Man convicted for possessing pictures of underage characters

Re: Man convicted for possessing pictures of underage charac

Shiroi Hane said:
I don't see that minor upskirt being a problem (it wasn't a lingering closeup or anything) especially with 11-year-old Francesca running around in Strike Witches. We're definitely talking something a lot more hardcore.
Click to expand...

Well the start of the section on the act says 'pornographic'

Oxford dictionary defines that as 'Printed or visual material containing the explicit description or display of sexual organs or activity, intended to stimulate sexual excitement.'

Panty shots fulfil the 2nd part of that but don't seem to meet the 1st part. While I'm sure some would argue it's obscene, it'd be hard to justify it as grossly obscene to meet the other criteria.

I doubt much Anime/Manga available would fall foul of this, it's when you stray into artwork that you start getting images that breach the law.
 
Re: Man convicted for possessing pictures of underage charac

Here's a tip for preventing other innocent British guys like me from going to jail: Never ever click a link that Ilmae seemingly innocuously leaves in your path. After reading this thread, I'm actually genuinely angry at him. And it was on my mums laptop too...

This thread is the kind of stuff that seriously makes me consider stop watching all and any anime. It makes you so paranoid when you think how much questionable content makes it into even mainstream anime, even official Naruto guidebooks!! I'm burning that book tonight.
 
Re: Man convicted for possessing pictures of underage charac

Rosencrantz said:
Panty shots fulfil the 2nd part of that but don't seem to meet the 1st part. While I'm sure some would argue it's obscene, it'd be hard to justify it as grossly obscene to meet the other criteria.
Click to expand...
I've seen pantyshots on British TV.
Actually, I can remember one specifically due to the irony; it was that "100 greatest cartoons" show where they had a number of guests including Jonathan Clements - and also a bunch of kids sat of the floor flashing their knickers.
 
Re: Man convicted for possessing pictures of underage charac

Lol, vash's dark (accidental) past coming back to haunt him.

I'm not so worried about anime titles as they pass through so many different committees in the process of their creation that they're unlikely any have any deeply objectionable content (though I can think of a few which certainly come close, and we do live in a country which considers that one innocent second from Code Geass R2 to be smut). It's manga where I feel there's a legitimate risk that people might buy something viewed as obscene; it's largely unregulated even in the US and there's some very edgy content out there. All it takes is one very conservative judge to decide that the story doesn't justify some weird scene or that something is more 'titillating' than the reader thought, and problems could arise. A lot of shoujo titles, for example, clearly reference underage sex and it could be argued that some people find that erotic (I suppose I should be grateful that the law's interpretation of titillating is likely very simple and biased towards a certain mindset, meaning we have a situation where visual smut causes outrage but graphic textual descriptions of hardcore abuse are just fine).

Another thing which I forgot to say in my last ramble is that the 'I can't suppress my inner desires!' argument bothers me on another level too (besides it having a direct effect on my own safety with all of these supposedly uncontrollable people running around out there). If we claim we can't keep our own kinks in check and need to waive the laws to have them accommodated, then we're effectively asking for the state to keep us from harming others, which is a level of control I am extremely uncomfortable giving away to a bunch of clueless older people who reach for their smelling salts at the idea of ladies having breasts. I'd rather have the laws set more reasonably to begin with so everyone knows where they stand - which is preferably not in jail for doing something which harms absolutely nobody.

I can practically hear ayase approaching this thread now ^^;

R
 
Re: Man convicted for possessing pictures of underage charac

It's silly that we're even having to debate policing thoughtcrime when the justice system has such broken priorities. The judge was worried that this was the start of this guy's perversion, yet people who are already well down that path aren't even going to be charged? How is that fair?

