nikeshoes wrote:
> "Nick" wrote in message
> news:68lg5eF2tn421U1@mid.individual.net...
>> Cub Reporter wrote:
>>
>>> We will now be able to prosecute UK nationals here for a .ual
>>> offence committed against a child anywhere in the world, so long as
>>> the act committed would be a relevant offence in this country. We have
>>> also raised the age of a child for these purposes from 16 to 18. This
>>> has all been achieved through the Criminal Justice and Immigration
>>> Bill which received Royal Assent on Thursday 8 May.
>> Out of curiosity what .ual offences are illegal here with 17 year olds
>> but not 18 year olds. I know possessing .ual pictures of a 17 year old
>> is a crime but that is a crime regardless of where the picture is taken.
>> So what actual crimes are they talking about, someone who had pictures
>> abroad but didn't bring them back?
>
> You could not meet a 17yo having met them on the internet, this would be
> meeting a child after grooming.
>
Where is this specified. I understand that it is wrong to use the
internet to meet a child of 17 that you intend to abuse. But having .
with a child of 17 isn't abuse, is it?
> |