Assumed age
Notifications OFFPost deleted by user
EA, I know, the whole thing seems bonkers, doesn't it?
Do sorry that you have found yourself here, you will get to learn the intricacies of the legal system at a snails pace. It's a long journey. Be kind to yourself and your children.
Unfortunately, as the law stands at the moment, it seems that the line between legal and offending is extremely blurry. But if the activity/behaviour falls into the blurry area, there is no benefit of the doubt given, just the full force of the law applied.
I think it's time there was a public education campaign and also in schools if it isn't already, so that people are clear on what the law is and what to do to stay out of the blurry bits. Ideally, the law needs clarifying so that people are fully aware if and when they are crossing a line.
Do sorry that you have found yourself here, you will get to learn the intricacies of the legal system at a snails pace. It's a long journey. Be kind to yourself and your children.
Unfortunately, as the law stands at the moment, it seems that the line between legal and offending is extremely blurry. But if the activity/behaviour falls into the blurry area, there is no benefit of the doubt given, just the full force of the law applied.
I think it's time there was a public education campaign and also in schools if it isn't already, so that people are clear on what the law is and what to do to stay out of the blurry bits. Ideally, the law needs clarifying so that people are fully aware if and when they are crossing a line.
Hey EA,
It's bloody hard but FIGHT, FIGHT, FIGHT! If charges get posted for it or he gets offered a caution keep fighting if it is this one image and he truly believed the person was 18. They assume most will go guilty because of the headaches but we must fight against this when innocent. As for the Police saying "it's best you don't know" - they do this a lot, make it out to be way worse than it is. There was no evidence to say my partner was guilty of anything (there still isn't) and it was related to communication but the a-holes alluded to him being a massive user of abuse images. They're disgusting for that because it makes the already traumatic experience even more traumatic and is actually gaslighting you into believe untruths about your significant other. You're not alone & your mistreatment unfortunately isn't uncommon. Sending love xx
It's bloody hard but FIGHT, FIGHT, FIGHT! If charges get posted for it or he gets offered a caution keep fighting if it is this one image and he truly believed the person was 18. They assume most will go guilty because of the headaches but we must fight against this when innocent. As for the Police saying "it's best you don't know" - they do this a lot, make it out to be way worse than it is. There was no evidence to say my partner was guilty of anything (there still isn't) and it was related to communication but the a-holes alluded to him being a massive user of abuse images. They're disgusting for that because it makes the already traumatic experience even more traumatic and is actually gaslighting you into believe untruths about your significant other. You're not alone & your mistreatment unfortunately isn't uncommon. Sending love xx
The police LIE, we got some charges dropped last minute in court due to having a good solicitor who requested proof (image) of offence and they didn't have it. Makes you think when you see all the stories printed how much of it is actual true. My advice is don't believe anything the police say, even when you think they are being nice, say very little to them.
Post deleted
Thanks everyone.
I'm just constantly trying to find out info. My saving grace is that the kids are away atm so I can just stress without worrying about them.
Can charges be made on assumed age? They keep saying they're trained to know but surely that's bull because at the end of the day she could be 40 and looks young to them.
I really don't understand how these things protect kids when they're just shooting in the dark hoping to find more but ignoring and missing actual harmful situations.
Also, ss have been a nightmare with the kids already. The police don't think oh shouldn't be allowed access but ss have overruled... because the case worker Is off and they can't come out sooner. So they're happy to wait longer to see the kids to check they're okay... for their safety.
Ahhhh.
I'm just constantly trying to find out info. My saving grace is that the kids are away atm so I can just stress without worrying about them.
Can charges be made on assumed age? They keep saying they're trained to know but surely that's bull because at the end of the day she could be 40 and looks young to them.
I really don't understand how these things protect kids when they're just shooting in the dark hoping to find more but ignoring and missing actual harmful situations.
Also, ss have been a nightmare with the kids already. The police don't think oh shouldn't be allowed access but ss have overruled... because the case worker Is off and they can't come out sooner. So they're happy to wait longer to see the kids to check they're okay... for their safety.
Ahhhh.
EA regarding the age and all that type of dentail is why you should get a solicitor and a good one at that, they will look into all that and they know the law better than us so know what information they can get. Our solicitor actually had a meeting with the police to view images to determine if they were indecent.
