What now?
Notifications OFF
18 months ago my now ex partner was arrested and last week went to crown court for sentencing. All of his court (2) dates have been in the court chambers where it's him, prosecution, barrister and judge. I feel that I believe everything he has told me but I have asked him to get things like the court transcript so I can believe him more if we move forward with our relationship. We were both teachers so this has been life changing. I am currently suspended as I have been open with my school and they are not happy - I may be dismissed. My parents are concerned that I do not know the whole truth. My now ex is thinking of how to break the news to friends. He was convicted of attempted sexual comms 13-15.
His Snapchat was shared on Kik and then he says someone pretended to be him on his snapchat to groom a boy (we now know this was the police). The police also started a second comm with him which he has admitted to sending a message - he replied 'that's hot' when a girl sent an image of her in underwear. The police had not said her age until the court date where they said she was 15 but he says she looked early 20's. That's all he has said he did but I feel that a community order and SOR are heavy for replying two words. What should I believe, do we get back together in the future?
I have no idea what to think. I'm grateful this is not public as my mental health right now could not cope. What other evidence can I ask him to obtain to help me understand it all better and believe in him. I am glad the court side of it is over and it's final it's just dealing with the conviction.
His Snapchat was shared on Kik and then he says someone pretended to be him on his snapchat to groom a boy (we now know this was the police). The police also started a second comm with him which he has admitted to sending a message - he replied 'that's hot' when a girl sent an image of her in underwear. The police had not said her age until the court date where they said she was 15 but he says she looked early 20's. That's all he has said he did but I feel that a community order and SOR are heavy for replying two words. What should I believe, do we get back together in the future?
I have no idea what to think. I'm grateful this is not public as my mental health right now could not cope. What other evidence can I ask him to obtain to help me understand it all better and believe in him. I am glad the court side of it is over and it's final it's just dealing with the conviction.
I feel the pain. I am very early on in my journey and my oh was arrested for sexual communication with children. I was fed lies after lies. Now I have asked for full disclosure so I no where I stand. Not sure if you can get disclosure from Sarah law as its already been to court.
Bless you, I k ow how you're feeling I've been there and try to think about you and take some time out to decide what you want to do. I git full disclosure of evidence when it was sent to barrister, then my person got it emailed to him and he forwarded it to me. Sadly he did tell me the truth about some things but swore no pics and he did send a dick pic, although never charged with this. I'm surprised your person hasn't seen his evidence? I got everything, police interview all 3 chats woyh decoys (same age rannge as yours.) it was horrendous to read but I needed, like you, to know everything and I'm grateful he did that for me. So ask your person to get the evidence emailed to him as he has every right to this, then he can forward it to you. If he doesn't then afraid he's lying.
Sorry you find yourself here. Its shocking how much this can impact the innocent, especially those who work with children.
The only real way to know the truth is to see the evidence. Only parts will be discussed in court.
One thing that does seem strange here is that he says he was sent a image of a under age child. If it was sexual in anyway the police wouldn't be able to do this - Perhaps I have miss understood. If it wasn't sexual then there is grounds for disputing it based on presumed age.
The only real way to know the truth is to see the evidence. Only parts will be discussed in court.
One thing that does seem strange here is that he says he was sent a image of a under age child. If it was sexual in anyway the police wouldn't be able to do this - Perhaps I have miss understood. If it wasn't sexual then there is grounds for disputing it based on presumed age.
Newlady - I have asked him to contact solicitor for evidence so I can see and he has done that
SAL -
he said that the image of the girl he did reply to was someone that looked 21/22 but in court he was told that it was a 15 year old girl. He got 'attempted' because it was a pseudo.
are you saying the police cannot send any pictures? I was of the belief that they send maybe a picture of someone 18 or something then saying they're 15. It was an image of someone in underwear with their face not in it.
he said that the image of the girl he did reply to was someone that looked 21/22 but in court he was told that it was a 15 year old girl. He got 'attempted' because it was a pseudo.
are you saying the police cannot send any pictures? I was of the belief that they send maybe a picture of someone 18 or something then saying they're 15. It was an image of someone in underwear with their face not in it.
