Child porn offender allowed to walk free by same judge who handed education official suspended sentence

GUILTY: Karl Jones at Bournemouth Magistrates Court

GUILTY: Karl Jones at Bournemouth Magistrates Court

First published in News
Last updated
by

A JUDGE who gave a suspended sentence to an education official convicted of downloading indecent images of children has allowed another child porn offender to walk free.

Judge Samuel Wiggs was criticised recently for giving a suspended sentence to former council officer Robert Ian Finlay, who downloaded 600 child abuse images.

On Friday, he gave a three-year supervision order to another man who downloaded more than 500 indecent images of children.

Karl Jones, 35, pleaded guilty to 20 counts of possessing still and moving images of categories 1-4, which were found on his hard drives on July 7 last year by the owners of the property in which he was staying.

Judge Wiggs said a custodial sentence would not be in the interests of justice and imposed the three-year order along with a requirement that he attend a sexual offenders treatment programme for up to 60 days.

Prosecuting, Stuart Ellacott told Bournemouth Crown Court that Jones, of Capstone Place, Bournemouth, had initially admitted downloading large amounts of adult ‘teen’ porn, which might have contained the indecent images.

However, he later pleaded guilty to the charges.

Mr Ellacott said police found software on his computer designed to make it difficult for the IP address to be traced by the authorities, and which would also allow him to circumvent blocks imposed by internet browsers.

In mitigation, Nicholas Robinson said Jones was living in Bristol as a full-time carer for his 84-year-old mother, who has suspected lung cancer.

He said: “Mr Jones clearly deserves to be punished – there are no excuses for this behaviour.

“He is deemed to be of low risk of re-offending due to his previous good character, but a short prison sentence is too little to impact on his behaviour and minimised sense of responsibility. It might be appropriate to have a meaningful sentence in the community.”

Judge Wiggs said: “You don’t need me to tell you the public are very concerned about cases of this nature.

“In many cases it is necessary to impose a prison sentence. However they are relatively short at this level and the public interest would be better served by your having treatment and being supervised for a longer period.”

Jones was also ordered to sign the sex offenders register for seven years, and to submit any internet device to police on request for examination.

Comments (44)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

9:13am Mon 9 Sep 13

boardsandphotos says...

"...Judge Wiggs said a custodial sentence would not be in the interests of justice and imposed the three-year order along with a requirement that he attend a sexual offenders treatment programme for up to 60 days..."

The same useless Judge spouting the same ridiculous nonsense!!

Not in the interests of justice!!! What the *******!!! does that even mean, he's been found guilty of a serious offence and you are the judge you complete muppet!!
"...Judge Wiggs said a custodial sentence would not be in the interests of justice and imposed the three-year order along with a requirement that he attend a sexual offenders treatment programme for up to 60 days..." The same useless Judge spouting the same ridiculous nonsense!! Not in the interests of justice!!! What the *******!!! does that even mean, he's been found guilty of a serious offence and you are the judge you complete muppet!! boardsandphotos
  • Score: 49

9:15am Mon 9 Sep 13

colbel says...

Another vile pervert let lose on the streets of our children by some deranged judge........!!
Another vile pervert let lose on the streets of our children by some deranged judge........!! colbel
  • Score: 37

9:34am Mon 9 Sep 13

jill M says...

I wonder how Judge Samuel Wiggs is going to feel when one of the men he s allowed to go free, goes on to harm a child? Surely that could be the next progression for these sick individuals? He s not fit to judge. Also he seems to forget that children have been assaulted and harmed in the awful images that these people are looking at.
I wonder how Judge Samuel Wiggs is going to feel when one of the men he s allowed to go free, goes on to harm a child? Surely that could be the next progression for these sick individuals? He s not fit to judge. Also he seems to forget that children have been assaulted and harmed in the awful images that these people are looking at. jill M
  • Score: 32

9:44am Mon 9 Sep 13

Old Colonial says...

Perhaps in these cases Judge Wiggs is hinting that 'justice' might be better meted out in the 'community'. Surely not condoning vigilantes. Is he?
Perhaps in these cases Judge Wiggs is hinting that 'justice' might be better meted out in the 'community'. Surely not condoning vigilantes. Is he? Old Colonial
  • Score: 11

9:49am Mon 9 Sep 13

twynham says...

People who use **** consider it a victimless crime.
.
May I advise Judge Samuel Wiggs, IT IS NOT.
People who use **** consider it a victimless crime. . May I advise Judge Samuel Wiggs, IT IS NOT. twynham
  • Score: 20

9:50am Mon 9 Sep 13

retry69 says...

********* fuming "not be in the interests of justice" "not in the publics interest" catchphrases of judge wiggs, both wrong, it is in the public and justice interest to hand out custodial sentences as a strong warning to others who feel the need to partake in what seems to be an increasing hobby to some.Of course it may have been an innocent mistake as some of our fellow posters may want us to believe.I THINK NOT
********* fuming "not be in the interests of justice" "not in the publics interest" catchphrases of judge wiggs, both wrong, it is in the public and justice interest to hand out custodial sentences as a strong warning to others who feel the need to partake in what seems to be an increasing hobby to some.Of course it may have been an innocent mistake as some of our fellow posters may want us to believe.I THINK NOT retry69
  • Score: 21

10:37am Mon 9 Sep 13

politicaltrainspotter says...

