On Thu, 27 Mar 2008 23:32:41 +0000, Cub Reporter
wrote:
>>>> What is abusive about the children portrayed in the Klara and Edda
>>>> photo? They were indulging in horseplay! The CPS said the photo was
>>>> not indecent (let alone .ographic). And yet in another court you
>>>> would be locked up without any shadow of a doubt.
>>>
>>>Has it happened? I am still waiting for anyone with any evidence that
>>>anyone has been found guilty for possessing images that are all
>>>available on the shelves of WH Smiths.
>>
>>Do you or do you not recall the case of the man convicted a few months
>>ago for taking photos of girls in bikinis at a public swimming pool
>>that was discussed on this newsgroup?
>
>========================================================
>Could this be the one?
>========================================================
>Beach photo pest cases are 'rare'
>
>BBC News, UK: 10 September 2007
>http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/dorset/6988336.stm
Not the one I was thinking of - but should satisfy Sue that such
convictions take place. Convicted for possession of *two* images of
girls wearing bikinis.
That and the other examples you gave have hopefully changed Sue's mind
about such convictions being a figment of the imagination, and that
perhaps I am not spouting as much nonsense as she obviously thought I
had been.
--
Cynic
|