I'm sorry you find yourself here. I'm going to be totally honest, I think there is more to it than he is telling you or his representation has been appalling. The chat would've had to have been sexual in nature (and usually it's quite explicit) and age disclosed prior for the CPS to have charged as this would be the criteria for that offence. There should've been forensic evidence to prove the account behind any offence belonged to your partner and the chats likely would've been retrieved too from the phone - without this the evidence would be weak and it would be grounds to get it dismissed.
In regards to the image sent by the Police, I am pretty sure they can send images but they aren't of minors, if I recall correctly the evidence in my case, a photo was sent of underwear and this was a Police decoy but that was only sent after it was asked for. Although we don't really have enticement as a defence, there is something called abuse of process and I think if the Police were randomly sending people photos purporting to be iioc without anyone asking first or disclosing age that this would definitely be seen as such. The solicitors will have all the evidence which was sent from the CPS - this will be chat logs, I would ask your partner to ask the solicitor for a copy and have a look at it. You should definitely know everything before you decide what you want to do xx
In regards to the image sent by the Police, I am pretty sure they can send images but they aren't of minors, if I recall correctly the evidence in my case, a photo was sent of underwear and this was a Police decoy but that was only sent after it was asked for. Although we don't really have enticement as a defence, there is something called abuse of process and I think if the Police were randomly sending people photos purporting to be iioc without anyone asking first or disclosing age that this would definitely be seen as such. The solicitors will have all the evidence which was sent from the CPS - this will be chat logs, I would ask your partner to ask the solicitor for a copy and have a look at it. You should definitely know everything before you decide what you want to do xx
Cooper, I'm 99% sure police can not send any images that would be deemed illegal i.e. Under age and sexual which a naked photo would be. They'd be distributing IIOC which is a serious offence.
As BaffledB says, lots of decoy police officers get round this by sending pictures of children's underwear (they did in my person's case).
I may be incorrect but I'd highly recommend asking for full disclosure if you are considering a future. There were things in my person's case that didn't stack up and as a result of asking questions and reading questions here I found out my person had lied to me about certain things (including some daft things).
Just to say, asking for full disclosure and finding out your person hasn't been honest doesn't mean it has to be the end of thet relationship, for me it wasn't, but it helps you understand and move on. I didn't get full disclosure and found out more about the case through media reports which was hard.
As BaffledB says, lots of decoy police officers get round this by sending pictures of children's underwear (they did in my person's case).
I may be incorrect but I'd highly recommend asking for full disclosure if you are considering a future. There were things in my person's case that didn't stack up and as a result of asking questions and reading questions here I found out my person had lied to me about certain things (including some daft things).
Just to say, asking for full disclosure and finding out your person hasn't been honest doesn't mean it has to be the end of thet relationship, for me it wasn't, but it helps you understand and move on. I didn't get full disclosure and found out more about the case through media reports which was hard.
Police absolutely could not send iioc. The reason why it is classed as attempted is because it was a decoy. If it was a real minor it would be sexual communication but when it's decoys it's classed as "attempted" although I believe this has changed recently so new charges may be different.
I had a quick look a pseudo images I believe are treated the same as actual images - I might be wrong though. It does seem something might not be stacking up or I've miss understood.
Post deleted
In terms of finding out it was a decoy late on, he changed solicitors when he knew he needed to go to court because during the investigation times there was positive signs such as bail not extended and a charge dropped. When he changed solicitors from the duty solicitor who didn't seem good, then he found out more details.
I have emailed and he has emailed the solicitor used for full disclosure but waiting for them to get back to us as she is saying that he current case take priority - which I get but it's frustrating as I have my work meeting coming up.
He has sent an EX105/EX107 to he the court transcript of the whole case too.
He seems to be trying to prove what he said is right but I am being cautious to protect myself.
I have emailed and he has emailed the solicitor used for full disclosure but waiting for them to get back to us as she is saying that he current case take priority - which I get but it's frustrating as I have my work meeting coming up.
He has sent an EX105/EX107 to he the court transcript of the whole case too.
