UK man sentenced for having manga images of children

[trashpony]

How do you know?

Manga images are nothing like photographs.....

I thought that's what the judge said.

They are clearly all images designed to make people think they are of children.

Doesn't sound like manga to me.

 

[Dr_Herbz]

Oh yeah, obviously..... but we're clearing not setting boundaries out well enough.....

The boundaries seem pretty clear to me. Don't be a sick bastard with kiddy porn on your computer.

On this point anyone see about that aussie dude that's been arrested as he was tricked into get his knob out on a webcam as he thought he was talking to a child....it was actually a CGI 9 year old.

How did a 9 year old child (CGI or not) trick an adult into getting his dick out on webcam? You mean a nonce got his dick out on camera to a 9 year old child?

 

[sim667]

Forget manga -that's just the blokes defence. Manga is not relevant.

Oh is he claiming they're manga, but they're CGI?

Need to re-read the article again.

But I stay absolutely resolute that a it is nigh on impossible to confuse a manga image and a photograph.

 

[sim667]

The article I posted doesn't say anything about the images being realistic beyond being manga, doesn't mention CGI, doesn't say anything about this bloke having ever been done for actual child porn.

It even quotes "This should serve as a warning to every manga fan in the UK".

is there another one with more detail?

 

[butchersapron]

The article I posted doesn't say anything about the images being realistic beyond being manga, doesn't mention CGI, doesn't say anything about this bloke having ever been done for actual child porn.

It even quotes "This should serve as a warning to every manga fan in the UK".

is there another one with more detail?

No one mentioned CGI but you!

Google his name. It's all there. Maybe +2008.

 

[sim667]

No one mentioned CGI but you!

Google his name. It's all there. Maybe +2008.

trashpony said the images were almost indistinguishable from photographs?

 

[captainmission]

No, speeding restrictions are restrictions.

A computer game on the other where you take control of a car and can speed... BAN THIS SICK FILTH!

Or even a youtube video of someone speeding.

In both cases activity is prohibited because it produces a risk to society as a whole. He not been prosecuted for thinking about having child rape images, or watching a youtube video, or playing a computer game where some one has child rape images- but for engaging in activity that puts children at risk.

 

[butchersapron]

trashpony said the images were almost indistinguishable from photographs?

That's what the judge said in one of the trials in which he was found guilty of possessing images of sexual abuse of children. I think it was from the 2008 one.

 

[sim667]

In both cases activity is prohibited because it produces a risk to society as a whole. He not been prosecuted for thinking about making child rape images, or watching a youtube video, or playing a computer game where some one make child rape images- but for engaging in activity that puts children at risk.

No no no, we've been through this already....

He hasn't put children at risk with the regard to manga style images, because no children were involved in the making of the images.

I'm not talking about the issue of other things, I'm specifically talking about the anime images, in the same way that you could say playing a game where you drive a car over a speed limit, you are vicariously doing something you know is against the generally accepted stance of society, but you are not actually undertaking it.

 

[trashpony]

That's what the judge said in one of the trials in which he was found guilty of possessing images of sexual abuse of children. I think it was from the 2008 one.

I think it's from this trial - this is the article I read: http://www.gazettelive.co.uk/news/teesside-news/anime-fan-convicted-over-illegal-7958896

 

[sim667]

That's what the judge said in one of the trials in which he was found guilty of possessing images of sexual abuse of children. I think it was from the 2008 one.

Well you can't use an argument from a new source and not link it. What are we, animals?

trashpony

 

[trashpony]

Well you can't use an argument from a new source and not link it. What are we, animals?

trashpony

 

[butchersapron]

I think it's from this trial - this is the article I read: http://www.gazettelive.co.uk/news/teesside-news/anime-fan-convicted-over-illegal-7958896

Ta - and that's linked to in the link that sim gave us in the OP.

 

[8115]

How come it's beyond the pale to look at fictionalised versions of child porn but not at fictional versions of adults being brutally tortured (The Human Centipede, many other films). Not really stating a position, just wondering.

 

[sim667]

That article still says nothing about him having actual photos of kids..... in fact it even says

He said: “They are clearly all images designed to make people think they are of children. They are fictitious images in the sense that in no part of them does any real person appear.
“It is important to emphasise that there were no actual children or perpetrators involved.

and lets get to the crux of this

“This is material that clearly society and the public can well do without."

I wonder what other "art" we could all be unknowingly looking at that "society" and the "public" can well do without.

 

[sim667]

How come it's beyond the pale to look at fictionalised versions of child porn but not at fictional versions of adults being brutally tortured (The Human Centipede, many other films). Not really stating a position, just wondering.

