Family and Friends Forum

Lrf

Member since
July 2024

71 posts

Posted Wed January 8, 2025 12:04pmReport post

Hi,

In my ex OH's case thousands of images have been found across all categories, the OIC says he will be charged with 3 x making IIOC, do the charges relate to number of images because if there's so many wouldn't there be hundreds of charges? Or is it related to categories so X amount found in this category means a charge for that category so 3 is because there's over the threshold of images for A and B and C? So each charge relates to each category rather than individual images?

There's also a charge for possession of 'prohibited images'.

Does anyone have any experience of similar charges and what the sentence is? I know it's dependent on the judge but just some personal experiences would be good to hear.

Although we're not together im hoping he avoids custody I don't think I could bear to break my children's hearts over that aswell, and financially I would be in a terrible situation...

Thanks for any help.

Edited Wed January 8, 2025 12:14pm

LosingIt

Member since
September 2024

199 posts

Posted Wed January 8, 2025 2:25pmReport post

Hi, it will be 1 charge for each category since they carry a different sentencing level (although in practice they'll just sentence for the most severe offence). Prohibited images is usually cartoons or AI images of children.

If you know rough estimate of numbers and ages you can likely approximate overall sentence but it will hinge on the judge and available mitigation. Remorse, insight into harm caused and taking responsibility is key. If you have 1000s of images across multiple devices and maintain you have zero interest in the images will work against you.

Edited Wed January 8, 2025 2:27pm

Lost in the dark

Member since
November 2024

26 posts

Posted Thu January 9, 2025 9:34pmReport post

Charges for my family member are all related however very specific. Broken down into categories A,B and C then the prohibited images separately. The guidance for the prohibited images states, "The prosecution must prove that the images are within the accused’s custody or control such that they were capable of accessing them and they must know that they possess the images. The accused need not know that the photographs were indecent" even the judge queried this charge believing it was covered in the making of charges.



xx

Eye of storm

Member since
May 2024

121 posts

Posted Mon January 13, 2025 9:57pmReport post

My OHs images were found in the cache and no longer accessible, in fact the police forensic team couldn't access them, but still pursuing a charge of making. X

Flower

Member since
February 2023

128 posts

Posted Tue January 14, 2025 7:42amReport post

Large quantities can occur because of the way material is discovered. It is possible to click on links that have a large collection within. This is not to say said person have accessed them all and viewed them all however will be charged for all regardless.

If the large amounts in possession have taken place over a very large period of time, collected and organised/categorised and viewed by your partner then this will be treated differently.

Large numbers don't form a direct link between risk or sentencing, there are several factors to include in calculating this. So as everyone said above, It really does depend on the judge, offender's previous contact, mitigating and aggravating factors, remorse etc.

We ended up with a suspended sentence & no media.

Best of luck on the day.

Edited Tue January 14, 2025 7:44am