He seems to be trying to prove what he said is right but I am being cautious to protect myself.
Dafodil:
attempted sexual communications with a child (13-15)
attempted sexual communications with a child (13-15)
I don't understand how the timestamps of him not being involved in the main conversation which was more explicit and what he was originally arrested on were not enough to prove it wasn't him.
this is where I need clarity.
In his SHPO some paragraphs have been removed as they felt he can be around children but he just can't delete things off of his devices.
we are getting all devices back from the forensics but not the phone he has said he replied the one message from.
Why was the KIK account not traced as he's never had it and that's what was sharing his Snapchat? Was this what got the interest of the police..
this is where I need clarity.
In his SHPO some paragraphs have been removed as they felt he can be around children but he just can't delete things off of his devices.
we are getting all devices back from the forensics but not the phone he has said he replied the one message from.
Why was the KIK account not traced as he's never had it and that's what was sharing his Snapchat? Was this what got the interest of the police..
It can be very difficult to prove a Kik account belongs to someone - it's usually when live pictures (which are taken within the app) are sent or going across to another platform which helps build a case against someone along with other bits of information. Once Kik is deleted the majority of data is removed as it doesn't store within a device like other apps do. Snapchat is a bit easier to uncover data from. The only thing which could've happened is someone on Kik had these conversations and gave his Snapchat - perhaps a mistake as the usernames could've been similar.
The main points of interest for yourself when looking through the evidence will be the usernames of the accounts, the contents of the conversations and the forensics report. You have to look at it from a different perspective, not that it is someone you know but as though it is a stranger so you aren't biased when drawing your conclusion. My first instinct when reading the conversations in my case were that it wasn't him due to spelling and grammar and it made me miss some vital things for a while.
The main points of interest for yourself when looking through the evidence will be the usernames of the accounts, the contents of the conversations and the forensics report. You have to look at it from a different perspective, not that it is someone you know but as though it is a stranger so you aren't biased when drawing your conclusion. My first instinct when reading the conversations in my case were that it wasn't him due to spelling and grammar and it made me miss some vital things for a while.
I've seen the CPS case file today and it does support what he has told me. The account on kik had a different sir name. The police did send an image which my now ex partner had admitted to sending one reply and this all matches what I've read in the file.
Awaiting the court transcript.
The solicitor has said that because he replied to one, even though there is inconclusive evidence of the conversation or a kik account in his phone - the judge has charged him for the reply and that he has admitted that was his account
Awaiting the court transcript.
The solicitor has said that because he replied to one, even though there is inconclusive evidence of the conversation or a kik account in his phone - the judge has charged him for the reply and that he has admitted that was his account
You can call yourself anything you want on Kik and most people purposely do use different names but the rest of it sounds very weird, if he pleaded guilty by his own accord due to poor advice and scaremongering then I doubt the judge will have paid much mind to all the evidence in the way of being sure it was him behind it. The Police shouldn't be approaching anyone without confirming they are who they've been speaking to previously as if they do message someone incorrectly and they responded then no crime has been committed because he didn't know their age. You did mention this was a pseudo image which is illegal and I am baffled why the police would be allowed to send it.
I know. I thought this would bring more clarity but it hasn't.
The CPS file says that there is no evidence of Kik on the phone or the main sexual conversation. It says inconclusive to negative.
He has admitted to the second conversation and sending one message after the pictures of 'the girls body' (words from the CPS file). They have admitted the person asked for images of the girl but the main bulk of the conversation was on Kik and my now ex just received an image and replied 'that's hot!!', they then replied 'I'm a 14 year old boy?' And the conversation ended.
it says all of this...
I feel so lost..
The CPS file says that there is no evidence of Kik on the phone or the main sexual conversation. It says inconclusive to negative.
He has admitted to the second conversation and sending one message after the pictures of 'the girls body' (words from the CPS file). They have admitted the person asked for images of the girl but the main bulk of the conversation was on Kik and my now ex just received an image and replied 'that's hot!!', they then replied 'I'm a 14 year old boy?' And the conversation ended.
it says all of this...
I feel so lost..