If the photo was taken on Friday then i see he arrived as per usual with his bag ready for a custodial sentence.

So what message does this send out by the judicary.Absolutley nothing.Like our politicians the judges are also out of touch with reality.
If the photo was taken on Friday then i see he arrived as per usual with his bag ready for a custodial sentence. So what message does this send out by the judicary.Absolutley nothing.Like our politicians the judges are also out of touch with reality. politicaltrainspotter
  • Score: 16

11:20am Mon 9 Sep 13

politicaltrainspotter says...

Further more.Its about time you considered 'hanging up your wig'.Samuel ?
Further more.Its about time you considered 'hanging up your wig'.Samuel ? politicaltrainspotter
  • Score: 19

11:23am Mon 9 Sep 13

Mike_French says...

Yet again a certain judge allows someone guilty of this to walk 'free'.
Absolutely disgusting!
"He is deemed to be of low risk of re-offending due to his previous good character, but a short prison sentence is too little to impact on his behaviour and minimised sense of responsibility. It might be appropriate to have a meaningful sentence in the community.” - A meaningful sentence in the community?.
Do you live in the real world Mr Wiggs?
Yet again a certain judge allows someone guilty of this to walk 'free'. Absolutely disgusting! "He is deemed to be of low risk of re-offending due to his previous good character, but a short prison sentence is too little to impact on his behaviour and minimised sense of responsibility. It might be appropriate to have a meaningful sentence in the community.” - A meaningful sentence in the community?. Do you live in the real world Mr Wiggs? Mike_French
  • Score: 12

11:24am Mon 9 Sep 13

In Absentia says...

There's no point in ranting about the Judge or the judicial system, it's the Government that issues sentencing guidelines. If you want something done, lobby your MP.
There's no point in ranting about the Judge or the judicial system, it's the Government that issues sentencing guidelines. If you want something done, lobby your MP. In Absentia
  • Score: 5

11:56am Mon 9 Sep 13

retry69 says...

In Absentia wrote:
There's no point in ranting about the Judge or the judicial system, it's the Government that issues sentencing guidelines. If you want something done, lobby your MP.
Totally disagree it is within the powers of the judge to hand out a custodial sentence,he chose not to,as is his normal attitude towards this type of crime.
[quote][p][bold]In Absentia[/bold] wrote: There's no point in ranting about the Judge or the judicial system, it's the Government that issues sentencing guidelines. If you want something done, lobby your MP.[/p][/quote]Totally disagree it is within the powers of the judge to hand out a custodial sentence,he chose not to,as is his normal attitude towards this type of crime. retry69
  • Score: 12

12:04pm Mon 9 Sep 13

In Absentia says...

retry69 wrote:
In Absentia wrote: There's no point in ranting about the Judge or the judicial system, it's the Government that issues sentencing guidelines. If you want something done, lobby your MP.
Totally disagree it is within the powers of the judge to hand out a custodial sentence,he chose not to,as is his normal attitude towards this type of crime.
You miss the point. If the Judge had sent him down, then at the end of a very short sentence, there's no obligation on him to do anything but obey the requirements of his listing on the sex offenders register. The Judge has made him attend 60 days of a treatment programme and be supervised by the Probation Service for 3 years.

Personally, I'm in favour of a custodial sentence for all of these type of offences, but it's up to the Government to set the guidelines on punishment. I don't believe that this judge is doing anything too differently to most other courts in the country at the moment. With this Government slashing prison capacity ahead of new prisons being built to replace it, we'll see more of this sort of sentencing over the next 3 years, not less.
[quote][p][bold]retry69[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]In Absentia[/bold] wrote: There's no point in ranting about the Judge or the judicial system, it's the Government that issues sentencing guidelines. If you want something done, lobby your MP.[/p][/quote]Totally disagree it is within the powers of the judge to hand out a custodial sentence,he chose not to,as is his normal attitude towards this type of crime.[/p][/quote]You miss the point. If the Judge had sent him down, then at the end of a very short sentence, there's no obligation on him to do anything but obey the requirements of his listing on the sex offenders register. The Judge has made him attend 60 days of a treatment programme and be supervised by the Probation Service for 3 years. Personally, I'm in favour of a custodial sentence for all of these type of offences, but it's up to the Government to set the guidelines on punishment. I don't believe that this judge is doing anything too differently to most other courts in the country at the moment. With this Government slashing prison capacity ahead of new prisons being built to replace it, we'll see more of this sort of sentencing over the next 3 years, not less. In Absentia
  • Score: 0

12:09pm Mon 9 Sep 13

retry69 says...

I certainly didn't miss the point Judge Wiggs could have shown some backbone and jailed this person which may have acted as a warning to others,he chose not to,nothing to do with guidelines whatsoever
I certainly didn't miss the point Judge Wiggs could have shown some backbone and jailed this person which may have acted as a warning to others,he chose not to,nothing to do with guidelines whatsoever retry69
  • Score: 0

12:27pm Mon 9 Sep 13

In Absentia says...

