Police

From Seenoevil

Jump to: navigation, search

Contents

[edit]

Local police forces

There are 43 local police forces in England and Wales.

17 of the 43 responded to the consultation (the government response mentions 18 forces but Nottinghamshire appears twice).

These were:

  • Derbyshire police http://www.derbyshire.police.uk/ . Consultation response #78, Detective Sergeant Richard Sharpe:
    • Makes concerns about each case being assessed subjectively, as there will be no "bench mark", unlike child abuse on the Internet which is more straightforward to assess.
    • Refers to "material depicting beheading of kidnap victims, such as those in Iraq ... I feel these are as abhorrent as any sexual context imagery".
  • North Yorkshire police http://www.northyorkshire.police.uk/ . Consultation response #83, Detective Chief Inspector Alan Carey:
    • "Safeguards should be in place to protect young and vulnerable people".
    • "Powers of arrest for these offences should be available to ensure evidence is secured at an early opportunity".
  • Merseyside police http://www.merseyside.police.uk . Consultation response #90, Detective Sergeant Gareth Thompson:
    • There is no doubt that the material that this legislation proposes to address is freely available on the Internet. This cannot be allowed to continue as the material has the potential to corrupt and the [blacked out]."
    • "There has to be a limit in civilised society what should be tolerated. I believe that the material referred to here is beyond the limit."
  • Hampshire police http://www.hampshire.police.uk/internet/ . Consultation response #91, Acting Detective Superintendent Kevin Walton:
    • "The proposals bring possession of extreme pornographic material involving adults into line with other legislation regarding indecent images of children".
    • Argued that the definition of bestiality include an animal whether alive or dead; claimed it was a "loophole" not to include them.
    • "The ONLY legitimate possession should be by the prosecuting agencies. I do not see a need to extend the OPA "public good defence" (science, literature, art or [illegible]) to this material".
    • "My preferred option would be 5 years for possession and 10 years for the OPA aggrevated offences in line with indecent images of children."
  • Metropolitan police http://www.met.police.uk/about/blair.htm . Consultation response #93, David Johnston:
    • "This area needs to be followed up with some rigorous academic research to back up anecdotal belief that there is a link between this material and those involved in harm/crime".
    • "The provision of 5 years would also bring this in line with Protection of Children legislation".
  • Leicestershire police http://www.leics.police.uk . Consultation response #100, Chief Superintendent Alistair Helm (who wrote in twice, also as an individual - see below):
    • Points out that prosecutions under the Obscene Publications Act have fallen, and prosecutions of child pornography has increased, and that since it is easier to police, claims therefore that the OPA is inadequate and the law must be strengthened.
    • "The material ... is of a very extreme nature and if a perpetrator was caught in the act of committing the sexual offence, then they would be prosecuted under one of a number offences. It is desirable that the possession of images of these illegal acts should be an offence."
    • "In my view there is no justification for being in possession of such material."
    • "A new free-standing offence ... would allow the new offence work in a similar way to the Childrens Act 1978 and Section 160 of the Criminal Justice Act works with regards to the indecent photographs of children."
  • Dyfed-Powys police http://www.dyfed-powys.police.uk/ . Consultation response #104, Detective Superintendent Steve Wilkons:
    • "It is recognised that some sexual practice allows some consensual violence between adults; having said this the public tolerance to this should have a very low threshold."
    • "Those unnatural acts with animals or dead bodies have no place in society. Allowing "artistic impression" as an exception is to provide a defence and loophole to possession and production of such material. This cannot be deemed acceptable."
    • "Possession of such material for artistic impression should not be a defence."
  • Durham police http://www.durham.police.uk/ . Consultation response #112, Detective Inspector Colin Gibson:
    • "The current legislation was created a considerable time before the evolution of the home computer and the internet ... The legislation concerning the protection of children which was drafted much later has still had to be updated to include electronic and pseudo images. It is therefore logical that the earlier legislation requires updating accordingly."