He was given a solicitor who when they showed the girl stopped the interview and spoke to him. She asked him if he thought she was under 18 and he said no she looks 18+. The solicitor told him she agreed and even said she looks older than her. We don't have the money to pay for a different solicitor than what they offer :(
Yeah he said she seems good. I've not met her or anything. I'm just so worried I can't stop overthinking it all when it's only the beginning by the looks of things.
The only thing that bugged me is how she didn't ask what they mean by assumed and how that's enough of a case. I literally phoned the police man and asked him to explain it and he was just saying about training but because they don't know the person they give an estimate. It just annoys me that this girl could be 30 with a filter on and because they think she looks young that's enough.
I've not seen the picture so can't comment on what I think she looks but the fact that seems to be the case is crazy. I almost wish she definitely was a certain age because then I could process this better!
The only thing that bugged me is how she didn't ask what they mean by assumed and how that's enough of a case. I literally phoned the police man and asked him to explain it and he was just saying about training but because they don't know the person they give an estimate. It just annoys me that this girl could be 30 with a filter on and because they think she looks young that's enough.
I've not seen the picture so can't comment on what I think she looks but the fact that seems to be the case is crazy. I almost wish she definitely was a certain age because then I could process this better!
He thinks he has a porn addiction (which seems common from reading posts on here) and downloaded and shared a video of a topless girl who they assume to be 15/16 (but haven't been able to identify her) he said he found the image on reddit and shared it and did use kik but deleted it because he didn't like what he saw (which makes me nervous because this can flag stuff now even if he didn't download it?)
I honestly don't believe he internationally did anything and he's just an idiot but that makes it a million times harder because I just feel like people are gonna assume I'm covering for him. I'm so angry at him that I think I'd rather have a reason to not cover for him if that makes sense?
Thanks for messaging BTW x
I honestly don't believe he internationally did anything and he's just an idiot but that makes it a million times harder because I just feel like people are gonna assume I'm covering for him. I'm so angry at him that I think I'd rather have a reason to not cover for him if that makes sense?
Thanks for messaging BTW x
EA,
One of the many things I find disturbing about this process is how legal proceedings (court hearings, trial, sentencing) can go ahead without the judge, the jury, or the prosecution counsel actually ever *seeing* any of the images. I realise there are issues with a jury seeing the images, and that viewing would probably be very distressing for most people, and it's not ethically right that images of real children being abused should get further viewing. But I do feel it's problematic, if these images are the actual *evidence*, that decisions on whether to prosecute, the categories (and therefore seriousness) of the images, the estimated ages of the children in the images, (when it's likely that in a number of cases the category and ages will be contentious), and determining an appropriate sentence, can be made *solely* on the *description* of the images from the police forensics officer.
From what I've read, I think it's possible for the defence's legal representative to view images in some circumstances, but by no means guaranteed.
One of the many things I find disturbing about this process is how legal proceedings (court hearings, trial, sentencing) can go ahead without the judge, the jury, or the prosecution counsel actually ever *seeing* any of the images. I realise there are issues with a jury seeing the images, and that viewing would probably be very distressing for most people, and it's not ethically right that images of real children being abused should get further viewing. But I do feel it's problematic, if these images are the actual *evidence*, that decisions on whether to prosecute, the categories (and therefore seriousness) of the images, the estimated ages of the children in the images, (when it's likely that in a number of cases the category and ages will be contentious), and determining an appropriate sentence, can be made *solely* on the *description* of the images from the police forensics officer.
From what I've read, I think it's possible for the defence's legal representative to view images in some circumstances, but by no means guaranteed.
His solicitor has definitely seen the one they arrested him for because she agreed she didn't think the girl looked under 18.
I forgot to mention that someone else was arrested and they flagged my oh from him. So maybe the chat room was the same or he has shared / download the same image. We haven't really been told much about that side I don't don't think I was supposed to be told that.
It's so hard to see where we would fall in what could happen because people don't share their whole stories and while I completely understand my brain just doesn't work in grey and I need black and white ????
I forgot to mention that someone else was arrested and they flagged my oh from him. So maybe the chat room was the same or he has shared / download the same image. We haven't really been told much about that side I don't don't think I was supposed to be told that.
It's so hard to see where we would fall in what could happen because people don't share their whole stories and while I completely understand my brain just doesn't work in grey and I need black and white ????
Thank you Lee!
Just to add our solicitor was through legal aid, when I say make sure a good one as in they have a reputation for dealing with these crimes Xx