| Posted By |
Message |
| DavidNewland PRO Thu 7th Aug 2008 12:51
|
http://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/news/Photographer-prosecuted-for-fairy-39child.4359539.jp
This is getting sadder by the moment.
If the parents actually requested photo's of this nature ( faeries ) in the first place and were at the photoshoots themselves then case going to court is ridiculous but then to actually be charged as well ??
So why werent my parents arrested along with every other parent who took photo's of their newly born babies ?
So many posters and competitions with a naked smiling child in black and white winning competitions without incident.
So many things lately are very wrongly now labelled as child pornography.
Where will the line be drawn before everything is classed as this ?
|
| Pondy PRO Thu 7th Aug 2008 13:01
|
Passing sentence, Judge Lawler QC added: "You always acted perfectly properly and their parents were perfectly law-abiding, sensible people who cared for their children."
So why did he give him community service??
Thanks to our controlling fine obsessed govt. we have lost use of all common sense.
|
| DavidNewland PRO Thu 7th Aug 2008 13:40
|
If the ( ridiculous ) charge held, why werent the parents charged with soliticiting child pornography ?
I cant get my head around any of this.
Someone pinch me ( and yes I am over 18 ).
|
| Lensvision Thu 7th Aug 2008 15:27
|
About time they started prosecuting Anne Geddes...........
|
| DavidNewland PRO Thu 7th Aug 2008 15:57
|
That's the problem - so many companies specialise in the cute baby photography market.
So they'll all be closed down and put on the sex offenders register?
I'm all for criminal charges being brought against child pornography rings which deal in unspeakable acts - that is not in dispute.
But this is not even a far cry away from anything close to being pornographic. And the children in question were put in no danger or abused in any way shape or form.
This was not even someone taking photo of his own or someone elses kids in a public place.
This was arranged and in the privacy of a studio.
Bring in the parents not only requesting it but also being present at the sessions how on earth is the photographer to blame ?
|
| Jagged PRO Thu 7th Aug 2008 17:30
|
Jesus wept, what a terrifying state this stupid country is in. Government policy dictated by the gutter press leads us to judicial idiocy.
That judge must be one serious pervert if he finds anything prurient in innocent images of naked kids larking about as fairies.
I imagine he's taken a set of prints home with him and is now wanking furiously in his back room along with the editors of The News of The World and The Daily Mail.
|
| genese PRO Thu 7th Aug 2008 20:30
|
does that mean midwifes and doctors are to be sued for touching children ?
ROFLMAO @ jagged
|
| jomoud PRO Mon 11th Aug 2008 13:23
|
This is unfrigginbelievable!!!!!
|
| |
156,996 members
2,180,045 photos
5,876,685 comments