    • "Even now there are some subjects, including those identified in the discussion document amongst others, that are so abhorrent they have no place in today's society."
    • "Whilst it is accepted that it is the intention to restrict any new offence to pornographic material many would argue that this is a conservative list ... Not all abhorrent images are produced for sexual gratification. Some are clearly just obscene and offensive and without a sexual connutation [sic] yet simple possession would still fall outside of current and proposed legislation.
    • Gives an example of an offender who circulated images of a decapitation of a hostage in the Middle East, and complains he could only be prosecuted for breach of the police (he doesn't state why he couldn't be prosecuted under the OPA, nor does he understand that a law on possession would criminalise those who had received the image).
    • "A statutory power of arrest would also be required for the new offence of possession."
    • "Just because this would make it more difficult for law enforcement does not mean that we should not do it. Society has a right and expectation to be protected from images such as those discussed."
  • Avon and somerset police http://www.avonandsomerset.police.uk/ . Consultation response #113, Anonymous Detective Inspector:
    • "Whilst there may be an absence of research results, most psychologists agree that there is an element of overcoming internal inhibitors on the route to offending. The widespread availability of such material on the Internet gives the potential offender the belief that criminal sanctions are non existent and that such acts are not seen as criminal."
    • "A message must be promoted that this is regarded as serious crime."
    • "The introduction of such legislation would give a clear message as to what is acceptable. There has been a significant drift from protective standards over the years and the Internet has accelerated this process. This new proposed legislation is welcomed."
  • West Midlands police http://www.west-midlands.police.uk/ . Consultation response #175, Detective Sergeant Keith Wharton:
    • "The OPA 1959 is an anachronism ... This document is failing to recognise that this material is being distributed by persons on a scale that ranges from [blacked out] own community or very serious crime groups."
    • "We are currently investigating individuals who are trading in images and then taking part in degrading and criminal sexual acts. Those ‘pushing the boundaries’ are time and again leading to criminal offences against animals and children and although empirical data is poor, those probation officers I deal with who are part of the sexual rehabilitation program, see pornography, particularly of an extreme nature, as throwing ‘fuel on the fire.’ Remember, laws are there to protect the vulnerable."
    • Argued that the following should also be included: "sexual interference with an animal corpse"; "snuff films" such as "militant executions (beheadings)"; eating of faeces or urine (they cited R v. Brown as justification).
    • "I am constantly battling to deal with the risk of children who live in environments where the adults are in possesion of copies [sic] amounts of extreme pornography or inappropriate sexual contact with animals."
    • "Bear in mind the suffering involved in forced rape/mutiliation pornography. Organised crime is making huge profit and the available sentence should reflect this. Following the lead of the SOA 2003, I do not feel that a 10 year maximum for distribution is too strong - allow the court to decide on the facts. Some of this material is the physical evidence of the torture of unknown individuals."
    • "2 years maximum sentence is derisory and shows no understanding of the issues involved."
  • Cleveland police http://www.cleveland.police.uk/ . Consultation response #192, Detective Chief Inspector Rob Donaghy:
    • "The potential corruption and exploitation of young and vulnerable people via the Internet is significant."
    • "It is well known that a worrying proportion of people who access adult pornography, follow the path to extreme pornography and ultimate child pornography."
    • "It is the responsibility of everyone to protect children and vulnerable people in our Community."
    • "The material ... would be found to be abhorrent to members of the public."
    • "I note that violent scenes without a sexual nature are specifically excluded from these proposals ... the 'Abhorrent to the Public' test would surely be met with these images. I consider that the basis for the current proposals (i.e. protection of vulnerable people involved and access to such material) would equally apply to extreme violent scenes without a sexual nature. (e.g. snuff movies etc.)
