An Ipswitch man has admitted downloading graphic cartoon porn images featuring child characters from The Simpsons and The Powerpuff Girls TV shows.
The 28-year-old is now a registered sex offender and will have to report to police after pleading guilty in Ipswich District Court to having the bizarre images on his computer.
[...]
Milner told police he would co-operate but did not want to give them his computer.But an hour-and-a-half later he phoned police and said they could now have his computer.
Officers discovered the computer would no longer turn on but a year later police forensic experts recovered 64 images of cartoon child exploitation material in the machine’s recycle bin.
The images depicted figures from The Simpsons, The Powerpuff Girls and The Incredibles in sexually explicit positions.
Good grief. Now you can be charged with ‘child exploitation material’ where no child was exploited. I’m all for punishing those who exploit children, especially producers of child pornography, and this creepy guy seems to be in the red zone, but this sets a dangerous precedent IMHO. Thoughts?
no child, no crime.
Here’s something interesting. You can view and/or own pictures and even videos of someone being murdered (either in real life or fiction), or being raped (fictionally), and be considered a perfectly normal, sane, and safe human. But if you try to view and/or possess pictures of child pornography, then you are dangerous pedophile and you must be closely tracked by the State for the rest of your life, if not imprisoned. It’s interesting how this kind of thinking isn’t even questioned. It has become automatic.
21: I suppose you also think no criminal found, no crime; & no conviction, no crime, huh? I know of lawyers disbarred because they temporarily borrowed their client’s money thinking: No victim, no crime.
Many crimes simply depend upon intellectual intent.
19 f_w: “But you should not go to jail or get on a list for sexing up shoes.”
No, just for sexing up children or behaving like you might. Most people see the difference and are concerned about such things.
RBG
This has happened and will happen again.
—-
Even with photographs I don’t see possession as a crime when another person already did the photography.
#23.. Was a child hurt or adversely effected by this?
#17 The courts struck it down because the law said that _any_ image of someone less than 18 or who appeared to be less than 18 could be used as justification to charge the person with child pornography cartoon and fantasy characters included. All they had to do was claim that you felt lust due to the image.
I think the cartoon part is still standing but I’m not sure. I think they just refined it to limit it to more or less nude images or sexually suggestive images. Not sure about the true legal status of Madonna and child pictures.
# 23 RBG said, “Many crimes simply depend upon intellectual intent.”
You must be Roman Catholic. You don’t have to commit the sin, you merely have to THINK about doing it. Too late. You’re damned.
27 Animby: And all court judges and juries must be RC too when they must rule on the intent of an accused.
25 KNFIX: Children are hurt every day by pedophiles trying to get their fix. Look at #24 June already trying to justify child porn. Next he’ll be excusing it because it was made outside US jurisdiction.
RBG
The way it was explained to me once was that if you draw a dot on a piece of paper and say that it represents someone underage having sex, then you can be arrested and charged.
—
The recycle bin, how stupidly embarrassing!
#28… Still didn’t answer the question as you know how absurd this situation is.
Yes, children are hurt every day. People are killed every day. I just saw a cartoon lighthouse keeper get his head chopped off by a laser in a BBC report. Does that mean I’m going to go and kill lighthouse keepers?
Should I now have to report to the police department every time I move to let them know where I’m now located because I saw a cartoon lighthouse keeper get his head cut off with a laser in a BBC report, so I’m most likely going to kill the local lighthouse keeper (if there is one)??
It think it’s a great thing. We should make it into a law immediately and enforced it 24/7. This way absolutely NO Japanese can reside in the US. The Anime and Manga and….everything else is a perfect example of what we, the great US, should not have around.
God Bless American and it’s dumbass politicians! And I’m pretty sure Seth Rogan is going to jail and hell for his Snuggles skit ><!
The “would be” U.S. version of this abomination was called COPA, the Child On-line Protection Act (of 1995, as I recall). Under COPA, any depiction of “underage” sexual behavior, even those which were implied, in ANY form whatsoever was a criminal act. The Supreme Court objected to the language used to define the criminal act as being too broad (and all-encompassing), which would make U.S. theatrical releases such as “The Blue Lagoon”, “Atlantic City”, “Taxi Driver”, and various other more artistic films into obscenity after-the-fact. N.B., the Supremes did NOT object to the IDEAs that generated the law, just the language.
#32
COPA stands for
Child OK for Porn Act. Get your facts straight. If it was a protection act, we would have seen more results!
And for the rest of you sick fcks, go to China, Indai for your twisted behaviors! It’s wide available there and you won’t get caught!
30 KMFIX. As absurd as requiring me to wear a seatbelt when no one can directly show how anyone was hurt when I didn’t wear one last Friday.
COPA: Canadian Owners and Pilots Association
RBG
I was being sarcastic about China and India but wanted to let all know that every time I go to China for business I try my best to talk to officials (lawyers, officers, etc.) and seek non profit organizations locally (which is zilch) to see if anyone, anyone can do something about the kids being exploited…in most cases right in front of their eyes.
If there is a Devil, I hope he has place for these ahole people there.
#34.. I don’t agree with seatbelt laws either…and that’s a retarded analogy.
I’m not going to bother responding to you anymore. You obviously can’t think for yourself, and that’s why these laws exist.
In the UK we have the same kind of law:
An image depicting a child (or someone who appears to be under age) in a sexual context is considered pornographic and therefore illegal.
It has happened in the UK where a man with real child pornographic material was also prosecuted for having an image of a young boy in his swimming trunks. This image was stored in the same place as the real porn, and when questioned, the man admitted getting sexual gratification from the picture. Despite the pic not being pornographic, he was charged for that picture being pornographic because of his admission.
I think this goes a bit too far, but he was guilty anyway.
RBG:
So you think “behaving like you might” commit a crime is itself a crime?
If so, then behaving like you might behave like you might commit a crime is also a crime. And so on, until everything is a crime.
A crime is a deliberate action causing or attempting to cause actual harm to a real person.
Any other definition of crime is a politically-motivated fiction.
Take care that your knee-jerk panic at the phrase “kiddie porn” doesn’t cloud your judgement…
#23.. Was a child hurt or adversely effected by this?
Yes a judge