Skip to content Skip to main navigation


Daily flights from Canberra
to Singapore and the world

Should we name child-bestiality enthusiasts?

By johnboy 25 May 2010 29

[First filed: May 24, 2010 @ 10:09]

The Supreme Court has published a judgment from late last week on a child pornography owner. The material found on his seven DVDs was described thusly:

9. In addressing the nature of the material, the approach has been taken to follow the scale of seriousness set out by the United Kingdom Court of Appeal in R v Oliver [2003] 1 Cr App R 28 where (at 467) the court categorised the relevant levels as:
1. images depicting erotic posing with no sexual activity;
2. sexual activity between children or solo masturbation by a child;
3. non-penetrative sexual activity between adults and children;
4. penetrative sexual activity between children and adults;
5. sadism or bestiality.
Using that scale there were eight video files of level 1, 15 video files of level 2, 15 video files of level 3, 54 video files of level 4 and four video files of level 5.
10. A more detailed analysis was incorporated as part of the agreed statement of facts. I do not need to describe the material save to say that some of the material was of a most disturbing kind, with oral sex between adults and quite young children, penile-vaginal sex with young children, bestiality and other abhorrent acts. The children ranged in ages from 3 to 15 years old, with the majority, apparently, in the range of three to seven years old. An estimate, not accurate, especially as some faces could not be seen, was of some 377 children who were victims in the course of making those videos. The videos range in time from 1 second to 33 minutes and 51 seconds.

In an earlier similar case the perpetrator is constantly in my ear begging, cajoling, wheedling, occasionally demanding, and every now and then making spurious legal threats.

If RiotACT didn’t name him then googling his name wouldn’t bring up a result related to his offence on the first page. He thinks he would find it much easier to get another job in his field if potential employers had to dig a little deeper.

So readers; should we name them when the non-publication order is lifted? Is the public mark in perpetuity part of the sentence (in today’s case suspended with community service)?

Naming child smut downloaders

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

UPDATE: The mob has spoken (I should note the mob was only consulted because this was a rare occasion where it could go either way for me).

Bruce Ronald Ashman, I hope you’re really very sorry for what you’ve done.

Further update: Well that didn’t take long:

google results

What’s Your opinion?

Please login to post your comments, or connect with
29 Responses to
Should we name child-bestiality enthusiasts?
Showing only Website comments
Newest to Oldest
Oldest to Newst
deborahlLee 6:18 am 30 Jun 12

I believe as we are not animals we have the right to defend ourselves, why shouldn’t we know, who’s idea was it, ( a pedophile’s idea ) that the public doesn’t need to know who the pedophiles are, i believe we should isolate and destroy the pedophile gene, how many signatures do we need to have legislation changed, if we all decide it is not our problem it will get worse. The evil that children suffer at the hands of a torturing pedophile, is unbelievablly disgusting,***** it is children, not adults being sexually horrified, leaving lifelong scares that are almost impossible to recover from, isolate the gene and destroy it simple

RandomGit 12:36 pm 27 May 10

the difference between RAPING A CHILD and LOOKING AT CHILD PORN.

Voyeurism is participation Monster. Their actions may differ but the culpability is the same.

Pandy 7:47 pm 25 May 10

Is looking at porn a crime? where would the internet be without it?

farq 7:11 pm 25 May 10

Postalgeek said :

…There is the offender’s family, wife and children.


JB said: “…He thinks he would find it much easier to get another job in his field if potential employers had to dig a little deeper.”

Don’t most employers ask you about convictions before they hire you anyway? If Riotact did not publish his name, he would still be stuffed getting a job.

CraigT 6:40 am 25 May 10

There is no argument for anybody deserving anonymity when they’ve been convicted of any sort of crime.
Name the guy caught pissing in Garema Place and name the guy caught with child porn.
Why should paedophiles get special treatment?

jake555 11:33 pm 24 May 10

Postalgeek said :

Naming and shaming can affect more than just the offender.

There is the offender’s family, wife and children. Name him, and all the people the wife works with are now aware and suddenly she can’t escape the awkwardness, and kids are going up to the offender’s children at school and telling them they have a kiddy fiddler for a father. Nice.

Let’s just hope he doesn’t have children of his own.

There’s shame in many different crimes, which believe it or not, wives are awkward about and kids get teased about at school.

If it’s there to be published, publish it. Might be news actually worth knowing for a change.

cleo 9:02 pm 24 May 10

I say pedophiles have a lobotomy, and castrated, no need to worry about the sick bart..ds then.

moneypenny2612 8:40 pm 24 May 10

Call me stupid, but hasn’t the non-publication order been lifted? (At least, it has for the linked case)

Interestingly it looks like neither the Crimes nor the local ABC has a court reporter anymore. Usually this sort of thing would get a mention in the ‘News in Brief’ given the public’s insatiable appetite for news about anything to do with sex (check out the most read articles on any given day).

So, using that logic, publish away – so long as you accurately describe what the court has found him guilty of (Child bestiality enthusiast is a bit of an overstatement methinks).

With the lifting of the suppression order, it’s now a matter of public record. Word gets around even without the RiotACT.

krats 8:39 pm 24 May 10

Dont be silly name a child Wendy,Brian,or even Sue but not bestiality enthusiasts,what sort of nickname would they get…?

Related Articles

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

Copyright © 2018 Riot ACT Holdings Pty Ltd. All rights reserved. | | |

Search across the site