www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2718803...sa-mother-Marge.html


Cartoons which are freely available on a Google image search for "Bart and Lisa shagging"

I presume that the CPS are preparing charges!!

I remember being at school students watching doctored Disney cartoons. The only threat was teachers banning you from PC's and password deleted by the headmaster.

"Smith, who is a full-time carer for his 87-year-old mother, was found guilty of nine counts of possessing prohibited images of children as young as eight"

I went to a promotional party for The Simpsons in 1994.

So Bart & Lisa are in their 30s at the least.

sheer, utter madness,

Alice Through The Looking Glass... everything was reversed and peculiar... yes, our world has become very peculiar indeed and reminds me of that alternative universe where lemmings rush over a cliff together and scorpions sting themselves to death rather than get burned in a ring of fire.

The human species has been in self destruct mode for several years.

But at least our fine police force and courts system is being used well in Portsmouth Giles...

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2718792...g-arms-cemetery.html

I hope poor Bart and Lisa are ok...

And just how did this come to the police's attention? The only reason they might have had an interest in him was because of his view that the age of consent and the incest laws needed changing, but that's a political viewpoint. So I take it that they had him under intensive surveillance and were intercepting all his net use, on the basis of a political view.

Sinister.

corevalue wrote:
And just how did this come to the police's attention? The only reason they might have had an interest in him was because of his view that the age of consent and the incest laws needed changing, but that's a political viewpoint. So I take it that they had him under intensive surveillance and were intercepting all his net use, on the basis of a political view.

Sinister.

Actually, corevalue, plausible though your explanation is, it is worse than that. What if Andrew Smith had the dirt on a police officer, or one of his buddies in the security state, and went to the police with a complaint? Perhaps the police then threatened him with a thorough investigation of his hard drive if he persisted in making their lives difficult. How can we prevent the police from having and relying on the power to threaten people in this way? The more sweeping the definitions of crimes, and the more invasive the surveillance state, the more vulnerable we are to this kind of abuse.

Under current practices, if Edward Snowden is to believed, it seems likely that they were able to get everything they needed on Andrew Smith from a simple database search bringing up every URL he ever requested.

Am I exaggerating? The point is, though your explanation seems more likely, mine is possible, and as long as it is possible, this is the power the police increasingly have.

For example, do you remember the guy that caught the video images of the Met cop killing Ian Tomlinson? Two weeks earlier the Commissioner had flatly denied any contact between the Met and Ian Tomlinson. The IPCC weren't even investigating. The cops had managed to persuade the Coroner's Office to hire a dodgy pathologist who found that he had died of a heart attack and, surprise surprise, the conclusion had leaked out into the media, even as the police themselves, who normally wouldn't be allowed to see it, were showing only a redacted copy to the family, the primary beneficiaries of such a report.

Now it turns out this passing merchant banker happened to have the whole thing on video. He went to The Guardian. By a most propitious coincidence I have yet to understand representatives of the Met Police showed up at The Guardian's offices at about the same time arguing the video should not be published. The Guardian published anyway and the rest is history.

But what if the cops had said to Mr. Banker, the copyright owner, "If you proceed with this we will of course thoroughly investigate the crime you allege against this cop, evidenced by this video, but we will also thoroughly investigate you and your hard drive, as is our job"? Could this perhaps have had an intimidating effect on Mr. Banker? Now maybe he is a rare, pure soul who can be sure he has nothing to fear and has broken no laws. Maybe he has a team of lawyers who can advise him daily on the latest legislation and can constrain the contents of his hard drive accordingly. Maybe he has never contacted anyone or visited any websites he wouldn't want his wife to know about. Then again, maybe not. Or maybe he's a poor banker and can't afford the lawyers so can't quite be sure. Yes. I think this may have an intimidating effect sufficient to swing the balance in some cases. In those cases the public at large will never see the videos and the police will be able to cover up their crimes all the more effectively.

We should recognize the legitimate authority of the police, but we should never trust them unquestioningly, and when we give them sweeping powers like this we give them too much power, precisely because we can't trust them.