Skip to content Skip to main navigation

News

Chamberlains - complete legal services for business

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?


Post a comment
Please login to post your comments, or connect with
29 Responses to
Should we name child-bestiality enthusiasts?
weeziepops 3:02 pm 24 May 10

I note that the penalty for this crime was a suspended sentence. That oughta learn him.

Pommy bastard 2:57 pm 24 May 10

NiroZ said :

Have they been diagnosed as a pedophile, and reoffended against children several times? Then yes, they should be stringently monitored.

Diagnosed?

BimboGeek 2:41 pm 24 May 10

I would personally keep the name quiet if they were really just within the “literature” grey area which is currently illegal but while icky, doesn’t really hurt anyone. If they hurt people (even indirectly, by “grooming” children or using their images for videos or synthetic pics that can come back to haunt them) then everyone has a right to know.

But there are ways to report these things without beating the person up. I think many good intelligent people can learn to control their dangerous impulses if sufficiently motivated, but being bombarded with a wall of hate doesn’t help them to gain the strength necessary to do it.

Summary: Name (but not shame) only in the case of dangerous behaviour that can hurt people.

p1 2:37 pm 24 May 10

Ugh, I knew the poor wording of my first post would attract nit-pickers, that’s why I posted a second time. I was pointing out the difference between RAPING A CHILD and LOOKING AT CHILD PORN.

While I accept the fact that there is a difference between thinking about abusing children and actually abusing children, you are missing one important fact.

In order for such a person to look at child porn, the child porn has to exist. For it to exist, someone had to abuse children. It is a direct line. So while I do not think that in general looking at child porn is AS bad as child rape, it is a very close second.

Monster of the Deep 1:57 pm 24 May 10

Ugh, I knew the poor wording of my first post would attract nit-pickers, that’s why I posted a second time. I was pointing out the difference between RAPING A CHILD and LOOKING AT CHILD PORN.

SmileOnTrial 1:15 pm 24 May 10

Grail said :

I’m just wondering what benefit society expects to obtain from naming and shaming pedophiles. We don’t name and shame alcoholics or chronic gamblers. Why are people so fascinated with a culture of fear?

There is a huge difference between somebody being pissed all the time and somebody who rapes childeren and if you can see that I seriously question your thinking.
Society benefits from knowing the whereabouts of such filth so society can keep their childeren out of harms way and as to ruining a child rapists life forever by naming and shaming them I say good. What sort of life did he leave for the child he raped.

jasere 12:35 pm 24 May 10

Monster of the Deep said :

There’s a quite marked difference between paedophiles and child porn consumers, Grail. Both are lowlifes, but there’s a difference.

and what are the differences? is that one has acted on their sick desires and the other is just waiting for the right opportunity.

Name them all!

p1 12:34 pm 24 May 10

This is a pretty tough question. I would say yes, if the non-publication order is lifted, then yes the name should be published. I think that is as important as any other bit of news of what happens in the court.

A whole different question though is, what benefit to society is there for an individuals name still being linked to such a crime in say ten of twenty years, through the power of google?

NiroZ 12:21 pm 24 May 10

Grail said :

I’m just wondering what benefit society expects to obtain from naming and shaming pedophiles. We don’t name and shame alcoholics or chronic gamblers. Why are people so fascinated with a culture of fear?

Well personally, I think that depends on a few factors. Have they been diagnosed as a pedophile, and reoffended against children several times? Then yes, they should be stringently monitored. I don’t think that they should be named and shamed, because in the past, it has shown no benefit, and may have hypothetically worsened their behaviour as it just adds stress.

If they have committed a physical act of pedophilia, then jail has seen the only benefit, from 60% never reoffending (when the child was in no way related or associated to the adult), to 95% never reoffending (when the child was offspring or step-offspring) so it’s a bit too soon to judge.

If they have just been caught with child porn, that’s not quite enough to condemn them as a pedophile, as there are several other motivations for looking at it, such as getting off on perversity, and (on the rare occasion) suffering from PTSD, and finding it the only thing that will make them feel emotion.

Tooks 12:20 pm 24 May 10

Monster of the Deep said :

There’s a quite marked difference between paedophiles and child porn consumers, Grail. Both are lowlifes, but there’s a difference.

What’s the difference? Depending on what dictionary definition you’re reading, a paedophile is someone who is sexually attracted to children. If someone watches child porn, presumably it’s because they’re sexually attracted to children. Does that not make them a paedophile?

bloodnut 12:17 pm 24 May 10

Joe Canberran said :

Don’t forget that when there is someone providing a demand for said images someone is going to create them. In creating those images there is a victim.

Does that mean there’s a grey area around material like erotic literature…?

Joe Canberran 11:56 am 24 May 10

Don’t forget that when there is someone providing a demand for said images someone is going to create them. In creating those images there is a victim.

Monster of the Deep 11:26 am 24 May 10

And make that paedophiles as in actual child rapists, since the dictionary definition is “an adult who is sexually attracted to children”.

Monster of the Deep 11:16 am 24 May 10

There’s a quite marked difference between paedophiles and child porn consumers, Grail. Both are lowlifes, but there’s a difference.

Grail 11:02 am 24 May 10

Remember, this society we live in currently believes that murderers and rapist can repent and be resocialised. When in Crazy Christian Right Land, do as the Crazy Christian Right do: believe that murder and rape are merely “sins” and that the sinners can be redeemed by telling them to repent their sins, reciting the Hail Mary a dozen times, and sprinkling the sinner with holy water. On the other extreme we have Shariah Law, where we would be stoning the children to death as punishment for bringing shame on their families by being raped. Then there’s the redneck lynch mob mentality: take the guy out to the park and hang him high.

Some people will argue that naming a child rapist will ruin their lives forever, and they’ll never be able to integrate into society. On the other hand, alcoholics who manage their conditions will tell their friends that they are alcoholic, and their friends will arrange to have alcohol-free parties when inviting their alcoholic friend. So my question here is: is pedophilia the same kind of condition as alcoholism? Will the person be able to manage their condition as long as you don’t leave children lying around? Is it reasonable to expect society to help this person avoid contact with children in the same way we help alcoholics avoid alcohol?

I’m just wondering what benefit society expects to obtain from naming and shaming pedophiles. We don’t name and shame alcoholics or chronic gamblers. Why are people so fascinated with a culture of fear?

Related Articles

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

Top
Copyright © 2017 Riot ACT Holdings Pty Ltd. All rights reserved.
www.the-riotact.com | www.b2bmagazine.com.au | www.thisiscanberra.com

Search across the site