Femme Fatalities Message Board

The first charge of possessing extreme porn (pictures) which actually went to a full trial in front of a jury, has resulted in the acquittal of the Defendant. The jury apparently did not take too long dismissing the mumbo-jumbo of the prosecution, who admitted from the off that the pictures in the defendant's possession were staged.

The Great British jury has always been renowned for throwing out obviously illogical, politically correct prosecutions. One hopes that this will serve as a notice to prosecutors that just because some half-wit law gets passed,doesn't mean a jury will agree and convict.

Any previous convictions had been "guilty" pleas, usually because the defendant faced other charges anyway and thus didn't contest this law. So the loss of the first contested case drives a nail in the coffin of this idiotic, Orwellian law.

Historically, the greatest triumph of the British jury came in the aftermath of the Falklands War. Margaret Thatcher or her Ministers told lies to the nation about the circumstances surrounding the sinking of the Argentine cruiser General Belgrano.

One high ranked Civil Servant, Clive Ponting, had rather more integrity than the Government, and leaked the documents that proved they were lying. He was charged under the Official Secrets Act. At his trial, despite his admitting he had done it, the jury acquitted him, one of the major embarrassments suffered by Thatcher's dictatorial government.

But I digress.

Read for yourselves:
http://www.melonfarmers.co.uk/gch11a.htm

Never made sense to me either. Surely they have seen movies and/or stills from Friday the 13th, Last House on the Left, and so many more.

England's obsession with stamping out our material never ceases to depress me.

This from the land of Jack the Ripper! (And Hitchcock)

I have it on good authority that Henry the VIII was into erotic beheadings, a particularly extreme sub fetish in our community.

What in the hell happen to those men over there. Did the Queen collect all of their balls?

Does she keep them in her royal handbag?

I'll bet that the Englishmen of Churchill's generation would have loved to watch a little necro while sipping their favorite drinks.

Ah well

Very interesting. I'd love nothing more than to discuss this topic in my law and procedures class, but alas we only discuss american law and cases.

This makes perfect sense to have a violation as an enhancement to other crimes but as a stand alone law we predicted that it would not be successful - so far so good.

I am not sure how the prosecution of crime is done in the UK but in the US is done by an elected official and his/her office - The District Attorney (this may vary state by state).
Since it's an elected official and to be re-elected they have to give the voters their conviction rate. To get re-elected the conviction rate had better be in the 90% plus level. On that basis, the public doesn't know that they cherry pick their cases to ensure they are going to get a conviction near a 100% most of the time. Cases that are below 90% are pleaded out or the defendant released. Many cases where the police make arrests are declined by the DA and the police have to drop charges and let them go..and open to civil suits. As a consequence the police don't arrest many people that have committed crimes since they know they would never be prosecuted. For example, my ex-wife was raped by the handyman that was over to her home on a regular basis. He forced sex on her (rape) but was not arrested since this was considered 'acquaintance rape' with only a 50% conviction rate - so no charges were ever brought.

Our juries determine if the law makes sense in our community and if it should be enforced. What may be considered a trivial and unenforceable law in my community, may be a critical and enforceable law in another community. So enforcement will vary from one jurisdiction to another. So if one smokes dope in Calif. and nothing happens but do the same in some other jurisdiction don't be surprised when a lawman throws you in his car and says you are going to get years... and get the jail time.

After a history of a low conviction rate of the extreme porn law there perhaps they will stop arresting and prosecution of people there, as they would here in the US ?

Dennis

Yes, Den, how it works in the U.K. is that the Police investigate but then turn over their files to the Crown Prosecution Service who review the evidence and decide whether or not to launch a prosecution. They are an unelected body of lawyers. They need to be satisfied that there is a better than 50% chance of a conviction on a contested case or they will not prosecute. Obviously the decisions here in the U.K. are less political than in the U.S.A.; though often open to criticism as the C.P.S. are not regarded as being particularly competent.