R
 
Re: Man convicted for possessing pictures of underage charac

Hmm...you do raise some very good points...urgh, why can't this be an issue with a simple answer? I did stumble upon this though, The Effect of Easy Availability of Pornography on the Incidence of Sexual Crimes: The Danish Experience, which had the following conclusion:
On the basis of various investigations, including a survey of public attitudes and studies of the police, it was established that at least in one type of offense (child molestation) the decrease represents a real reduction in the number of offenses committed. Various factors suggest that the availability of pornography was the direct cause of this decrease.
Click to expand...
I haven't been able to find anything to indicate whether the above study or a different one is being referred to in this article, but it makes a strong case too.

In regards to this specific case though, I decided to take a look at the "Coroners and Justice Act 2009", which does actually include provisions for context and it is pretty clear cut:
(7)References to an image of a person include references to an image of an imaginary person.
(8)References to an image of a child include references to an image of an imaginary child.
Click to expand...

It also has a piece that might possibly apply to characters like Yoko in Gurren Lagann:
(6)Where an image shows a person the image is to be treated as an image of a child if—
(a)the impression conveyed by the image is that the person shown is a child, or
(b)the predominant impression conveyed is that the person shown is a child despite the fact that some of the physical characteristics shown are not those of a child.
Click to expand...

What concerns me, is that aside from those examples and two further references to "imaginary" in the context of them meaning fictional animals (like dragons, unicorns etc), the rest of the act is clearly written with the mindset of the images being of actual flesh-and-blood subjects and I think it's fair to say that producing and possessing indecent images of actual children is on a whole different level to owning a drawing of a loli, so I think that a clearer distinction needs to be made, with different criteria and guidelines in relation to what constitutes an offence and what an acceptable punishment, if any, should be.

Personally, loli and shota aren't for me. I cringe when I see people on my social media feeds posting sexualised fanart of say, the Madoka Magica cast, because not only are they canonically only 14-15 years old, but they're drawn to look young as well. I do watch High School DxD and Strike Witches, but not for characters like Koneko and Lucchini (Rias and Barkhorn ftw).
 
Re: Man convicted for possessing pictures of underage charac

Rui said:
It's silly that we're even having to debate policing thoughtcrime when the justice system has such broken priorities. The judge was worried that this was the start of this guy's perversion, yet people who are already well down that path aren't even going to be charged? How is that fair?

R
Click to expand...

That's odd, because the article indicated he'd been found guilty of a seemingly worse offence a few years back, clearly not the start, and probably an indication that they were keeping an eye on him.

I for one would hope they'd focus on the serious cases as mentioned in that BBC link, hitting someone who looked at a dozen questionable bits of art is tiny when there are people out there making, distributing and re-distributing real images of abuse.

Joshawott said:
Which to be honest, concerns me, is that aside from those examples and two further references to "imaginary" in the context of them meaning fictional animals (like dragons, unicorns etc), the rest of the act is clearly written with the mindset of the images being of actual flesh-and-blood subjects and I think it's fair to say that producing and possessing indecent images of actual children is on a whole different level to owning a drawing of a loli, so I think that a clearer distinction needs to be made, with different criteria and guidelines in relation to what constitutes an offence and what an acceptable punishment, if any, should be.
Click to expand...

I believe the act is intended to close a loop hole where an abuse picture could be claimed to be otherwise because it was a drawing rather than a photo.

I do note this is the 1st apparent instance where it's been used, hard to tell if this opens the flood gates or if they are being responsible and not abusing the vague framing of the act.
 
Re: Man convicted for possessing pictures of underage charac

This is just stupid. That whole damn Section 65 should be de-regulated. I find it curious that the law can jump on some one for this, but whole community councils, social workers and police can turn blind eyes to actual real UK children being abused and gang raped for years on their own towns and streets in this country for years and no one gets so much as a suspension.
 