I don't think it takes backbone to send the bloke to prison. You could argue that the judge has taken a gamble with trying to put him through a rehab programme in the hope that it prevents re-offending. Does a short sentence with no programme at the end protect society in the long term? What's a braver choice under the current guidelines?

Personally, I'd like to see a custodial term with compulsory treatment afterwards, but the Government would avoid this down to cost. At the base of this is budget restrictions.
I don't think it takes backbone to send the bloke to prison. You could argue that the judge has taken a gamble with trying to put him through a rehab programme in the hope that it prevents re-offending. Does a short sentence with no programme at the end protect society in the long term? What's a braver choice under the current guidelines? Personally, I'd like to see a custodial term with compulsory treatment afterwards, but the Government would avoid this down to cost. At the base of this is budget restrictions. In Absentia
  • Score: 2

12:35pm Mon 9 Sep 13

AmsterdamMan says...

In Absentia touched briefly on the point at issue here....The sentencing guidelines for this level of offending is up to 26 weeks imprisonment. If this were handed down then he would serve 3 months and be free. On the other hand Judge Wiggs saw it more sensible to commit him to 3 years probation with a requirement to attend the Thames Valley Sex Offenders Program, where he will be required to address his offending behaviour over a continuous period of 43 weeks, as well as being monitored by his offender manager. I certainly do not condone this guy's behaviour in any way and don't wish to defend him at all, but to me it makes more sense for him to address his behaviour in a controlled environment and through a proper recognised process prior to "hitting the streets" again as opposed to receiving a short term in prison where his short sentence deems him unable to receive help or guidance. I fully understand the knee-jerk reaction to this sort of crime by the hang-em-high brigade but think through the logistics of the Judge's choices and whether if you were in his position what you would see as a practical solution to the dilemma. A short spell in Dorchester with no treatment to satisfy public outrage is in my view not as effective long-term as a 3 year probation order with an additional order to attend the course to prevent further commission of this sort of offence.
In Absentia touched briefly on the point at issue here....The sentencing guidelines for this level of offending is up to 26 weeks imprisonment. If this were handed down then he would serve 3 months and be free. On the other hand Judge Wiggs saw it more sensible to commit him to 3 years probation with a requirement to attend the Thames Valley Sex Offenders Program, where he will be required to address his offending behaviour over a continuous period of 43 weeks, as well as being monitored by his offender manager. I certainly do not condone this guy's behaviour in any way and don't wish to defend him at all, but to me it makes more sense for him to address his behaviour in a controlled environment and through a proper recognised process prior to "hitting the streets" again as opposed to receiving a short term in prison where his short sentence deems him unable to receive help or guidance. I fully understand the knee-jerk reaction to this sort of crime by the hang-em-high brigade but think through the logistics of the Judge's choices and whether if you were in his position what you would see as a practical solution to the dilemma. A short spell in Dorchester with no treatment to satisfy public outrage is in my view not as effective long-term as a 3 year probation order with an additional order to attend the course to prevent further commission of this sort of offence. AmsterdamMan
  • Score: 16

1:06pm Mon 9 Sep 13

spooki says...

I was part of a Domestic Violence support group and in discussions about about failed court cases (with evidence against the perp) it was nearly always Judge Wiggs.
I was part of a Domestic Violence support group and in discussions about about failed court cases (with evidence against the perp) it was nearly always Judge Wiggs. spooki
  • Score: 6

1:12pm Mon 9 Sep 13

skydriver says...

Clearly this judge is out of touch with the real world, and what the general public think, he should be fired he is not fit for purpose .
Clearly this judge is out of touch with the real world, and what the general public think, he should be fired he is not fit for purpose . skydriver
  • Score: 8

1:13pm Mon 9 Sep 13

boardsandphotos says...

AmsterdamMan wrote:
In Absentia touched briefly on the point at issue here....The sentencing guidelines for this level of offending is up to 26 weeks imprisonment. If this were handed down then he would serve 3 months and be free. On the other hand Judge Wiggs saw it more sensible to commit him to 3 years probation with a requirement to attend the Thames Valley Sex Offenders Program, where he will be required to address his offending behaviour over a continuous period of 43 weeks, as well as being monitored by his offender manager. I certainly do not condone this guy's behaviour in any way and don't wish to defend him at all, but to me it makes more sense for him to address his behaviour in a controlled environment and through a proper recognised process prior to "hitting the streets" again as opposed to receiving a short term in prison where his short sentence deems him unable to receive help or guidance. I fully understand the knee-jerk reaction to this sort of crime by the hang-em-high brigade but think through the logistics of the Judge's choices and whether if you were in his position what you would see as a practical solution to the dilemma. A short spell in Dorchester with no treatment to satisfy public outrage is in my view not as effective long-term as a 3 year probation order with an additional order to attend the course to prevent further commission of this sort of offence.
Why does it have to be either/or why can't he serve a custodial sentence with his treatment beginning while he is in prison then continue during his probation period once released?
[quote][p][bold]AmsterdamMan[/bold] wrote: In Absentia touched briefly on the point at issue here....The sentencing guidelines for this level of offending is up to 26 weeks imprisonment. If this were handed down then he would serve 3 months and be free. On the other hand Judge Wiggs saw it more sensible to commit him to 3 years probation with a requirement to attend the Thames Valley Sex Offenders Program, where he will be required to address his offending behaviour over a continuous period of 43 weeks, as well as being monitored by his offender manager. I certainly do not condone this guy's behaviour in any way and don't wish to defend him at all, but to me it makes more sense for him to address his behaviour in a controlled environment and through a proper recognised process prior to "hitting the streets" again as opposed to receiving a short term in prison where his short sentence deems him unable to receive help or guidance. I fully understand the knee-jerk reaction to this sort of crime by the hang-em-high brigade but think through the logistics of the Judge's choices and whether if you were in his position what you would see as a practical solution to the dilemma. A short spell in Dorchester with no treatment to satisfy public outrage is in my view not as effective long-term as a 3 year probation order with an additional order to attend the course to prevent further commission of this sort of offence.[/p][/quote]Why does it have to be either/or why can't he serve a custodial sentence with his treatment beginning while he is in prison then continue during his probation period once released? boardsandphotos
  • Score: 3