    • Argues that the penalty should be "subject to a scale similar to the sentencing levels / Copine scales currently in use by the courts in respect of child pornography."
    • "It follows therefore that maximum penalties for making /distributing should be increased to 5 years."
  • Notts police http://www.nottinghamshire.police.uk/ . Consultation response #212, Detective Inspector Ian Winton:
    • "We have seen a year on year increase in the seizure of pornographic material by the Police. It is also increasingly evident that such private collections are precursory to the owner collecting images of child abuse or the more extreme forms of pornography."
    • "We acknowledge and accept the premise that viewing pornography increases a person's toleration of sexually violet [sic] acts. This may also have an impact on their relationships as will the long-term harm caused to victims of sexual abuse." Cites as "evidence" the increase in the number of recorded sexual offences, and the increasing number of persons on the Sex Offenders Register.
    • "We have numerous examples of the negative effects of pornographic material. It is particularly evident in the grooming process of children before they partake in sexual activity. In our opinion acts of coprophilia (excrement, urination) within pornograph are examples of the total degradation of the person subject of such acts. It is our view that such acts are enjoyed by sadists. Likewise acts of belonephilia (needles fetish) agonophilia (pseudo rape) and other forms of extreme violence are also enjoyed by sadist and those with persons with sadistics tendencies. Such tendencies would skew the mindset of the viewer of such material to believe that this is the norm. As such we feel it should not be tolerated."
    • Claim that the law should also criminalise images of "copriphilia [sic]" (excrement and urination) and belonephilia (needles).
    • "There should be a widespread publicity campaign regarding this change in the law - This will further inhibit people from "surfing" the Internet for pornography and accessing it."
    • "It will send out a clear message to the public of the dangers of such materials".
    • "We feel that a penalty of 3 year is derisory and will be seen as such." Suggests a maximum of 5 years for possession, and 7 years for possession with intent of supplying. Also claims that possession of R18 videos with the intent to distribute without a licence should be increased to 7 years and/or a fine of £1000 per copy of such a video.
    • "Such sentencing provision will (a) Send out a message to organised criminals not to line their pockets from the lucrative pornography market. (b) Inhabit [sic] consumers from seeking out such material."
  • Gtr Manchester police http://www.gmp.police.uk/ . Consultation response #224, Inspector Nick Howarth:
    • "Would like to see account of several child cartoon images e.g. Hentai material."
    • Asks for "Power to refer to treatment programme when considered necessary".
  • Suffolk police http://www.suffolk.police.uk/ . Consultation response #228, Constable A Gooch:
    • "We deal specifically with images of child abuse. As a result I have also seen numerous images of beastiality [sic] and extreme sexaul [sic] violence. The content of these images/movies are at times as equally disturbing as the images of children, yet we are powerless to deal with persons in possession of them. Just as we seek to protect children from abuse we should also look to protect the victims coerced/forced into participating for this extreme pornographic behaviour."
    • On sexual interference with a human corpse: "Maybe consideration could be given to the wording ie: dead or apparently dead."
    • "Consideration should be given to prevent defences of research/private investigation."
    • "Would consideration be given to an offence of "making" as with the P.O.C Act downloading images via the Internet constitutes an offence of "making"."
  • Kent police http://www.kent.police.uk/ . Consultation response #284, Anonymous Detective Sergeant:
    • Although there is no conclusive evidence there is emerging academic support that this material is used a means of desensitising children as part of the grooming process. ... In the same way that child images 'normalise and reinforce behaviour', extreme adult material will be a powerful contributor to fantasy aspect of an offender's cycle. There are also fears that exposure to extreme material will heighten stimulation levels and due to the lack of current self-regulation morality will become distorted. Some research that suggests that the Internet could lead to an increase in compulsive sexual behaviour."
    • Claims that the legislation should include written material about fantasy "child rape and murder".
[edit]

