Just now, Cameroni said:

 

Yah some of the pics were of younger kids, but the law deeming that he "made" these pictures because he downloaded them is obviously a nonsense.

 

He downloaded something he should not have, but the sentence here is sufficient for effectively dowloading something prohibited.

 

That is all that happened.

 

He didn't download them himself. Someone else downloaded them and sent them via WhatsApp. He asked for 14 to 16 years old and what he got was what he got.

Just now, Chomper Higgot said:

Perhaps we different tastes.

 

I suspect we do.

 

For sure. I have a white girlfriend 😊

1 minute ago, NowNow said:

 

He didn't download them himself. Someone else downloaded them and sent them via WhatsApp. He asked for 14 to 16 years old and what he got was what he got.

What did jury say about that?

Just now, NowNow said:

 

For sure. I have a white girlfriend 😊

Does she know?

1 minute ago, NowNow said:

 

He didn't download them himself. Someone else downloaded them and sent them via WhatsApp. He asked for 14 to 16 years old and what he got was what he got.

 

The law deems him as having downloaded them, and indeed having "made" them therefore.

 

But clearly that is a fictional construct.

 

His life was ruined anyway so seems like sufficient punishment .

Just now, Cameroni said:

 

The law deems him as having downloaded them, and indeed having "made" them therefore.

 

But clearly that is a fictional construct.

 

His life was ruined anyway so seems like sufficient punishment .

It’s not a fictional construct, it’s the law.

 

 

 

 

Just now, Chomper Higgot said:

What did jury say about that?

 

I don't know. What did they say? They are directed to make a decision on whether he was guilty on certain charges. Obviously they weren't serious charges. You don't seem to be able to get your head around that.

Just now, NowNow said:

 

I don't know. What did they say? They are directed to make a decision on whether he was guilty on certain charges. Obviously they weren't serious charges. You don't seem to be able to get your head around that.

The said: Guilty as charged!

 

 

Edited September 25, 20241 yr by Chomper Higgot

3 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Does she know?

 

Yes, she's here laughing at you.

1 minute ago, Chomper Higgot said:

It’s not a fictional construct, it’s the law.

 

 

 

 

 

No it is a fictional construct, he did not "make" these images, even if the law deems he made them by virtue of  downloading them.

 

That is clearly a nonsense.

 

Just a construct to ensure the law can convict.

Just now, Chomper Higgot said:

Guilty as charged!

 

Yes and he got the appropriate sentence for a not that serious charge 😊

Anyway, let's move on. It was fun. Bye for now.

1 minute ago, NowNow said:

 

Yes and he got the appropriate sentence for a not that serious charge 😊

And he’s signed onto the sex offender’s register.

 

That’s pretty serious.

A convicted and registered pervert.

 

3 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

And he’s signed onto the sex offender’s register.

 

That’s pretty serious.

A convicted and registered pervert.

 

 

That black policewoman was also put on the sex offender's list...for an unsolicited video.

Sometimes, the law is an ass. Don't just follows asses @Chomper Higgot

2 hours ago, NowNow said:

 

He didn't download them himself. Someone else downloaded them and sent them via WhatsApp. He asked for 14 to 16 years old and what he got was what he got.

 

   What do you think should happen to adults who pay for sexually explicit photos of Children ?

14 hours ago, NowNow said:

 

He didn't download them himself. Someone else downloaded them and sent them via WhatsApp. He asked for 14 to 16 years old and what he got was what he got.

 

   Do you realise that its illegal to posses indecent photos of 14-16 year olds ?

18 hours ago, NowNow said:

 

That black policewoman was also put on the sex offender's list...for an unsolicited video.

Sometimes, the law is an ass. Don't just follows asses @Chomper Higgot

In what way does that indicate signing the sex offenders register is not a serious matter?