1:31pm Mon 9 Sep 13

retry69 says...

colbel wrote:
Another vile pervert let lose on the streets of our children by some deranged judge........!!
And you know from previous cases we will get posters on here that will show some signs of sympathy towards these people either by the sentence or the crime itself
[quote][p][bold]colbel[/bold] wrote: Another vile pervert let lose on the streets of our children by some deranged judge........!![/p][/quote]And you know from previous cases we will get posters on here that will show some signs of sympathy towards these people either by the sentence or the crime itself retry69
  • Score: -2

3:56pm Mon 9 Sep 13

colbel says...

retry69 wrote:
colbel wrote:
Another vile pervert let lose on the streets of our children by some deranged judge........!!
And you know from previous cases we will get posters on here that will show some signs of sympathy towards these people either by the sentence or the crime itself
And as you quite rightly quoted in an earlier post, the judge in particular has no backbone, I understood this is a nation that cares for its children, but it's a shame that the people who make the rules don't seem to care. Once you commit a crime involving children, then it should be life and mean life, because its in these vile creatures to do it.
[quote][p][bold]retry69[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]colbel[/bold] wrote: Another vile pervert let lose on the streets of our children by some deranged judge........!![/p][/quote]And you know from previous cases we will get posters on here that will show some signs of sympathy towards these people either by the sentence or the crime itself[/p][/quote]And as you quite rightly quoted in an earlier post, the judge in particular has no backbone, I understood this is a nation that cares for its children, but it's a shame that the people who make the rules don't seem to care. Once you commit a crime involving children, then it should be life and mean life, because its in these vile creatures to do it. colbel
  • Score: 1

4:34pm Mon 9 Sep 13

Flusters says...

Chemical castration or a prison sentence please. Get rid of that 'deranged judge'.
Chemical castration or a prison sentence please. Get rid of that 'deranged judge'. Flusters
  • Score: 4

4:56pm Mon 9 Sep 13

colbel says...

Flusters wrote:
Chemical castration or a prison sentence please. Get rid of that 'deranged judge'.
Flusters and retry69, it seems we have minus scores on our quotes, makes you wonder who and what sort of person would do that, probably a pervert sympathiser.......!!
[quote][p][bold]Flusters[/bold] wrote: Chemical castration or a prison sentence please. Get rid of that 'deranged judge'.[/p][/quote]Flusters and retry69, it seems we have minus scores on our quotes, makes you wonder who and what sort of person would do that, probably a pervert sympathiser.......!! colbel
  • Score: -1

5:11pm Mon 9 Sep 13

boardsandphotos says...

colbel wrote:
Flusters wrote:
Chemical castration or a prison sentence please. Get rid of that 'deranged judge'.
Flusters and retry69, it seems we have minus scores on our quotes, makes you wonder who and what sort of person would do that, probably a pervert sympathiser.......!!
Yes I noticed that on my earlier post when I suggested prison or treatment are not mutually exclusive, he could go to prison AND receive treatment, it didn't need to be one or the other, how does that get a minus? Who doesn't want someone downloading child **** to go to jail?
[quote][p][bold]colbel[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Flusters[/bold] wrote: Chemical castration or a prison sentence please. Get rid of that 'deranged judge'.[/p][/quote]Flusters and retry69, it seems we have minus scores on our quotes, makes you wonder who and what sort of person would do that, probably a pervert sympathiser.......!![/p][/quote]Yes I noticed that on my earlier post when I suggested prison or treatment are not mutually exclusive, he could go to prison AND receive treatment, it didn't need to be one or the other, how does that get a minus? Who doesn't want someone downloading child **** to go to jail? boardsandphotos
  • Score: 2

5:17pm Mon 9 Sep 13

boardsandphotos says...

.....and why is the word P-0-R-N censored?

It's not a swear word and it's in the Dictionary.
.....and why is the word P-0-R-N censored? It's not a swear word and it's in the Dictionary. boardsandphotos
  • Score: 3

5:40pm Mon 9 Sep 13

GAHmusic says...

