Clutching at straws?
Notifications OFF
Hi all hope you all had a relatively good Christmas.
Bit confused, oic went and visited my OH in prison (on remand) and said there was a iioc video on his phone sent to him in 2017, and extreme porn and beastiality (I'm sorry I really can't spell that), I'm confused as please bare in mind over the years I've been through his phone and never seen anything like that, OH said he had no idea they were there either. One of his friends used to send the most random of stuff, most of which was never opened by my OH. His brief even said it most likely came through on the back of something completely innocent.
With all that's going on it sort of feels like they are trying to get him on anything and everything. Also saying he searched for firearms back in 2017, that one's confusing in itself as his phone is brand new so surely search history wouldn't even go that far back?!
I wasn't with him in 2017 but I find it a bit hard to believe (I don't know I might be in denial but again I also know he's not into that sort of stuff).
im not with him but still supporting him in the sense being completely alone is not good for anyone's mental health. Plus weird me needs answers even if they are bad.
I just don't understand
Bit confused, oic went and visited my OH in prison (on remand) and said there was a iioc video on his phone sent to him in 2017, and extreme porn and beastiality (I'm sorry I really can't spell that), I'm confused as please bare in mind over the years I've been through his phone and never seen anything like that, OH said he had no idea they were there either. One of his friends used to send the most random of stuff, most of which was never opened by my OH. His brief even said it most likely came through on the back of something completely innocent.
With all that's going on it sort of feels like they are trying to get him on anything and everything. Also saying he searched for firearms back in 2017, that one's confusing in itself as his phone is brand new so surely search history wouldn't even go that far back?!
I wasn't with him in 2017 but I find it a bit hard to believe (I don't know I might be in denial but again I also know he's not into that sort of stuff).
im not with him but still supporting him in the sense being completely alone is not good for anyone's mental health. Plus weird me needs answers even if they are bad.
I just don't understand
I can't help on some of the question, but regarding searches, a lot of phones you are logged into a account via your phone - For Android it's Google. That account (oftin on a default setup) will log and store everything - Your Google searches, your browsing history, use of certain apps, locations, back up all photos to the cloud). It's possible they can see his search history through these means.
Hi Sal thank you for replying, I thought of that too, but Google search history is only saved by the company itself for 18 months, they are talking 6 years ago. Besides OH has a thing about nurf not actual firearms I'm wondering if he put in g word they are saying an actual firearm when he's actually searching for nerf? I don't know. But I do find it hard to believe.
it just feels like it's one thing after another when it comes to investigating but that's partially to be expected. Just want it to stop.
it just feels like it's one thing after another when it comes to investigating but that's partially to be expected. Just want it to stop.
I don't know how they do it but police (IT side of it) can go back a long way. For my partner they went back ten years worth of search history... So would have been mid 00s.
I have heard from others that some files can have 'hidden files' attached, typical from torrentening and downloading what people think are 'legal' content (music films, images etc). However, I believe the forensics can look into whether files have been accessed - might be worth asking the solicitor to ask for the evidence on whether iioc hidden files were viewed. Tho possession is ofc illegal, but can give more context to the overall offending - ie was any of the iiocs actually clicked on and viewed Vs hidden and chance never knew they were there.
The guns aspect isn't illegal itself, but with the concern of other images they is likely to raise concerns - but a solicitor should be able to argue it should be ignored.
Before I was introduced to iioc offending I believed such iioc was only available through the dark web and you would need to be very tech savvy to access, but that isn't actually the case for many cases.
A full forensic report would likely help you understand the full background to it, but I personally never read my partner's or know if such a report was available to view.
I have heard from others that some files can have 'hidden files' attached, typical from torrentening and downloading what people think are 'legal' content (music films, images etc). However, I believe the forensics can look into whether files have been accessed - might be worth asking the solicitor to ask for the evidence on whether iioc hidden files were viewed. Tho possession is ofc illegal, but can give more context to the overall offending - ie was any of the iiocs actually clicked on and viewed Vs hidden and chance never knew they were there.
The guns aspect isn't illegal itself, but with the concern of other images they is likely to raise concerns - but a solicitor should be able to argue it should be ignored.
Before I was introduced to iioc offending I believed such iioc was only available through the dark web and you would need to be very tech savvy to access, but that isn't actually the case for many cases.
A full forensic report would likely help you understand the full background to it, but I personally never read my partner's or know if such a report was available to view.
I can go back and see my own Google search history, location movements etc in Google back to about 2013 (without doing anything tech savvy).
As another poster has said, some of these I think can be hidden files.
As another poster has said, some of these I think can be hidden files.
It does seem though that in these cases (probably do with all crimes) they do try to build up as unsavoury picture as possible - Related to the fire arms they'd have to prove (I imagine, some kind of intent behind the searching).
Thank you all for your responses, it was one search for "firearms", one iioc video (I won't go into detail but I was crying when I heard of it, probably cat A) and several videos and pics of other bits but again all back in 2017, seriously do they not think that if someone we're actually searching for this stuff it wouldn't be just the one time years ago. Or is that just my way of thinking? OH was initially arrested for communicating with a minor by a vigilante group. Which he is adamant he knew it was a decoy.
