Waiting on Forensics
Notifications OFF
I am unsure what we are waiting on exactly re a charge. For instance if there are already 40+ "known IIOC" which flagged ... and now waiting on forensics ... what exactly for - what I mean is - is that not enough to know if there will be a charge already?
Or is that by itself definetely enough for a charge, but juat waiting to see if there is more too?
(please excuse my ignorance).
Or is that by itself definetely enough for a charge, but juat waiting to see if there is more too?
(please excuse my ignorance).
Sorry you haven't had much of a reply yet-I'm sure someone will be along in a bit with more advice to help. I'm assuming your person is suspected of having images on their devices. If so the police will need to be really thorough with the search to establish the categories and number of images which is used to help with charges and later sentencing. Unfortunately they will also be looking for evidence of a pattern of behaviour which shows the person has been actively seeking out this information to build the case. They may also be looking to find extra evidence such as chats or internet searches that support their case.
Thank you very much. Yes they said a number of images were detected leading to the arrest. I have since read on the report they were "known IIOC" and he admitted to using some inapproproate words when searching for porn. But claims he has done nothing wrong. I am just trying to understand whether some kind of charge is therefore inevitable based on that much alone ... or if it doesn't work like that?
A charge is probably inevitable, but what charge depends on the category of the images, A, B or C. Sentencing also depends on the category of the images so each one has to be graded.
Then there is the question of what words were used to search. Although not a crime, those words will have an impact on the possible defences he could use. Many men will say they downloaded the images accidentally, so the police always look for searches that contradict this.
Then there is the question of what words were used to search. Although not a crime, those words will have an impact on the possible defences he could use. Many men will say they downloaded the images accidentally, so the police always look for searches that contradict this.
Thank you very much for your reply.
Please could I clarify when you say it's not a crime to use deliberate search words when DL porn?
Please could I clarify when you say it's not a crime to use deliberate search words when DL porn?
They wait for foresnsics as there may be more found on the devise/s. For example they may have been flagged to the police due to a single image, but when they look on the devise/s they could find hundreds. That can portentially change the suggested sentence from CPS to the court.
These offences all relate to possession of images. Not to what people searched for, but what they actually looked at or downloaded.
However the police always check the persons internet searches anyway and include those in their evidence file to the court. This is because so many men claim to have accidentally downloaded images. That is a defence, so the police are very keen to show the judge that it was not an accident.
I have also seen one instance on here of a person being charged with "attempted" downloading of images. So far I am aware that is not a crime, but if the forensics show an image once existed at a particular date and time and they can prove that, it seems as if it can be prosecuted.
However the police always check the persons internet searches anyway and include those in their evidence file to the court. This is because so many men claim to have accidentally downloaded images. That is a defence, so the police are very keen to show the judge that it was not an accident.
I have also seen one instance on here of a person being charged with "attempted" downloading of images. So far I am aware that is not a crime, but if the forensics show an image once existed at a particular date and time and they can prove that, it seems as if it can be prosecuted.