Re: Man convicted for possessing pictures of underage charac

Mohawk52 said:
This is just stupid. That whole damn Section 65 should be de-regulated. I find it curious that the law can jump on some one for this, but whole community councils, social workers and police can turn blind eyes to actual real UK children being abused and gang raped for years on their own towns and streets in this country for years and no one gets so much as a suspension.
Click to expand...
Otaku don't have enough money for bribing after importing all of those blu-rays and figures :p
 
Re: Man convicted for possessing pictures of underage charac

Yeah I definitely agree with Rui in regards to the whole "porn is needed to prevent latent rapists for acting out" argument. Has there ever been any hard evidence that correlates access to hardcore porn with lower levels of sexual assault? Maybe there is, but I'm skeptical. As Rui said, as fully sentient humans, we should be able to rise above and control these basest of instincts. Sure, there are always those who fail in that regard, but nonetheless, we're not cavemen anymore and we should expect more. And I genuinely find it hard to imagine that any kind of porn helps keep certain types out of trouble. Not to sound too old Daily Mail reading pensioner (most of them are probably addicts themselves), but I think porn probably just as often has the opposite effect to keeping people satisfied. I think I even read one study that suggests porn can lead to or exasperate depression. That seems about right to me, as whenever I've watched porn, I've felt pretty damn depressed. Besides, I'm sure there were plenty of non sexually abusive men around before the advent of porn.
 
Re: Man convicted for possessing pictures of underage charac

@vashdaman - In my previous post, I actually included a link to the Danish study that was referenced in chrisjmuk's link, which concluded:

On the basis of various investigations, including a survey of public attitudes and studies of the police, it was established that at least in one type of offense (child molestation) the decrease represents a real reduction in the number of offenses committed. Various factors suggest that the availability of pornography was the direct cause of this decrease.
Click to expand...
 
Re: Man convicted for possessing pictures of underage charac

I'm currently in a middle of an online correspondence with Dru Pagliassotti, a yaoi expert, and she told me that in Australia the laws on cartoon pornography are even more strict.

I know from reading Mark McLelland's articles that in Australia even the *appearance* of a character who's under the age of consent and in an erotic situation can be called child pornography, even if the text says the character is of legal age.
Click to expand...
 
Re: Man convicted for possessing pictures of underage charac

Rather puts you off importing titles if your going to need a BBFC certificate on a disc for it to be OK.
 
Re: Man convicted for possessing pictures of underage charac

Rui said:
I can practically hear ayase approaching this thread now ^^;
Click to expand...
HA! I've been so busy in the last couple of months I haven't had time to check in here at all, and this is what I return to!?

My thoughts have been laid out on this many times before, and personally I think it's a lot more simple than people like to make it. No victim = No crime. In a society where we believe in freedom of expression thoughtcrime should not exist and fiction should not be subject to censorship. Ever. As part of the course I'm currently on (which is what's been taking up my time) I'm actually attending a talk by someone from the BBFC soon. That should be fun, especially if audience questions are allowed.

Mohawk52 also brings up a very relevant point - The law seems more interested in prosecuting people who've harmed no-one for possession of fiction while people who actually forcibly raped real children over the course of decades in the higher echelons of society either die unpunished or have files on their activities go "missing". Anyone still think the justice system is fit for purpose, and not just there to protect the interests of the wealthy and powerful? Anyone?
 
Re: Man convicted for possessing pictures of underage charac

ayase said:
Rui said:
Mohawk52 also brings up a very relevant point - The law seems more interested in prosecuting people who've harmed no-one for possession of fiction while people who actually forcibly raped real children over the course of decades in the higher echelons of society either die unpunished or have files on their activities go "missing". Anyone still think the justice system is fit for purpose, and not just there to protect the interests of the wealthy and powerful? Anyone?
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
I don't think there's a sane person in the UK who isn't ether very Nieve or outright stupid that thinks the system isn't built to protect the guilty haves and punish the innocent have nots.
 
Re: Man convicted for possessing pictures of underage charac

The system exists to process easy 'wins' - take the who'll trolling debacle for example, with people who tweet abuse getting jailed. This must be happening in the tens of thousands every single day, but only a handful will actually get prosecuted.

How can you enforce a criminal system where you're basically saying 'Hey, all these other guys did the same thing as you, or worse, but we just haven't got round to cracking down on them yet'
 
Back
Top