ForumGarden

hello again and its eyes down for another AA grumpy column

following on from sundays shock revalation heres another story to tell

Some paedophiles with images of child abuse will escape prosecution, the head of the National Crime Agency has said.

Keith Bristow said expecting all the estimated 50,000 people in the UK who have accessed abuse images to be brought to justice was “not realistic.

He said police would have to focus on those who posed most risk.

Some 660 arrests were made during a recent operation targeting people who had accessed child abuse images online.

However, the BBC understands that as part of that investigation, as many as 20,000-30,000 individuals were identified as potential offenders The Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre (Ceop) part of the NCA – has estimated that 50,000 people in the UK are involved in downloading and sharing images of child abuse.

http://www.britainfirst.org/paedophiles ... t-charged/

AAG

since when has justice not ever been realtistic im sure its an offence to down load obscene images of children

or is it the fact that the courts are already too clogged up with cases

to cope with these extra ones or do you have to be a celebrity with a

bank account full of cash that can be seized ? in the name of the law?

what makes this quango of justice assume that men who download images of children are not a danger to children it doesnt really take much to take the next step child abuse and underage sex with a minor some may be happy just to leer at images for their own sordid perverted pleasure same as bondage ,whips and s&m

( didnt know you knew about that kind of stuff grumpy ED)

you havent been in the cellar!! ..... ANYWAY on with the story

the police are to focus on those who posed most risk surely they are all a risk or did the 660 arrests made i assume nationwide get in the way of a cup of tea and box ticking in a nice warm police station

are morals so corrupt and depraved these days that we let this happen ?

how many more innocent lives need to be lost before some one in power addresses this issue or is the life of a child just something to discard like an unwanted pizza box

I just find it difficult to believe how the Government can be so suicidal in the run up to next year's election. Barely a week goes by when they don't come up with a major nail in their political coffin. Last week it was Disabled only being worth £2 / hour & refusing to sack him. Removing existing laws that prevented them from closing hospitals, Cutbacks upon Cutbacks on those that can least afford it so as to give further Tax Cuts to those that already have so much cash that they don't know what to do with it. And now they're talking about decriminalising Paedo-Porn.

What's next - encouraging kids to sell their bodies on the streets so that they can provide Income Tax as additional revenue?

Why are you surprised? The catholic church got away with covering up decades of child abuse and protecting known paedophiles and with blaming the victims for being so tempting to their abusers andf barely a word of criticism was uttered. This goverment is hell bent on repealing the human rights act and is against legislation which makes it a crime to hit children.

I can understand how you can end up on such a site by accident but that's a bit different from downloading the stuff or re-visiting such sites.

I'm no expert on this subject but... I did watch a Doco recently on this..

Why do police prosecute some and not others? From what I saw, It's about risk factor. Apparently there are 5 grades of child Images. Grade 4 Is downloading video's or Images where penetrative sex with a child Is shown and Grade 5 Includes animals and objects with babies. WTF ?

I think they do a risk assessment and go after the one's with the highest grade's found on their PC's and especially those who pose a physical risk to children. ie grooming young children with a view to meeting them.

I know that even the choir has to be very careful with images of children, as when we had a local children's choir as guests for our Christmas Concert last year, we had to get disclaimers signed by the parents before we could publish photos online - not because of data protection / copyright laws, but potential paedophile issues.