a reet fucking larf at all...
PS, Dear Mr Falkes, please try again!!!!!
Better make sure
you clear out your inbox, when something unforeseen is stuck in it, nudge nudge
Don't forget to keep your Junk clean!
If that's what you get for watching 6 seconds of sex...
what are they going to give us for watching this government fuck this entire country up the a*** for 13 years?
As far as I can see, this government has fucked us up illegally, and non-consensually , and is keeping doing it even though we are yelling 'STOP!'.
If we are watching that, current laws should have us all put away for life....
Oh, and why isn't there a dildo icon when you need one...
you'll probably get three months in jail for using it on a public forum.
Its 'The Ring' all over again
with an Orwell angle
Hapless victim receives video attachment in Inbox.
Hapless victim clicks on video
7 days later, hapless victim is found locked up in a police cell
it's even worse that that ...
the 6-second clip could have come from a BBFC rated film. For those of you that forgot, the fact a complete film may have gained BBFC approval is no defence to a clip taken out of context ...
Bizarre, staggeringly bizarre
"At the Crown Court in Mold, last week, before Mr Justice Medland, Holland pleaded guilty to a charge of possession, in the expectation that this would count as mitigation and lead to a lighter sentence"
If you plead guilty to it you have to expect the sentence which being guilty of it brings. It may make the sentence lighter but that doesn't mean it won't be heavy.
Are we seeing a spate of people appearing in court and pleading guilty a result of having no legal representation or advice, or do have they had legal representation or advice which is worse than useless ?
representation or advice worse than useless
As someone who has previously been arrested for possession (of a Herb not XP), I can say with pretty much certainty that his lawyer will have advised him to accept the 'Fast Track' option to get in the court system quickly and to plead guilty and that doing this would likely lead to a lesser punishment.
This is however a CROCK OF SHIT!
My boss was arrested with the same charges (worked in bong shop & no, we did not sell the herbs!), I fast tracked, he dragged it out for a year or so - guess who came off worse!
Do not ever accept 'Fast Track' to court!
Anon obviously. Relevence to story? Laws agaist herbs are just as bad as laws against XP (or worse in that to date they have been used agaist millions of otherwise lawabiding folks)
- Leaked screenshots show next Windows kernel to be a perfect 10
- Amazon warming up 'cheapo web video' cannon to SINK Netflix
- Something for the Weekend, Sir? I need a password to BRAKE? What? No! STOP! Aaaargh!
- Episode 13 BOFH: WHERE did this 'fax-enabled' printer UPGRADE come from?
- Vulture at the Wheel Ford's B-Max: Fiesta-based runaround that goes THUNK