I think your ex really needs to seek some legal help in getting this looked at again. It sounds similar-ish to my case and luckily my partner had a good solicitor in his first interview or he could've perhaps been advised wrongly, I've seen some solicitors just tell their clients to plead guilty and even when people aren't guilty they have done so because why would you question a solicitor? It's quite frightening how some of these professionals get things so wrong - our first barrister made reference to a Cat A image in his first hearing when there wasn't one.
If your ex believes he was led into pleading guilty I would write a complaint to the solicitors asking them to investigate what has happened and why things hadn't been picked up on. They have 28 days to respond and if they don't you then take it to the Legal Ombudsman.
If your ex believes he was led into pleading guilty I would write a complaint to the solicitors asking them to investigate what has happened and why things hadn't been picked up on. They have 28 days to respond and if they don't you then take it to the Legal Ombudsman.
[F115ASexual communication with a child
(1)A person aged 18 or over (A) commits an offence if—
(a)for the purpose of obtaining sexual gratification, A intentionally communicates with another person (B),
(b)the communication is sexual or is intended to encourage B to make (whether to A or to another) a communication that is sexual, and
(c)B is under 16 and A does not reasonably believe that B is 16 or over.
(2)For the purposes of this section, a communication is sexual if—
(a)any part of it relates to sexual activity, or
(b)a reasonable person would, in all the circumstances but regardless of any person's purpose, consider any part of the communication to be sexual;
and in paragraph (a) “sexual activity” means an activity that a reasonable person would, in all the circumstances but regardless of any person's purpose, consider to be sexual.
(1)A person aged 18 or over (A) commits an offence if—
(a)for the purpose of obtaining sexual gratification, A intentionally communicates with another person (B),
(b)the communication is sexual or is intended to encourage B to make (whether to A or to another) a communication that is sexual, and
(c)B is under 16 and A does not reasonably believe that B is 16 or over.
(2)For the purposes of this section, a communication is sexual if—
(a)any part of it relates to sexual activity, or
(b)a reasonable person would, in all the circumstances but regardless of any person's purpose, consider any part of the communication to be sexual;
and in paragraph (a) “sexual activity” means an activity that a reasonable person would, in all the circumstances but regardless of any person's purpose, consider to be sexual.
Above is the criteria for committing the offence which from what you have read doesn't sound like it has been met.
Post deleted
HelpMe:
it says on the CPS File that it was a law enforcement officer.
the image that he replied 'that's hot' to was on Snapchat.
I don't understand how that is really sexual communication and when the rest of the conversation was on Kik and they have said there's no trace of this on his kik conversation on his phone..
it says on the CPS File that it was a law enforcement officer.
the image that he replied 'that's hot' to was on Snapchat.
I don't understand how that is really sexual communication and when the rest of the conversation was on Kik and they have said there's no trace of this on his kik conversation on his phone..
He didn't plead guilty. - would this have lost him credit.
do we get a new solicitor?
can we speak to leading investigation officer?
court transcript is still being obtained.
His friends are saying he's lying but how can this paperwork all be false. I feel that he's been made an example of and although it's a community order, the conviction will stay with his record forever which is a heavy price
do we get a new solicitor?
can we speak to leading investigation officer?
court transcript is still being obtained.
His friends are saying he's lying but how can this paperwork all be false. I feel that he's been made an example of and although it's a community order, the conviction will stay with his record forever which is a heavy price
Replying "that's hot" to an image being sent to you isn't a crime - I highly doubt it would be even if you KNEW a minor had sent it to be honest with no further comms.
I would go back to the initial solicitors for a full investigation but if he didn't plead guilty and it's gone to trial it may be difficult to fight as it's gone through a jury. The barrister should've worked with the lack of evidence and proven that there's no evidence to show it was him behind the Kik account and that although he may have replied on Snapchat he didn't know the age of the person. It will be difficult to get a new solicitor on board with fighting this if on legal aid, I struggled trying to get a new solicitor when I realised how poor the latter part of the representation was and the only way forward was complaining and following the procedure. Legal firms hate the thought of being investigated and get charged £500 once a complaint reaches the Legal Ombudsman, the Solicitors Regulation Authority is also very strict on competance so it's the only real way to get them to go through things with a fine toothcomb if the proverbial hits the fan.