I know I shouldn't have but I made a profile on several dating sites to see how quickly I could spot a decoy and I spotted 3 (same pics different names clearly decoys, different sites), I didn't communicate with them or anyone, but they were easy to spot. This btw is the reason he said he was able to spot them, so I just wanted to check, all profiles of mine now deleted.
I know I shouldn't have but I made a profile on several dating sites to see how quickly I could spot a decoy and I spotted 3 (same pics different names clearly decoys, different sites), I didn't communicate with them or anyone, but they were easy to spot. This btw is the reason he said he was able to spot them, so I just wanted to check, all profiles of mine now deleted.
I do understand your frustration. My person had one conversation, with another adult, about a child. They found no other conversations, no pictures/ videos or search terms. It was one conversation amongst 100 (possibly thousands) of conversations with women about all kinds of things that could only ever be role play - I do think my person needed be convicted of something, he was pushing boundaries and could have put a child at risk, but the outcome seems disproportionate.
My person's conversation started adult legal sexual fetish forum. I can see the decoy (police) on there and is still active. I have real mixed feelings about it all, I can see why they do it and I'm sure the do find people that are a risk to children, but it also seems they go for the low hanging fruit.
I can understand why you wanted to do this, it's part of trying to understand the truth of the situation.
My person's conversation started adult legal sexual fetish forum. I can see the decoy (police) on there and is still active. I have real mixed feelings about it all, I can see why they do it and I'm sure the do find people that are a risk to children, but it also seems they go for the low hanging fruit.
I can understand why you wanted to do this, it's part of trying to understand the truth of the situation.
Hi Sal, it's annoying as all hell to say the least, the site they were on originally was for 18+ and you had to be verified, I understand the decoy persons being on sites where no varification is needed but this one does. So can first understand if a person thought it was role play (messed up role play though). But as I said I spotted 3, I was only on it for about a 12 hours or so. Personally I think it it should be illegal to pose as a minor when you are not one. (Police acception and not on over 18 sites), his search history clearly shows he wasn't looking for a minor.
they always go on about how you must be attracted to children if you talk to one but I wonder if they are getting off pretending to be one. It's sickening.
saw a video of another "sting" this group did the other day and they were going on about how they have an after care program and make sure families are ok etc and I just thought to myself you lying sacks of crap, they have never bothered to help me or my family and didn't care about the damage that they caused to my children because of course "they care about protecting children", it's bs and they just want glory
they always go on about how you must be attracted to children if you talk to one but I wonder if they are getting off pretending to be one. It's sickening.
saw a video of another "sting" this group did the other day and they were going on about how they have an after care program and make sure families are ok etc and I just thought to myself you lying sacks of crap, they have never bothered to help me or my family and didn't care about the damage that they caused to my children because of course "they care about protecting children", it's bs and they just want glory
Vigilantes stings are particularly cruel on the families because of the public nature of them.
There was a article in the news recently about someone that chased intruders from their house and it ended in a car accident, it was n 24 hours in police custody - Throughout the program the police kept saying not to take the law into your own hands, yet vigilantes related to this crime is encouraging by the police it seems.
I spent a lot of energy being confused and frustrated by the whole thing, that energy would have been better spent trying to understand the legalities of the case and angles to help his case - It's one of my biggest regrets. If you don't already have it and you want to help, I'd ask to have full disclosure and try to help in that way.
There was a article in the news recently about someone that chased intruders from their house and it ended in a car accident, it was n 24 hours in police custody - Throughout the program the police kept saying not to take the law into your own hands, yet vigilantes related to this crime is encouraging by the police it seems.
I spent a lot of energy being confused and frustrated by the whole thing, that energy would have been better spent trying to understand the legalities of the case and angles to help his case - It's one of my biggest regrets. If you don't already have it and you want to help, I'd ask to have full disclosure and try to help in that way.
Dragonmama,
Unfortunately, they do tend to clutch at straws in cases like these. It seems as though they hyperfocus on minute things, when in comparison to real issues is ridiculous. In my case the prosecution tried to use a silly video of a stick figure to say it demonstrated a sexual interest in children??!! There is so much nuance to these situations, I genuinely believe that there needs to be some kind of psychiatric or psychological input on every case because yes, some of these things are illegal and we understand why the law is there but I don't believe every case should be dealt with the way it is. This whole process is completely inhumane. Xx
Unfortunately, they do tend to clutch at straws in cases like these. It seems as though they hyperfocus on minute things, when in comparison to real issues is ridiculous. In my case the prosecution tried to use a silly video of a stick figure to say it demonstrated a sexual interest in children??!! There is so much nuance to these situations, I genuinely believe that there needs to be some kind of psychiatric or psychological input on every case because yes, some of these things are illegal and we understand why the law is there but I don't believe every case should be dealt with the way it is. This whole process is completely inhumane. Xx