Other police organisations

  • The Police Superintendants Association of England and Wales responded to the consultation the PSAEW represents the interests of more than 1,600 Superintendents and Chief Superintendents. http://www.policesupers.com/ . Consultation response #333:
    • They answered that the law does not need to be strengthened. Questions the lack of definitive research. "Surely one would have expected such a link arising from research in countries where such material is readily available".
    • Refers specifically to "pornography that involves serious physical harm to non consenting participants" as material that should not be tolerated.
    • Points out that it would not be an offence to take part in the making of the film, but would be an offence to possess it.
    • "These questions appear to have a pejorative sense to them. The consultation document does not appear to have put forward the size of the "problem"."
  • The Police Federation of England and Wales, the representative body for over 136,000 Police Constables, Sergeants, Inspectors and Chief Inspectors. The Chairman and principle spokesman of the Police Federation is Mrs Jan Berry of Kent Police. http://www.polfed.org/default.asp . Consultation response #179, signed John Francis, General Secretary:
    • Supports the Government's view that the law requires strengthening, because "The Obscene Publications Act has fallen in to disrepute".
    • "[We] believe that there are some forms of pornographic material that are totally unacceptable and should not be toleranted by society. ... However, there are a number of areas which cause concern that have not been dealt with by this paper".
    • Refers to "private nudity images to be circulated, without the consent of a party involved in the image".
  • Chief Superintendent Alistair Helm, head of the Leicestershire force's specialist crime investigation department put in an individual contribution (consultation response #111), which appears to be identical as the official Leicestershire force response (it is unclear if the Government response counted them both, or not?)
  • British Association of Women in Policing [1] also gave a response (consultation response #201), by executive committee member Jackie Alexander (who is also a Detective Superintendent of Nottinghamshire police):
    • "While conslusive research results may not be available the experience of the police around child abuse images - e.g. Operation ORE - is that there is a link between viewing this material and offending 'hands on'. It also adds to the degradation of, particularly, women - both as a general view and of the women involved in the making of the material who - (as evidence around prostitution would indicate) - are likely to be 'victims' even if 'consenting' (e.g. victims of domestic abuse, drug abuse, grooming etc). Many women in videos/images are young and if consenting vulnerable by age."
    • Although "fully supportive", questions where the resources for policing it will come from.
[edit]

Non-consultation responses

Although the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) did not offer a response to the consultation Metropolitan Police Commander Dave Johnston, a spokesman for them said: "The police service welcomes this Home Office consultation. The Internet is being targeted more and more by those who create sites that specialise in sexual violence and other types of extreme perversion. The investigation into such matters proves to be very difficult due to the fact that many of the sites are abroad and outside the jurisdiction of UK law enforcement agencies. Opportunities for prosecution only exist when links to such sites are found in this country.” "The creation of new offences to deal with these matters would assist greatly in preventing the spread of such material”

Detective Inspector Ian Winton, of the Notts police sexual exploitation unit, said the new offence of possessing violent and extreme pornographic material will deter users. It would stop their habits escalating into acts of violence such as rape.

He said: This is a huge breakthrough for the police. Previously we have been unable to prosecute people for simply possessing more extreme pornography, such as material that shows the rape of women or bestiality. We will not hesitate in using this new legislation. Those convicted of this new offence will have to sign the sex offenders' register which will affect not just their relationship with friends and family but also their careers. It will make many users of extreme pornography think again.

In Scotland no individual forces responded but the Scottish Police Federation (SPF), ACPOS, The Scottish Police Authorities Conveners forum (SPACF), Association of Scottish Police Superintendents (ASPS) did and all cited technological advances as the main reason they consider a change in the law is needed. Three out of the four went on to add that it would be important to ensure that adequate enforcement provisions are developed along with the new legislation.

ASPS offered the view (in light of the fact that no detailed and relevant research has been carried out in the area.) that “exposure to extreme pornographic material, particulary at a young age, may irreparably adversely affect an individuals behaviour, psychological profile and social skills”.

ACPOS went further than this and claimed that it has been proven that the majority of paedophiles begin by collecting images and then pass through stages of fantasy and normalisation, which can lead to direct abuse of children. No evidence was cited. ACPOS then asserted, again without reference to any research, that the progression to acts of an obscene nature by individuals who collect this material cannot be ruled out.

Jan Berry, Chairman, Police Federation of England and Wales, gave evidence to the Commons Committee [2]. It turned out that she was talking about child pornography, and had to be corrected by an MP that the legislation was about adult pornography ("Oh, I am sorry. I thought that we were talking about children.") Nonetheless, she is allowed to continue arguing in favour of the law, even though she apparently does not have a clue what it proposes.

[edit]

References

Retrieved from "http://www.seenoevil.org.uk/wiki/index.php/Police"
Personal tools