no-the 'only ' bit was in reference to the post before.
But there are categories and varying degrees of crime and if he only got 4 moths it indicates to me he wasn't in the worst category.
But I still have doubts that 'looking' can really be a crime..although it's the downloading and possession that gets people busted.
It's a question I've asked many and I've yet to get a reply-if looking is repeating the crime each time as claimed...then what happens when judges, policemen, juries and court officials look at pics ?. Is the crime temporarily suspended?
And could it be claimed that when the media published or broadcast images of the beheadings of captives in Iraq were they assisting the crime and was the public doing the crime by viewing?
I don't know the answer and I reckon I'll never get one.
***********************
Although there is a bit of an answer...a few years ago police in Oz sent out photographs of an abused girl to hundreds of school teachers around NSW state in an effort to identify her.
But instead of censoring the photo they sent the full pic..body and all. Did they abuse the girl again by doing so and did all the teachers by looking at it ?(and who knows if some didn't keep the pic and pass it on )
The police weren't reprimanded and the teachers were simply asked to delete the pic..and the authorities were back claiming that viewing was a crime within weeks. When the law is full of conundrums it gets a bit sticky!