Feeds

Holiday snaps? Er, no - criminal porn

Know the difference - or you could be in trouble

Providing a secure and efficient Helpdesk

Ignorance of the law is no excuse. Nor is it especially clever, if you’re voluntarily handing your PC over to the police to assist them in their inquiries, not to understand the difference between “holiday snaps” and pictures of a criminally pornographic or indecent nature.

That, however, was the fairly elementary mistake made by Roger Bohling, 57, of The Fairway, Westella in North Yorkshire, as reported in this week's Hull and East Rig Mail. Bohling’s 18-year-old son Russell disappeared some six months ago and, in a desperate effort to help the police find him, Bohling happily handed over his computer and discs. They turned out to contain some 484 indecent images of children and a further 28 bestiality pics and movies featuring dogs and horses.

The images were accessed after payment was made by credit card and then downloaded onto a third party's computer. Bohling subsequently copied the files to his computer.

According to prosecutor Karen Quintick, appearing in Beverley Magistrates’ Court earlier this week, the first set of images were "of young children and pre-teens wearing clothes and posing to reveal their underwear".

Although deemed to be indecent, these images were nonetheless classed as "level one", which is at the low end of the scale of indecency.

Other images on the computer were classed as "extreme pornography".

In mitigation, Bohling's defence lawyer, Lawrence Watts, told the court that Bohling had never intended to break the law. He said: "He didn't understand that a photograph in which no sexual activity was depicted could be seen as indecent."

In an interview with the Hull Daily Mail Bohling claimed he had no interest in children. He explained that the photographs of children in their underwear were like "holiday snaps", and added: "I handed my computer to police knowing there were images there because I had to help them find Russell despite the consequences for me. I deeply regret the embarrassment to my family."

Roger Bohling pleaded guilty to 11 counts of possessing indecent images of children and animals.

He was ordered to sign the sex offenders register and released on unconditional bail, pending sentencing at Hull Crown Court on 20 September. ®

Choosing a cloud hosting partner with confidence

More from The Register

next story
WHY did Sunday Mirror stoop to slurping selfies for smut sting?
Tabloid splashes, MP resigns - but there's a BIG copyright issue here
Spies, avert eyes! Tim Berners-Lee demands a UK digital bill of rights
Lobbies tetchy MPs 'to end indiscriminate online surveillance'
How the FLAC do I tell MP3s from lossless audio?
Can you hear the difference? Can anyone?
Google hits back at 'Dear Rupert' over search dominance claims
Choc Factory sniffs: 'We're not pirate-lovers - also, you publish The Sun'
EU to accuse Ireland of giving Apple an overly peachy tax deal – report
Probe expected to say single-digit rate was unlawful
Inequality increasing? BOLLOCKS! You heard me: 'Screw the 1%'
There's morality and then there's economics ...
While you queued for an iPhone 6, Apple's Cook sold shares worth $35m
Right before the stock took a 3.8% dive amid bent and broken mobe drama
prev story

Whitepapers

A strategic approach to identity relationship management
ForgeRock commissioned Forrester to evaluate companies’ IAM practices and requirements when it comes to customer-facing scenarios versus employee-facing ones.
Storage capacity and performance optimization at Mizuno USA
Mizuno USA turn to Tegile storage technology to solve both their SAN and backup issues.
High Performance for All
While HPC is not new, it has traditionally been seen as a specialist area – is it now geared up to meet more mainstream requirements?
Beginner's guide to SSL certificates
De-mystify the technology involved and give you the information you need to make the best decision when considering your online security options.
Security for virtualized datacentres
Legacy security solutions are inefficient due to the architectural differences between physical and virtual environments.