Huw Edwards - 6 month suspended sentence (pg 107)

Mr Kobayashi said:
Can you explain where I have said this? I merely pointed out that a rape doesn't need to have occurred for him to have images of Category A on his phone.
Click to expand...
I cut and pasted the definition of cat A from the criminal justice inspectorate website. I changed no wording.

As we have both not seen the cat A content in question then I am happy to take the word of that poor unfortunate profesional that had to wade through all that shit to categerise for prosecution.
 
Two Gun Bob said:
I cut and pasted the definition of cat A from the criminal justice inspectorate website. I changed no wording.

As we have both not seen the cat A content in question then I am happy to take the word of that poor unfortunate profesional that had to wade through all that shit to categerise for prosecution.
Click to expand...

You again seem to be arguing against a point that wasn't made.

At no point did I say that there weren't images of Category A. You made a comment that suggested you believe a rape has occurred I merely pointed out to you that isn't necessarily the case.

This is from a document that was made when the categories were changed. As you'll see below, penetration includes the victim penetrating themselves.

existing SGC guideline sets out five levels of
prohibited image based on those set out in the
judgment in Oliver78 which adapted the image
classification found in the Copine scale.79 The
image levels used are:
• level one – images depicting erotic posing
with no sexual activity;
• level two – non-penetrative sexual activity
between children, or solo masturbation by a
child;
• level three – non-penetrative sexual activity
between adults and children;
• level four – penetrative sexual activity
involving a child or children or both children
and adults; and
• level five – sadism or penetration of, or by, an
animal.
The Council is sensitive to the fact that
classification of images can be a difficult and
resource intensive job for the investigating and
prosecuting authorities. The Council is also
aware that the images before the court may give
only a partial indication of the abuse suffered
by the victim in the image, and image level
alone does not give a complete account of the
offender’s behaviour. However, the court can
only sentence what is before it and the Council
believes that, despite the limitations around
using image level, the severity of the sexual
offence depicted in the image can be an initial
guide to the harm that will have been suffered
by the victim depicted.
Given the challenges presented by the
classification of images, the Council proposes
the levels of images can be simplified further.
The proposed levels are set out below.
• Category A: ‘Images involving penetrative
sexual activity’; ‘possession of images
involving sexual activity with an animal or
sadism’. The Council believes that any image
showing a child involved in penetrative
sexual activity should be placed in the
highest category. In line with the other
sexual offences involving a child discussed
in section five page 36, it is envisaged this
would involve penetration of the vagina
or anus (using body or object) and penile
penetration of the mouth in either case by,
or of, the victim. It is not proposed that a
distinction is made between penetrative
activity between an adult and child and
penetrative activity between children.
It is also intended that category A includes
images involving sexual activity with an
animal or sadism. In the existing SGC
guideline, ‘penetrative activity and sadism’
and ‘penetration of, or by, an animal’ are
expressed as different levels of image
(four and five respectively) but they attract
exactly the same sentence starting points
and ranges. The Council has therefore
placed both of these into category A.
The Council has changed the wording
‘penetration of, or by, an animal’ to ‘sexual
activity involving an animal’ to ensure that
it covers images involving non-penetrative
activity and addresses a difficulty that
currently arises. This difficulty is highlighted
in the CPS charging guidance in relation to
the current categorisation which states:
“A question is raised as to what
happens if a photograph shows a
non-penetrative sexual act involving
an animal (for example an animal
licking the sexual organs of a child).
A strict interpretation of level five would
suggest that it could not come within
that level but neither would it fit into
any other level other than, conceivably,
level one”80
 
Pretty sad that he seemingly had to pull the mental illness card as some kind of cover for his illegal depravity.

As an aside, I never really liked him, he came across as quite arrogant at times to me. I also have a big adversion to the BBC paying these so called stars such huge salaries out of public money. When the BBC made and gave them their semi celebrity status.
 
Last edited:
Two Gun Bob said:
I have amended to include the word sadistly hurt to post 918 and hope you can now consider the matter closed.
Click to expand...

Why? That wasn't part of the discussion? Not sure it's in good faith. Not sure why you had to turn it into an argument rather than just admit you'd made an assumption.