Or simulated rape. eg A serbian film (which I think even implies pedophilia too).

 

[butchersapron]

That article still says nothing about him having actual photos of kids..... in fact it even says



and lets get to the crux of this


I wonder what other "art" we could all be unknowingly looking at that "society" and the "public" can well do without.

No one said that it did for gods sake. I said that at the original 2008 trial it was reported he had used real photos. I didn't link it to anything. I shall in a sec.

Why do you think that people can't distinguish between art and paedophilia - you must believe that you can - hence your argument. But no one else?

 

[butchersapron]

...and the link i promised to edit in:

During the trial, David Brooke, prosecuting, said one of the images was entirely computer-generated, the other five were a “mish-mash” of computer graphics and real photography.

 

[sim667]

No one said that it did for gods sake. I said that at the original 2008 trial it was reported he had used real photos. I didn't link it to anything. I shall in a sec.

Why do you think that people can't distinguish between art and paedophilia - you must believe that you can - hence your argument. But no one else?

I'm not saying that at all. This by definition does not include actual children, so whilst he may have a tendency toward children, is not by definition a nonce as he does not possess images of actual children, nor does he go looking for sex with children. What don't you understand?

Yet as I pointed out in my last post we can buy films that imply actual pedophilia involving children on DVD from Amazon..... So that must have been even reviewed by the BBFC

 

[butchersapron]

I'm not saying that at all. This isn't peadophile a by nature as there are no real children involved.

Yet as I pointed out in my last post we can buy films that imply actual pedophilia involving children on DVD from Amazon..... So that must have been even reviewed by the BBFC

Oh god. We can and do distinguish between credible attempts to do 'art' and being a paedo. We all do it - it's something we have learnt to do. You seem to think that we can't. You are wrong.

 

[DotCommunist]

...and the link i promised to edit in:

well thats a bit more than your standard hentai, done in heavily stylised form...

 

[sim667]

And that new link describes a hybrid or what is technically know as a "mishmash" it doesn't say he has images of actual child abuse :Ffs:

 

[killer b]

fucking liberals.

 

[sim667]

Oh god. We can and do distinguish between credible attempts to do 'art' and being a paedo. We all do it - it's something we have learnt to do. You seem to think that we can't. You are wrong.

I'm not wrong and obviously you can't distinguish otherwise you'd know the difference between a drawing and a photograph. You seem to be struggling with the concept that one is a representation of something caught by the capturing of light, I.e it has to have a subject for the image. Where as a drawing or painting or cgi does not need a sitter or a subject or whatever you want to call it, and can be totally fabricated without even using source material..... It's not complicated

 

[Citizen66]

This is the 2nd time this bloke has been a test case - the first one in 2008 (which in itself suggests an ongoing active interest in encouraging the production of images of sexual abuse of children) involved him manufacturing images of incest and sexual abuse of children that was so realistic the jury decided it might as well have been photographs.

I'm not suggesting you're wrong; but how can anime-style art be deemed in any way 'realistic'? Or is the thread title misleading?

 

[sim667]

I'm not suggesting you're wrong; but how can anime-style art be deemed in any way 'realistic'? Or is the thread title misleading?

It's not misleading.

The man has been done twice for pseudo photographs, depictions of children in manga and Tomb raider styles.

 

[butchersapron]

I'm not wrong and obviously you can't distinguish otherwise you'd know the difference between a drawing and a photograph. You seem to be struggling with the concept that one is a representation of something caught by the capturing of light, I.e it has to have a subject for the image. Where as a drawing or painting or cgi does not need a sitter or a subject or whatever you want to call it, and can be totally fabricated without even using source material..... It's not complicated

You are wrong. You even here outline that you are capable of differentiating between paedo pics and art. You literally say it. Why do you think no one else can? Do you really think everyone else will just be running around binning art?

 

[Spymaster]

[QUOTE="sim667, post: 13482662, member: 25586"So to be on the safe side, shouldn't all sexualised manga/manga style/hentai whatever you want to be called be made illegal..... just a blanket ban.[/QUOTE]

Yes.

 

[butchersapron]

It's not misleading.

The man has been done twice for pseudo photographs, depictions of children in manga and Tomb raider styles.

He has not even once been done for having manga images. He has been done twice for having images of sexual abuse of children. The thread title is wrong and a contribution to his defence. It's just an art style people don't get. I've done nothing wrong.

 

[Spymaster]

Yet by saying that some manga is is bad and some is ok, you allow people access to films like one I saw where a monster with a thousand cocks works it's way round a city whilst simultaneously raping girls..... Why is that not banned?

It should be.