I hate when they say "previous good character" when "never been caught before" would be more acurate and a better phrase when concidering sentenceing too
I hate when they say "previous good character" when "never been caught before" would be more acurate and a better phrase when concidering sentenceing too GAHmusic
  • Score: 3

5:50pm Mon 9 Sep 13

retry69 says...

boardsandphotos wrote:
colbel wrote:
Flusters wrote:
Chemical castration or a prison sentence please. Get rid of that 'deranged judge'.
Flusters and retry69, it seems we have minus scores on our quotes, makes you wonder who and what sort of person would do that, probably a pervert sympathiser.......!!
Yes I noticed that on my earlier post when I suggested prison or treatment are not mutually exclusive, he could go to prison AND receive treatment, it didn't need to be one or the other, how does that get a minus? Who doesn't want someone downloading child **** to go to jail?
I think your suggestion of a possible combination of prison and treatment (if needed) would certainly solve any argument of whats the most appropriate punishment is.What is more concerning is your last question.Who doesn't want someone downloading childpawn to go to jail? Well having read all the recent articles and comments in this paper regarding people that have these images,there are among our fellow posters some who believe jail is the last place they should be and that downloading these images can be done by mistake.While you have that attitude shown by some and a judge that will not put these people where they belong the danger of escalation is increased.This is not a knee-jerk reaction from some hang em high brigade as suggested by someone earlier this is from a father/grandfather who thinks that children should be protected from this sort of violation.
[quote][p][bold]boardsandphotos[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]colbel[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Flusters[/bold] wrote: Chemical castration or a prison sentence please. Get rid of that 'deranged judge'.[/p][/quote]Flusters and retry69, it seems we have minus scores on our quotes, makes you wonder who and what sort of person would do that, probably a pervert sympathiser.......!![/p][/quote]Yes I noticed that on my earlier post when I suggested prison or treatment are not mutually exclusive, he could go to prison AND receive treatment, it didn't need to be one or the other, how does that get a minus? Who doesn't want someone downloading child **** to go to jail?[/p][/quote]I think your suggestion of a possible combination of prison and treatment (if needed) would certainly solve any argument of whats the most appropriate punishment is.What is more concerning is your last question.Who doesn't want someone downloading childpawn to go to jail? Well having read all the recent articles and comments in this paper regarding people that have these images,there are among our fellow posters some who believe jail is the last place they should be and that downloading these images can be done by mistake.While you have that attitude shown by some and a judge that will not put these people where they belong the danger of escalation is increased.This is not a knee-jerk reaction from some hang em high brigade as suggested by someone earlier this is from a father/grandfather who thinks that children should be protected from this sort of violation. retry69
  • Score: -2

5:52pm Mon 9 Sep 13

retry69 says...

boardsandphotos wrote:
.....and why is the word P-0-R-N censored?

It's not a swear word and it's in the Dictionary.
Of course you would have noticed that the word is in the headline by the Echo :)
[quote][p][bold]boardsandphotos[/bold] wrote: .....and why is the word P-0-R-N censored? It's not a swear word and it's in the Dictionary.[/p][/quote]Of course you would have noticed that the word is in the headline by the Echo :) retry69
  • Score: 2

6:02pm Mon 9 Sep 13

boardsandphotos says...

retry69 wrote:
boardsandphotos wrote:
.....and why is the word P-0-R-N censored?

It's not a swear word and it's in the Dictionary.
Of course you would have noticed that the word is in the headline by the Echo :)
Yes that as well, I find it odd that it can be in the headline but gets sensored when typed in the comments?
[quote][p][bold]retry69[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]boardsandphotos[/bold] wrote: .....and why is the word P-0-R-N censored? It's not a swear word and it's in the Dictionary.[/p][/quote]Of course you would have noticed that the word is in the headline by the Echo :)[/p][/quote]Yes that as well, I find it odd that it can be in the headline but gets sensored when typed in the comments? boardsandphotos
  • Score: 4

6:09pm Mon 9 Sep 13

O'Reilly says...

Is the judge worried about something? I think we should be informed....
Is the judge worried about something? I think we should be informed.... O'Reilly
  • Score: 2

6:49pm Mon 9 Sep 13

Tripod says...

To those calling for a Prison Sentence I'd suggest you read the news; a good number of prisons are being closed (including Dorchester, closed by the end of this year), there aren't enough spaces for the current prison population, by this time next year there will be far fewer; replacement prisons aren't being built until AFTER the next general election (and will probably be privately run); the judiciary are being told to use custodial sentences only in the more extreme cases.
To those calling for a Prison Sentence I'd suggest you read the news; a good number of prisons are being closed (including Dorchester, closed by the end of this year), there aren't enough spaces for the current prison population, by this time next year there will be far fewer; replacement prisons aren't being built until AFTER the next general election (and will probably be privately run); the judiciary are being told to use custodial sentences only in the more extreme cases. Tripod
  • Score: -2

8:36pm Mon 9 Sep 13

loadabull says...

