UK violent image laws

[MMI]

its also now the first time in modern history that instead of the prosecutor having to prove your guilt (all he has to do is show the pics lol) you have to prove your innocence!

I'm not sure you have got that right. It is necessary first for the prosecution to prove that the image comes within the meaning of "extreme pornographic image" as defined in s64(2), then, if it does, you can produce as your defence, evidence that one of the matters mentioned in s66(2) applies. You may have other defences as well.

There have always been pornography laws in England - cf Lady Chatterley's Lover. Look what they did to Oscar Wilde. Do you remember the prosecution of the producers of The Romans in Britain?

Not to seem complacent, I think the judiciary will probably apply this new legislation with a degree of caution and prudence. Otherwise, many of our avatars would come within s64(6)(b), and I don't think that's what's intended.

[mkemse]

I'm not sure you have got that right. It is necessary first for the prosecution to prove that the image comes within the meaning of "extreme pornographic image" as defined in s64(2), then, if it does, you can produce as your defence, evidence that one of the matters mentioned in s66(2) applies. You may have other defences as well.

There have always been pornography laws in England - cf Lady Chatterley's Lover. Look what they did to Oscar Wilde. Do you remember the prosecution of the producers of The Romans in Britain?

Not to seem complacent, I think the judiciary will probably apply this new legislation with a degree of caution and prudence. Otherwise, many of our avatars would come within s64(6)(b), and I don't think that's what's intended.

it is all just a quote from the same article i posted by date, all i did was look it, but it did say a Federal Judge ruled that the burden of Proof was on the Prosecution not the Defendent
A Judge even rules that a man who was cgaredwith child pornogrpahy both real and "virutal" did not have toopne his computer hard drivr since the password was a "virtual one" in his head and that of ot was in a wall safe the key would be a real physcial item the wholei ssue here i guess is the use of the world "virutal" what is what in not

i have no opinoin on it one way or another justreplying to a post on the topic, but do i condone child poronography NO WAY be it i real or virutal, to me both are still illegal regardless of what the courts say, but that is just my opnion

[icey]

I'm not sure you have got that right. It is necessary first for the prosecution to prove that the image comes within the meaning of "extreme pornographic image" as defined in s64(2), then, if it does, you can produce as your defence, evidence that one of the matters mentioned in s66(2) applies. You may have other defences as well.

There have always been pornography laws in England - cf Lady Chatterley's Lover. Look what they did to Oscar Wilde. Do you remember the prosecution of the producers of The Romans in Britain?

Not to seem complacent, I think the judiciary will probably apply this new legislation with a degree of caution and prudence. Otherwise, many of our avatars would come within s64(6)(b), and I don't think that's what's intended.

we looked into it at length and the burden is on the defence to prove their innocence, its actually at the prosecutors personal discretion as to whether he/she feels it to be pornographic and violent its the first time that personal opinion will come into play (legally anyway) and as far as we can see (though i have been known to be wrong many times lol) those are the defences as stated in OP,the bill was passed only a couple of days ago as re-wording and some revisions were deemed necassary ie as to what constitutes violent pornographic images,what defence can be used, what appears to be realistic actually includes,to make it as water tight as possible.

already in some districts sergeant officers have stated to the media they will be cracking down on these 'terrible' criminals and will be making as many raids and arrests as possible.

im wondering if i can use having them for educational or artistic purposes as a defence

in fact going off subject a little,when we began really researching we came across so many new or proposed rulings covering all areas its frightening, for eg a judge now in most trials other than serious offences such as rape,murder etc can decide whether a jury should be used or not.

parts of a defendants statement may now be blacked out if the judge deems it not neccasary, the defendant at the judges and prosecutors discretion may not be allowed to see any statements or be informed of anything used as evidence. its amazing what you dig up when you really look into it.
anyone over the age of 14 has to provide dna samples if stopped in the street and faces arrest and possible prosecution on refusal.

people will not be able to add anything to their first original statements ..not sure if that ones actually being passed at this moment in time.