tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14422435.post5418121340504409913..comments2024-10-25T13:58:36.797+01:00septicislehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03369157723084834549noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14422435.post-63512002613177717062014-07-10T01:18:51.349+01:002014-07-10T01:18:51.349+01:00Apparently in Britain we have a magic justice system where you can have a safe conviction for a sexual assault allegedly committed 45 years ago.Chrisnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14422435.post-82870153985255455982014-07-09T17:39:45.665+01:002014-07-09T17:39:45.665+01:00To judge from the Graun piece, it seems likely he visited sites where the content originated from either Russia or Ukraine, and eastern European porn producers have a reputation for employing models who while of legal age, do look younger. His lawyers were apparently trying to get the information proving they were over 18 from them, although whether this amounts to the US standard 2257 regulations is unclear. Certainly doesn't prove he had a child porn stash, either way.septicislehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03369157723084834549noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14422435.post-41536221427047489072014-07-09T12:19:54.807+01:002014-07-09T12:19:54.807+01:00Aside from this, I've yet to see anybody query the "making indecent images of children" charges against Rolf Harris. The police claimed that Harris had searched for images of teenaged girls on the internet, but they hadn't established the ages of any of the girls in the images. "Making" is an archiac (well, 1978) legal definition which includes simply using a computer to look at images. Harris' porn searches are pretty grim, but it is worrying that the net is being cast so wide. Anybody being investigated by the police, who has visited websites with young-looking models, can be charged (ie. in the media) with "making" child porn. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com