If another child was harmed by any of the people that Wiggs let 'walk' , would that mean he would also be liable for prosecution. Surely he has a greater duty of care and could it not be seen that he had willfully neglected that duty by allowing these men to walk free?
I know it would never happen, but it should.
If another child was harmed by any of the people that Wiggs let 'walk' , would that mean he would also be liable for prosecution. Surely he has a greater duty of care and could it not be seen that he had willfully neglected that duty by allowing these men to walk free? I know it would never happen, but it should. loadabull
  • Score: 0

9:15pm Mon 9 Sep 13

twynham says...

boardsandphotos wrote:
retry69 wrote:
boardsandphotos wrote:
.....and why is the word P-0-R-N censored?

It's not a swear word and it's in the Dictionary.
Of course you would have noticed that the word is in the headline by the Echo :)
Yes that as well, I find it odd that it can be in the headline but gets sensored when typed in the comments?
Precisely my thoughts.
.
Now if I'd said G#p#y I would understand it.
[quote][p][bold]boardsandphotos[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]retry69[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]boardsandphotos[/bold] wrote: .....and why is the word P-0-R-N censored? It's not a swear word and it's in the Dictionary.[/p][/quote]Of course you would have noticed that the word is in the headline by the Echo :)[/p][/quote]Yes that as well, I find it odd that it can be in the headline but gets sensored when typed in the comments?[/p][/quote]Precisely my thoughts. . Now if I'd said G#p#y I would understand it. twynham
  • Score: -4

9:35pm Mon 9 Sep 13

retry69 says...

twynham wrote:
boardsandphotos wrote:
retry69 wrote:
boardsandphotos wrote:
.....and why is the word P-0-R-N censored?

It's not a swear word and it's in the Dictionary.
Of course you would have noticed that the word is in the headline by the Echo :)
Yes that as well, I find it odd that it can be in the headline but gets sensored when typed in the comments?
Precisely my thoughts.
.
Now if I'd said G#p#y I would understand it.
Whats the matter with you? You can say gypsy :)
[quote][p][bold]twynham[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]boardsandphotos[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]retry69[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]boardsandphotos[/bold] wrote: .....and why is the word P-0-R-N censored? It's not a swear word and it's in the Dictionary.[/p][/quote]Of course you would have noticed that the word is in the headline by the Echo :)[/p][/quote]Yes that as well, I find it odd that it can be in the headline but gets sensored when typed in the comments?[/p][/quote]Precisely my thoughts. . Now if I'd said G#p#y I would understand it.[/p][/quote]Whats the matter with you? You can say gypsy :) retry69
  • Score: 3

9:50pm Mon 9 Sep 13

Lewcee says...

What is the point of the anger directed at these warped minds who "click" a download? FOR CRYING OUT LOUD will someone please tell me what is being done to pursue the bastards that have set up and taken these awful pictures in the first place? They are the ones who are really, really, sick, and worthy of everyone's bile...we don't see any of them getting "hung,drawn, and quartered", or the ISP's obliterated for allowing access! That is what is so sick - that we cannot seem to BLOCK this awful stuff! No wonder the Judges feel so helpless. Complain to your MP. Get these sites shut down and blocked. End of rant.
What is the point of the anger directed at these warped minds who "click" a download? FOR CRYING OUT LOUD will someone please tell me what is being done to pursue the bastards that have set up and taken these awful pictures in the first place? They are the ones who are really, really, sick, and worthy of everyone's bile...we don't see any of them getting "hung,drawn, and quartered", or the ISP's obliterated for allowing access! That is what is so sick - that we cannot seem to BLOCK this awful stuff! No wonder the Judges feel so helpless. Complain to your MP. Get these sites shut down and blocked. End of rant. Lewcee
  • Score: 8

8:20am Tue 10 Sep 13

boardsandphotos says...

Lewcee wrote:
What is the point of the anger directed at these warped minds who "click" a download? FOR CRYING OUT LOUD will someone please tell me what is being done to pursue the bastards that have set up and taken these awful pictures in the first place? They are the ones who are really, really, sick, and worthy of everyone's bile...we don't see any of them getting "hung,drawn, and quartered", or the ISP's obliterated for allowing access! That is what is so sick - that we cannot seem to BLOCK this awful stuff! No wonder the Judges feel so helpless. Complain to your MP. Get these sites shut down and blocked. End of rant.
The person that VIEWS the images is the person that is fueling the requiement for the images to be created and are there-fore involved and just as guilty by-proxy.

However that aside -

Just because you are not seeing headlines about Child **** rings being closed down (although there have been some) it doesn't mean they are not being investigated.

This type of investigation is a massively complex, global project involving child trafficing groups who are also involved in drug and arms smuggling, cross border co-operation with other Police Forces, Investigations using specialised IT teams and also co-operation with non-UK based ISPs.

The ISP's are helping to close down these websites (although I do suspect more could be done) but it's not as simple as typing 'child ****' into google and closing down all the sites that appear in the search.

These groups use ghost servers, encryption, they hack into companies networks and store their images on other peoples systems, they use hidden links from one website to another to gain access to the images and that's before you even look at the P2P sharing networks.