You may be correct in your assumption. At no point have I said that your assumption is wrong.

We will have to find out when the trial takes place.
 
Mr Kobayashi said:
You again seem to be arguing against a point that wasn't made.

At no point did I say that there weren't images of Category A. You made a comment that suggested you believe a rape has occurred I merely pointed out to you that isn't necessarily the case.

This is from a document that was made when the categories were changed. As you'll see below, penetration includes the victim penetrating themselves.

existing SGC guideline sets out five levels of
prohibited image based on those set out in the
judgment in Oliver78 which adapted the image
classification found in the Copine scale.79 The
image levels used are:
• level one – images depicting erotic posing
with no sexual activity;
• level two – non-penetrative sexual activity
between children, or solo masturbation by a
child;
• level three – non-penetrative sexual activity
between adults and children;
• level four – penetrative sexual activity
involving a child or children or both children
and adults; and
• level five – sadism or penetration of, or by, an
animal.
The Council is sensitive to the fact that
classification of images can be a difficult and
resource intensive job for the investigating and
prosecuting authorities. The Council is also
aware that the images before the court may give
only a partial indication of the abuse suffered
by the victim in the image, and image level
alone does not give a complete account of the
offender’s behaviour. However, the court can
only sentence what is before it and the Council
believes that, despite the limitations around
using image level, the severity of the sexual
offence depicted in the image can be an initial
guide to the harm that will have been suffered
by the victim depicted.
Given the challenges presented by the
classification of images, the Council proposes
the levels of images can be simplified further.
The proposed levels are set out below.
• Category A: ‘Images involving penetrative
sexual activity’; ‘possession of images
involving sexual activity with an animal or
sadism’. The Council believes that any image
showing a child involved in penetrative
sexual activity should be placed in the
highest category. In line with the other
sexual offences involving a child discussed
in section five page 36, it is envisaged this
would involve penetration of the vagina
or anus (using body or object) and penile
penetration of the mouth in either case by,
or of, the victim. It is not proposed that a
distinction is made between penetrative
activity between an adult and child and
penetrative activity between children.
It is also intended that category A includes
images involving sexual activity with an
animal or sadism. In the existing SGC
guideline, ‘penetrative activity and sadism’
and ‘penetration of, or by, an animal’ are
expressed as different levels of image
(four and five respectively) but they attract
exactly the same sentence starting points
and ranges. The Council has therefore
placed both of these into category A.
The Council has changed the wording
‘penetration of, or by, an animal’ to ‘sexual
activity involving an animal’ to ensure that
it covers images involving non-penetrative
activity and addresses a difficulty that
currently arises. This difficulty is highlighted
in the CPS charging guidance in relation to
the current categorisation which states:
“A question is raised as to what
happens if a photograph shows a
non-penetrative sexual act involving
an animal (for example an animal
licking the sexual organs of a child).
A strict interpretation of level five would
suggest that it could not come within
that level but neither would it fit into
any other level other than, conceivably,
level one”80
Click to expand...

What are you Kobi .. his defence lawyer?
My bad I should have put sadism alongside rape then I would not have caused you all this alarm angst and distress.

However as we have both not seen the 6 pictures we canot exactly say if it was rape sadism or both. What we both should agree on is that those 6 pics have been defined as being rape and or sadism otherwide it wouldnt be cat A.

I hope we can now move on from this dreadful debacle and that you can return to you Rumple-esque legal antics within the political moon forums. Goodnight my leaned friend.
 
Two Gun Bob said:
What are you Kobi .. his defence lawyer?
My bad I should have put sadism alongside rape then I would not have caused you all this alarm angst and distress.

However as we have both not seen the 6 pictures we canot exactly say if it was rape sadism or both. What we both should agree on is that those 6 pics have been defined as being rape and or sadism otherwide it wouldnt be cat A.

I hope we can now move on from this dreadful debacle and that you can return to you Rumple-esque legal antics within the political moon forums. Goodnight my leaned friend.
Click to expand...

I didn't mention sadism. You did. You're the only one who even discussed it. You're a bad faith poster.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
✖
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.