I would go back to the initial solicitors for a full investigation but if he didn't plead guilty and it's gone to trial it may be difficult to fight as it's gone through a jury. The barrister should've worked with the lack of evidence and proven that there's no evidence to show it was him behind the Kik account and that although he may have replied on Snapchat he didn't know the age of the person. It will be difficult to get a new solicitor on board with fighting this if on legal aid, I struggled trying to get a new solicitor when I realised how poor the latter part of the representation was and the only way forward was complaining and following the procedure. Legal firms hate the thought of being investigated and get charged £500 once a complaint reaches the Legal Ombudsman, the Solicitors Regulation Authority is also very strict on competance so it's the only real way to get them to go through things with a fine toothcomb if the proverbial hits the fan.
Thank you BaffledB.
this is my thought too but the solicitor said that because he admitted to the account being his for the one message then the judge would have considered the inconclusive to negative report but aired on the side of caution.
this was a closed court and there was no jury.
I will see if he will seek further advice but I know he is just glad it's come to the end and we read that there is a threat that if you appeal or keep going then it can make things worse with sentences etc.
it just seems like a big scaremongering case and the fact there is someone out there sharing his Snapchat over kik and they could potentially be ruining other live makes me so frustrated
this is my thought too but the solicitor said that because he admitted to the account being his for the one message then the judge would have considered the inconclusive to negative report but aired on the side of caution.
this was a closed court and there was no jury.
I will see if he will seek further advice but I know he is just glad it's come to the end and we read that there is a threat that if you appeal or keep going then it can make things worse with sentences etc.
it just seems like a big scaremongering case and the fact there is someone out there sharing his Snapchat over kik and they could potentially be ruining other live makes me so frustrated
Post deleted
Post deleted
Only just seen this thread and I just wanted to point out in regards to your employment. I believe you cannot be judged by association anymore. Have you got support to help your case of not getting dismissal because of this?
My person didn't have Comms offence so I haven't really anything to add to how your person's case was handled.
My person didn't have Comms offence so I haven't really anything to add to how your person's case was handled.
Are you based in England? It doesn't sound the same as the court system here. The judge shouldn't assume, it's guilty beyond reasonable doubt and the solicitor/barrister should've put forward in the defence statement prior to court that he denied use of the Kik account and this should've raised questions and further poking into the evidence.
As mentioned the previous messages to the 'that's hot' comment was on Kik which in the CPS file says there's not evidence of on his phone or any other devices.
I have now been dismissed through the employer not wanting a damaged reputation.
I am in the UK. I can only go by what I've read in CPS report from then police.
we are awaiting the court transcript.
I have now been dismissed through the employer not wanting a damaged reputation.
I am in the UK. I can only go by what I've read in CPS report from then police.
we are awaiting the court transcript.
HelpMe:
I have seen the file from the police to CPS.
I emailed them asking for a full disclosure and so did he. They sent us their opinions and answers to questions and then as mentioned, the file from police to CPS. We are awaiting the court transcript. I have seen the court papers and some probation papers.
I have seen the file from the police to CPS.
I emailed them asking for a full disclosure and so did he. They sent us their opinions and answers to questions and then as mentioned, the file from police to CPS. We are awaiting the court transcript. I have seen the court papers and some probation papers.
Hi ladies - they say your employer cannot take action against you (legally) if a family member is involved in this crime, but unfortunately (in my case) do look for a way to wriggle you out and protect their 'reputation' ......
I was 'paid off', mind you I don't think I could have continued there with this massive life change and people staring at me. I moved on to get a job where no one knows.
I was 'paid off', mind you I don't think I could have continued there with this massive life change and people staring at me. I moved on to get a job where no one knows.
smile through tears:
exactly what happened. I have a bit of time to find a new job and treat it as a fresh start.
might be a blessing I guess.
exactly what happened. I have a bit of time to find a new job and treat it as a fresh start.
might be a blessing I guess.