If you want the authorities to catch those responsible then you will need to be patient because it's not a quick investigation, this kind of thing will take years.
[quote][p][bold]Lewcee[/bold] wrote: What is the point of the anger directed at these warped minds who "click" a download? FOR CRYING OUT LOUD will someone please tell me what is being done to pursue the bastards that have set up and taken these awful pictures in the first place? They are the ones who are really, really, sick, and worthy of everyone's bile...we don't see any of them getting "hung,drawn, and quartered", or the ISP's obliterated for allowing access! That is what is so sick - that we cannot seem to BLOCK this awful stuff! No wonder the Judges feel so helpless. Complain to your MP. Get these sites shut down and blocked. End of rant.[/p][/quote]The person that VIEWS the images is the person that is fueling the requiement for the images to be created and are there-fore involved and just as guilty by-proxy. However that aside - Just because you are not seeing headlines about Child **** rings being closed down (although there have been some) it doesn't mean they are not being investigated. This type of investigation is a massively complex, global project involving child trafficing groups who are also involved in drug and arms smuggling, cross border co-operation with other Police Forces, Investigations using specialised IT teams and also co-operation with non-UK based ISPs. The ISP's are helping to close down these websites (although I do suspect more could be done) but it's not as simple as typing 'child ****' into google and closing down all the sites that appear in the search. These groups use ghost servers, encryption, they hack into companies networks and store their images on other peoples systems, they use hidden links from one website to another to gain access to the images and that's before you even look at the P2P sharing networks. If you want the authorities to catch those responsible then you will need to be patient because it's not a quick investigation, this kind of thing will take years. boardsandphotos
  • Score: 0

8:58am Tue 10 Sep 13

retry69 says...

Tripod wrote:
To those calling for a Prison Sentence I'd suggest you read the news; a good number of prisons are being closed (including Dorchester, closed by the end of this year), there aren't enough spaces for the current prison population, by this time next year there will be far fewer; replacement prisons aren't being built until AFTER the next general election (and will probably be privately run); the judiciary are being told to use custodial sentences only in the more extreme cases.
Im sure we are quite aware of latest cuts thanks,so what do you suggest? We carry on allowing this type of person to walk our streets unpunished or perhaps a community service order where they are can assist in schools might fit in with your thinking.
[quote][p][bold]Tripod[/bold] wrote: To those calling for a Prison Sentence I'd suggest you read the news; a good number of prisons are being closed (including Dorchester, closed by the end of this year), there aren't enough spaces for the current prison population, by this time next year there will be far fewer; replacement prisons aren't being built until AFTER the next general election (and will probably be privately run); the judiciary are being told to use custodial sentences only in the more extreme cases.[/p][/quote]Im sure we are quite aware of latest cuts thanks,so what do you suggest? We carry on allowing this type of person to walk our streets unpunished or perhaps a community service order where they are can assist in schools might fit in with your thinking. retry69
  • Score: 3

9:52am Tue 10 Sep 13

a.g.o.g. says...

His original plea was that the images must have arrived via some other (SADLY) legit ""TRASH"" he had downloaded.
His plea was changed to that of admitting the possession of illegal images of children on his computer.
Sounds like a deal was done to me.
Otherwise it also seems clear that children need protection from lots of people other than those of perverted sexual appetite.
His original plea was that the images must have arrived via some other (SADLY) legit ""TRASH"" he had downloaded. His plea was changed to that of admitting the possession of illegal images of children on his computer. Sounds like a deal was done to me. Otherwise it also seems clear that children need protection from lots of people other than those of perverted sexual appetite. a.g.o.g.
  • Score: 1

9:56am Tue 10 Sep 13

retry69 says...

a.g.o.g. wrote:
His original plea was that the images must have arrived via some other (SADLY) legit ""TRASH"" he had downloaded.
His plea was changed to that of admitting the possession of illegal images of children on his computer.
Sounds like a deal was done to me.
Otherwise it also seems clear that children need protection from lots of people other than those of perverted sexual appetite.
Good point !
[quote][p][bold]a.g.o.g.[/bold] wrote: His original plea was that the images must have arrived via some other (SADLY) legit ""TRASH"" he had downloaded. His plea was changed to that of admitting the possession of illegal images of children on his computer. Sounds like a deal was done to me. Otherwise it also seems clear that children need protection from lots of people other than those of perverted sexual appetite.[/p][/quote]Good point ! retry69
  • Score: 1

11:38am Tue 10 Sep 13

BH1 loyal says...

WIGGS IS A DISGRACE, he gives out the harshest sentences for stupid things and lets all the nonces out, probably part of a ring he really is a disgusting man
WIGGS IS A DISGRACE, he gives out the harshest sentences for stupid things and lets all the nonces out, probably part of a ring he really is a disgusting man BH1 loyal
  • Score: 4

11:59am Tue 10 Sep 13

MrPitiful says...

A couple of points here -

- The offender pleads guilty to the offences but states the images must have been downloaded within other teen ****. If that is true, why did his PC have software installed to make it difficult for the authorities to trace? Anyone who has this installed has it installed for a purpose and with intention - i.e. - they knoww hatthey are doing.

