Chris Langham...should he go to jail for having 15 fotos when other people get cautions for far worse?
Answers:
It has nothing to do with the number of images, its the images themselves!!!
These weren't some piccys that his mate gave him in the pub - these were images that he actively sought out, PAID FOR, downloaded and viewed again and again and again.
Those children would have been your child, your sister or brother, your niece or nephew, in fact any child that you know.
One of the biggest problems with child pornography (asides from the blantantly obvious) is that the viewer can eventually go on to act out their fantasties. That does happen.
This is not a comparible crime, if people commit this crime or likewise they go to jail - you don't get cautioned for having child pornography. The nature of your question leads me to think that you seem to think that having those 15 images of children being raped and beaten should be treated in the same way as a speeding offense...
give i chance may be not
When a person is arrested for downloading child porn, they usually have a stash of photos which are epic in size. However, the police only charge on what is called "sample charges", meaning just a few of the photos. This is a matter of convenience for the CPS and defence. The alternative would be that the accussed could face 10,000 charges for example. Clearly that would be troublesome for the jury.
If found guilty, the judge will sentence on all of the photos found and not just on the sample charges. This means that since Langham was found guilty of just 15 photos, he will face a bigger sentence as there was probably a lot more found. How many will be revealed at the sentencing hearing
they weren't just photos of naked children.
He had videos and photo's of children being violently raped and assaulted.
He's a fukcing pervert and needs to be locked up or even better have his u know whats removed
I think its rediculous to expect the public to belive that all this was to do with research . I think he should be castrated and imprisoned . As should all peodophiles
Anyone involved in child pornography in any way shape or form should be castrated and left to rot.
The law just went harsher on him because hes in the public eye so they can try to set an example and make it look like you will get a harsh sentence.
Yeah, he better go to jail.
He is going to Jail. He is awaiting sentencing. He will get around 2 - 3 years, but will likely be released early for good behaviour.
Just one of these sickening photos is enough.
what i'd like to know is...how do they go about tracing these poor kids whose images they find and giving them the help that they need...where are the kids parents, and do they find out too what has happened. ? it makes me sick //paedophiles should get the death penalty. there is nothing worse than the systematic rape and abuse of inocent children, by freaks like this little nonce. i would happily become a paedo hunter...i HATE them with my life.
Yes he should.
This case originally started out as a complaint of Indecent Assault against a Young girl which,gave the investigators the right to inspect Mr Langhams computer.
The images were discovered and of course he was duly charged with downloading and storing Indecent Images of children.
He was acquitted of the charge of Indecent Assault however,I believe some of the pictures were of the young girl which is why he was charged with distribution this,is a serious charge and will carry a sentence.
I agree with you when you say that "other"people get cautioned for far worse but,at the same time he needs to go to prison to teach him a lesson which,is you cannot use "stardom" as an excuse for abusing children which is what he did whether physically or otherwise.
There is little doubt as to his desire to download. The court heard of sickening abuse in the photo's. Lock him up, preferably in Holloway with the women.
I think I'll trust the judge to pass the appropriate sentence, rather than Y!A answerers, for a couple of simple reasons.
The judge actually has a legal training and knows what is appropriate for this scale of crime.
The judge actually heard the evidence, unlike Y!A answerers.
The fact that Langham has been refused bail, so will await sentencing in jail, gives a few clues about the nature of the sentence the judge is likely to pass.
The answers post by the user, for information only, FreeLawAnswer.com does not guarantee the right.
Answer question:
More Law Questions and Answers: