I wonder who amongst his colleagues this copper had managed to upset? You can bet your life he has either upset someone high up, or discovered something in the "line of duty" he shouldn't have and needed to be silenced.

www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/christophe...liceman-gets-1561133

Sounds for all the world like he's had computer trawled through, and amongst porno pics they've found 53 - most of them unopened thumbnails - that "are of children under 18" including some of "children having sex".
1) How would they would know they know ages of those in the photographs?
2) 53 is about 1 page of an average web page containing porno pics.

I've spoken before of my thoughts of a "social engineering" plan in the west that began in earnest in the mid-late 90s. Casting my mind back as a young man, I also see that this period was also the time in which Porn became more explicit and widely available - "normal" in fact. So "normal" that the it's new found acceptabililty has yielded a generation of young people to whom it is not an "under the bed" secret but "the norm", just as recreation drugs have become too. At the same the creation of "Child Porn" and "Paedophilia" allowed them to bring in laws making any image they deem unacceptable to classed as "illegal" an indication that the person viewing the picture automatically becomes Public Enemy No.1. What started being grounded in law by virtue of truly harrowing images of genuine child abuse then becomes any pictures of children, and then any child under 18.
Given that men are naturally inclined to be aroused and attracted by youth and beauty as they are, due to Mother Nature, drawn towards the most of fertile females of the species - we now find that getting a boner over a buxom 17 yr old puts you in the same class as those who sexually abuse small sexless children. Not only that but, snuck in through the back door, we are seeing an increasing number of people being charged with possession of "extreme pornography" (ie forms of adult pornography).

It's like going back to the Old Testament, and Adam & Eve. Men are prisoners to their own natural urges.
We are all sexual perverts.

Cant see anything suspicious. Too assume the copper was innocent is as equally presumptuous to assume his guilt.

Chris Retro wrote:

We are all sexual perverts



Please type for yourself.

what on earth would an "internet sex offenders’ programme " do?

unless they know the people in the pix, how could they know their ages?

I was passing for 18 even when I was 30.

The Sun published sexy pics of 18s for profit for years yet escapes censure.

Aside from my reservations about convictions for these porn offences and how they are classed & graded, here's an insight into how Police Forces behaved with their own 15+ year ago, before this gift-wrapped issue of computer porn.

There was a copper with over 25 years service in Humberside Police - very "old school". Tough, no-nonsense, loud, coarse but a fair family man who was both feared and grudgingly respected by criminals. He smoked roll-ups, enjoyed a pint and was popular locally. He'd worked years in 'traffic' and become the stolen vehicles specialist, knew every car thief & ringer and did a sterling job. He didn't suffer fools though, and fell foul of Humberside Police's desire to disband the stolen vehicle unit to fund a helicopter... and decided to refuse to move. He'd been in the job long enough that they couldn't move him and complete their plans against his will - whatever the reason, they couldn't do it.
So the knives came out for this loyal respected policeman of many years service, and he was accused of harbouring the stolen vehicles. More innocents were dragged into this mellee in order to 'strengthen the case' - the recovery company with the force contract etc. He was suspended and accused of ringing stolen vehicles, attempts were made to 'plant' evidence and homes and businesses were driven to the edge of ruin, reputations destroyed.
Evidence was hard to make stick though - until it transpired this tough-talking "mans man" had a skeleton rattling in his closet - he had engaged some years previous in a homosexual relationship with a 'friend of the family' and they'd managed to get this chap to make a statement. There was no question of co-ercian or abuse, but this had begun when the chap was a few weeks short of his 16th birthday. All of a sudden a 2-year investigation into theft and fraud was dropped like a hot potato, the Recovery Company given their contract back (at the brink of going under after 2 years under criminal investigation) - Humberside Police had driven him to drink, drawn a confession for this "loving relationship" and this hard-working policeman was charged, convicted and served 2 years in prison amongst criminal s he'd helped convict over the years. 28 years loyal service was rewarded with the sack and loss of pension (he was arrested - how's this for timing - 2 days before his ill-health retirement was due to commence).
He served his time, and had just under 2 years freedom before he succumbed to brain cancer in his early 50s.

That is how the police 'deal with their own' if they no longer fit in the picture.
I dare say a few years later they'd have cut out the attempt to label him a thief & fraud and gone straight for his computer, and the 'relationship' would have come out that way.
The internet is many things, but is also an almighty rope with which to hang people. Who decided what is and isn't acceptable? All the porn sites I've seen have disclaimers as to age etc, doesn't this matter? Do they trace the source or just the images? How do they judge ages of people in photographs? How do they assume someones intentions when viewing an image?