- With regards to the "judge" involved - He has been too lenient on way too many cases before - not just involving this type of offence but also assaults etc. Something is amiss and his inconsistency smacks of inability. Let's hope he retires soon before his hug-a-hoody attitude towards offenders ends up with someone being killed.

- It seems the sentence was chosen by the judge as an alternative to priso for whatever reasons the judge concocted. I think someone has already suggested this but surely a better option would have been a sentence involving both - i.e. a sharp shock in prison as the punishment ( offender + guilty = punishment ??) and then, if he survives/behaves himself and finishes his prison sentence, then put him through a rehab programme at our expense in order so that his likelihood of logging on to stuff he shouldn't be looking at is minimalised.

Overall, it makes you wonder what society is coming to.
A couple of points here - - The offender pleads guilty to the offences but states the images must have been downloaded within other teen ****. If that is true, why did his PC have software installed to make it difficult for the authorities to trace? Anyone who has this installed has it installed for a purpose and with intention - i.e. - they knoww hatthey are doing. - With regards to the "judge" involved - He has been too lenient on way too many cases before - not just involving this type of offence but also assaults etc. Something is amiss and his inconsistency smacks of inability. Let's hope he retires soon before his hug-a-hoody attitude towards offenders ends up with someone being killed. - It seems the sentence was chosen by the judge as an alternative to priso for whatever reasons the judge concocted. I think someone has already suggested this but surely a better option would have been a sentence involving both - i.e. a sharp shock in prison as the punishment ( offender + guilty = punishment ??) and then, if he survives/behaves himself and finishes his prison sentence, then put him through a rehab programme at our expense in order so that his likelihood of logging on to stuff he shouldn't be looking at is minimalised. Overall, it makes you wonder what society is coming to. MrPitiful
  • Score: 4

5:41pm Tue 10 Sep 13

mikeywest2007 says...

I was in the same company as Karl Jones a few years ago......and tbh i wanna know where this *good character* bull came from because he was a dick....rude and abusive....what a shame he wasn't put away
I was in the same company as Karl Jones a few years ago......and tbh i wanna know where this *good character* bull came from because he was a dick....rude and abusive....what a shame he wasn't put away mikeywest2007
  • Score: 1

6:02pm Tue 10 Sep 13

colbel says...

boardsandphotos wrote:
colbel wrote:
Flusters wrote:
Chemical castration or a prison sentence please. Get rid of that 'deranged judge'.
Flusters and retry69, it seems we have minus scores on our quotes, makes you wonder who and what sort of person would do that, probably a pervert sympathiser.......!!
Yes I noticed that on my earlier post when I suggested prison or treatment are not mutually exclusive, he could go to prison AND receive treatment, it didn't need to be one or the other, how does that get a minus? Who doesn't want someone downloading child **** to go to jail?
Probably the same people who download child ****, the dirty filthy vile disgusting perverts, and instead of using defenceless animals for Lab Tests use them and make some good use out of them, because they won't be missed by the normal decent people of this world.
[quote][p][bold]boardsandphotos[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]colbel[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Flusters[/bold] wrote: Chemical castration or a prison sentence please. Get rid of that 'deranged judge'.[/p][/quote]Flusters and retry69, it seems we have minus scores on our quotes, makes you wonder who and what sort of person would do that, probably a pervert sympathiser.......!![/p][/quote]Yes I noticed that on my earlier post when I suggested prison or treatment are not mutually exclusive, he could go to prison AND receive treatment, it didn't need to be one or the other, how does that get a minus? Who doesn't want someone downloading child **** to go to jail?[/p][/quote]Probably the same people who download child ****, the dirty filthy vile disgusting perverts, and instead of using defenceless animals for Lab Tests use them and make some good use out of them, because they won't be missed by the normal decent people of this world. colbel
  • Score: 1

8:24pm Tue 10 Sep 13

colbel says...

mikeywest2007 wrote:
I was in the same company as Karl Jones a few years ago......and tbh i wanna know where this *good character* bull came from because he was a dick....rude and abusive....what a shame he wasn't put away
Be carefully mikeywest2007, you will have one of his pervy mates coming on here and having ago at you, then they will report your post.
[quote][p][bold]mikeywest2007[/bold] wrote: I was in the same company as Karl Jones a few years ago......and tbh i wanna know where this *good character* bull came from because he was a dick....rude and abusive....what a shame he wasn't put away[/p][/quote]Be carefully mikeywest2007, you will have one of his pervy mates coming on here and having ago at you, then they will report your post. colbel
  • Score: 1

9:06am Wed 11 Sep 13

Mike_French says...

In Absentia wrote:
There's no point in ranting about the Judge or the judicial system, it's the Government that issues sentencing guidelines. If you want something done, lobby your MP.
Oh yes, Mr Ellwood is the sort of person I would turn to..................
[quote][p][bold]In Absentia[/bold] wrote: There's no point in ranting about the Judge or the judicial system, it's the Government that issues sentencing guidelines. If you want something done, lobby your MP.[/p][/quote]Oh yes, Mr Ellwood is the sort of person I would turn to.................. Mike_French
  • Score: 1

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree