You do NOT have to register to read, post, listen or contribute. If you simply wish to remain fully anonymous, you can still contribute.

Enter what you see:
This image contains a scrambled text, it is using a combination of colors, font size, background, angle in order to disallow computer to automate reading. You will have to reproduce it to post on my homepage Tip: Reload page if you have difficulty reading characters
Lost Password?
No account yet? Register
King of Hits
Home arrow Legal arrow Thousands of photos...???
Thousands of photos...??? PDF Print E-mail
Monday, 09 June 2008
Just to explain - the police and CPS regularly and automatically increase the quantity of pictures when they charge someone of "owning photos" because it MAKES A BETTER STORY.

For example, clearly innocent pictures of mothers with babies will be listed as separate charges - they know they will be abandoned before trial or disallowed in standard practice by the trial judge but it MAKES A GREAT STORY and convinces the casual observer or media reader that the person is guilty.

Before my trial, no computers were seized or examined (Odd, I thought, until my defence team said they would have found nothing and had to submit this as evidence).

But 40 polaroid pictures were taken. My defence team asked me "Why did you have pictures of 40 teenagers?" - all perfectly normal and not onscene but still, 40 teens? I told them - they were FOUR different friends together and separate. And there had been hundreds of other photos (NOT taken) of them with their families, of couple together, of other friends etc) which had not been taken. FOUR teenagers in a few hundred photos would (rightly) have been seen as perfectly normal. FORTY pictures of teenagers sounded and implied something very different. Oh they know their stuff.

< Prev   Next >