Family and Friends Forum

Hi Becky

In my case at my husband's sentencing the judge was very very graphic, going into great detail about the photos and videos. He explained what he saw, the ages, the poses, the websites he's been accessing - it was all disgusting and horrific stuff which I can't unsee 5 months on! However, I needed to hear it as he's lied so much to me, I needed to know the truth.

Think hard about if you want to go and if you do please take someone to support you. I had both my boys with me and a friend (my boys are both adults)

Xx

Tracey

Thank you for the information. It has been something which has been on my mind as well. Your advice re having support with you in court is also useful. I still don't know if I will be brave enough on the day to be there but at least I will be prepared if I do decide to go.

It might depend but in magistrates, because my ex pleaded guilty, the details weren’t read out.

Hi Wolfmama

I think that the charges will be read out in crown court, my husband didn't go guilty until crown court and his 2nd appearance. Maybe if they go guilty from the start and show remorse the judge isn't quite as harsh as the judge was with my husband. There isn't any consistency so there's no telling I'm afraid

X

I refused to go to sentencing, I couldnt do it and I am glad. He pleaded guilty months before sentencing, there was no jury. It was in an open Sheriff Court which mainly deals with drugs and violence. The Sheriff read out graphic details of 3 of the most horrific images found on his device. This caused an uproar in the court, fights broke out between those awaiting sentencing for their offences, the public shouting at my husband and his solicitor. It was so barbaric police were involved, people were arrested. The police put in a complaint about the judge as he shouldnt have done it but he only got a smack on the wrist.

If I could do it all again I still wouldn't have went. No hope in hell I would witness that but that's just our story x

My partners solicitor advised that they wouldn't go into detail, that the whole purpose of categorising the images as A, B and C, was to avoid such things being read out in a public forum. That was part of the reason for his guilty plea, to avoid the details of the images being associated with him. It was a gamble, the idea of one less hearing, which would reduce the probability of a journalist being present. At the plea hearing this was the case, and just the amount of images in each category were read out. Sadly at the sentencing hearing, this did not happen. The Judge read out the prosecution statements, and the descriptions were graphic to say the least. They just read out what the polices statements / summary - nothing more. We only received them just over 24 hours before the plea hearing (even though they had been written months before). The whole process seemed terribly unfair, I may write about other details another time.