Nick wrote:
>
> 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?
> >
We don't know yet, it depends on the details of he law. It could e.g. by
'Statutory abuse' by definition of the age, or it could be limited to
involvement with 'purchasing' .. |