Timeline
From Seenoevil
This is a timeline of events relating to the criminalisation of possession of "extreme pornography".
Contents |
1991
Graham Coutts told psychiatrists he feared his thoughts may lead to criminal behaviour [1].
2003
March 14: Jane Longhurst murdered by Graham Coutts.
2004
February 3: Coutts found guilty of murder.
February 4: Liz Longhurst calls for some adult porn sites to be shut down [2].
February 5: UK police attempt to persuade other forces worldwide to shut down "websites with sexually violent content" [3].
February 9: MP Martin Salter calls for "violent" adult porn sites to be banned [4]. He tables an Early Day Motion calling for the Government to close down "Internet sites promoting necrophilia" and to conduct a review of the Obscene Publications Act and all other key legislation. [5] (The resultant law is far broader than just sites promoting necrophilia, and is not related to the Obscene Publications Act.)
February 24: David Blunkett urges the US to take action against adult Internet pornography [6].
March: Liz Longhurst meets with David Blunkett to urge "violent" adult sites to be shut down [7].
March: David Blunkett again urges the US to shut down "violent" adult sites [8][9].
March: Liz Longhurst launches petition. The launch is publicised by the national media and backed by MP Martin Salter [10][11]. The petition refers to "sites promoting violence against women" [12], yet the resultant law applies to consensual images that do not promote violence against women.
May 6, 18: Debated in House of Commons [13][14].
October 13: Debated in House of Lords [15].
November 23: Debated in House of Commons [16].
December 13: Debated in House of Commons [17].
December: The Liz Longhurst Petition reaches 30,000, receives further promotion by the BBC [18].
2005
February: Amnesty gives their support to the Longhurst campaign [19][20]. They later stated however their "involvement was not in any way related to the pornogrpahic content of the crime but purely to the violent murder of the victim". They stated they do "not take a position on pornography" and that "we would not want our work on violence against women to be assumed to be support for areas on which we have no position as yet" [21]. Even after this, MPs still continued to misleadingly claim that Amnesty supported their campaign against adult pornography [22].
August 30: Government announces plans to criminalise possession of "extreme pornography" [23], and publishes its "consultation" [24].
November: Liz Longhurst closes the petition [25].
2006
July 19: Lords overturn Coutts's murder conviction.
August 30: Government publishes "consultation response" [27], and announces intention to push ahead with plans despite the majority of responses opposing any change in the law whatsoever. Vernon Coaker falsely claims on BBC Radio 4's World at One that the majority of respondents were in favour of the Government’s proposals [28][29]. The initial mainstream media coverage does not mention any criticisms or opposition to the plans, however the BBC later reported they decided to change the way the covered the story as a result of extensive opposition from readers [30]. Several criticisms in mainstream media follow, ranging from The Guardian to The Daily Mail [31].
November 15: Plans to criminalise possession of "extreme porn" included in Queen's speech.
2007
June 20: The Government publishes the "Criminal Justice and Immigration Bill Regulatory Impact Assessments" [32][33]. The document is in parts significantly out of date with what is published only less than a week later, referring instead to definitions given in the consultation response almost a year earlier, and claiming that depictions of rape would be included.
June 26: Publication of the Criminalise Justice and Immigration Bill 2007. The plans for "extreme porn" are even broader than previously announced, extending the threshold from "serious disabling injury" to "serious injury", and also bringing extracts from legal films into the scope of the law.
July 4: Coutts found guilty on retrial.
September 28: The Government publishes the Rapid Evidence Assessment on "The evidence of harm to adults relating to exposure to extreme pornographic material", written by Catherine Itzin, Ann Taket and Liz Kelly [34]. The authors are known to have anti-porn agendas: Liz Kelly even endorsed a response by the Lilith Project to the Government's consultation, which was heavily in favour of the proposals, and even argued that all pornographic depictions of naked women be a criminal offence to possess [35]. The assessment failed to cite examples of participants harmed in the production of "extreme porn", only bringing up the allegations made against the 1972 film Deep Throat (which is legally available under a BBFC classification), and resorting to speculating about serial killers who privately make recordings of their victims. The section asking whether viewing such material contributes to sexual or violent offending focused only on studies involving men who were sex offenders, with the exception of one study involving 11 men who were in a treatment programme for "problematic pornography use". The assessment was heavily criticised by over forty academics [36].
October 8: House of Commons 2nd Reading [37].
October 16, 18, November 22, 28: Debated in House of Commons Committee [38][39]
2008
January 9: House of Commons 3rd Reading features no debate on the "extreme porn" clauses whatsoever, despite extensive criticisms in committee, and amendments being proposed [40].
January 22: House of Lords 2nd Reading [41].
March 3: House of Lords Committee Debate [42]
April 21: House of Lords Report Debate [43].
April 30: House of Lords 3rd Reading [44].
May 8: The bill receives Royal Assent.
2009
January: Date when the law is planned to come into force [45].
