Thursday, 15 October 2009

The State now taxes our eyes

Busy day out there

It is now illegal to possess an "offensive" image. I warned you this would happen. I have plenty of offensive images in my possession. My wedding photos for a start. Today, the first fine was levied.

The State has taxed our lungs, our stomachs, our brains, our deaths and our limbs. It is now taxing our eyes.

A Lowestoft teenager has become one of the first people to fall foul of a new law which bans the possession of “grossly offensive” pornographic images.

In January this year, a new law came into force as part of the Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008 making it an offence to possess any extreme images which are deemed to be “grossly offensive, disgusting or otherwise of an obscene character”.

Yesterday, Lowestoft teenager Damien Wentworth, of Laurel Road, was fined after police found a short video on his mobile telephone which contained an extreme image.

Wentworth pleaded guilty to possessing an extreme pornographic image.

His solicitor Richard Mann said: “Technically, he is guilty of the offence, but I would say that he didn't even know it was an offence to have this on his phone. It is a law which came into force this year, so it is hardly a surprise that he didn't know.”

“He was not putting it on the internet or distributing it to anybody.”

Wentworth was ordered to pay £175 in fines and costs. Magistrates also ordered the destruction of the image.

The new law covers any images, including those stored on mobile telephones, DVDs and on computer hard disks.


Anonymous said...

and thats after the eyes have been taxed to death by receiving the brain dissolving obligatory ubiquitous degenerative brainwashing Tele ; now THAT is an offensive source of offensive images well after all Tele isn't harmles is it

Joe Public said...

Careful OH, Dave will consider those images below your post to be offensive, and may consider prosecuting you.

anonemo said...

What if it's an old photo.

I.E. it's been in your "possession" since before this law was enacted. Wouldn't that be a "denial of natural justice" and come under the heading of "retrospective legislation", bastards!

mungle said...

Shit, I looked at a picture of Jacqui Smith earlier today, but I didnt save it. Does that count?

Shades Of Ansel said...

'Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008'..I'm having a problem understanding what this has to do with immigration...AH,perhaps it's those naughty terrorists.

WHO will deem an image to be offensive? One mans meat as they say ( pardon the pun ).So will all ART containing nudity now be deemed offensive? Where will this control end? In civil WAR

Anonymous said...

Total censorship will be done incrementally and is taking place as we speak. The criteria is so broad that they now have a pretext to take away anyones PC.

VotR said...

More petrol for the fire. Labour's funeral pyre.

Tuscan Tony said...


Old Holborn said...


Worse than that. You don't need to have thought it. You just need to have seen it to be guilty.


SO17 said...

Damn, it must have been bad.
Since being online I cant move for 'creampies' and 'bucacks'.

lilith said...

Offensive pictures? Like Gordon Brown's leer, scowl, pout or worst of all,smile? I'm in trouble. Hilary Clinton addressing the Northern Ireland Assembly? Berlusconi? Cherie Blair? James Blunt? Derek Draper? Andy Marr? Evan Davis? There really is no end to the offence I take at so many pictures.

Lorenzo said...

...and if they can't prove you saw it, they will hold you for ninety days until you think you saw it and sign a confession.

K. G. McEgan said...

Or the tree hugger arrested at Dover and forbidden to leave the country to attend a meeting abroad. Terrorist threat. Extreme kettling?

mungle said...

How very apt to juxtapose a photo of a grinning Hitler with this item. It's as if he is saying "this is what you fought for you silly buggers"

Old Holborn said...


What THEY find offensive is what THEY will fine you for, take your DNA, your fingerpints, your ID.

I really, really, really have had enough. EK was on the blog earlier quite prepared to be arrested, DNA'ed etc AND CRB checked just for the chance to protest on my walk.

I'm 47 years old. If it carries on like this, I'm happy to sign off, permanently, at 50.

12 people in China control more than a billion lives. Births, lives, deaths. They control it all. 12, just 12 people.

Sod that.

Whiskey. Marlboro Red, Revolver.

Anonymous said...

OH, bring it on then, I find Brown a complete and utter CUNT fucking wanker. Is that offensive. No,I find the Queen a complete cunt. I find ALL MPs complete and utter cunts and a waste of good air. I wish that Blair was dead the complete and utter cunt. Any more for any more.

K. G. McEgan said...

O'H why not point said revolver at the enemy and take one (or more) with you?

blindcyclistsunion said...

Notable for what's missing from the story.

They don't say what the image was of, where it came from, and perhaps more importantly, what worthless piece of statist scum decided to involve the long arm of the law.

Old Holborn said...


They didn't have to.

Welcome to hell.

You owe us £175

Anonymous said...

How can anything that consenting adults do be offensive if no one other than those already interested in the activity look at the images? If it was on a bus stop ad hoarding that would be different.

John Ozimek said...

At risk of blowing my own trumpet, I've been covering this since the start.

Thankfully we no longer live in Suffolk. On t'other hand, we don't keep extreme porn on our mobiles (or pc's, come to that) no reason to check.

This is a bad case, since it is the first and unless I hear different, I'd guess it is animal porn. I rather suspect that none of the lawyers involved knew what they were dealing with.

Luckily, Magistrate decisions do not bind any higher this does not develop the law here at all.

Anonymous said...

Whichever fucktard dreamed this one up would probably have a massive heart attack if they ever visited /b/. Or start furiously fapping...

Kinderling said...

Can't be animal porn because that's OK in Islam I've read.

Leg-iron said...

If he didn't distribute the image or put it on the internet... did the police happen to find it on his phone?

Random searches in case of non-Puritan imagery now?

We should Email fisting images to every MP so they all have 'extreme porn' on their computers. On second thoughts, no, that's a waste of time. The laws don't apply to them at all. Only to us.


banned said...

“grossly offensive, disgusting or otherwise of an obscene character”

Presumably something one would not wish ones servants to see ?

Simon said...

Don't forget, whichever shower of cunts gets in next time they're going to have 5 years unchallenged to censor, regulate and generally attack the internet.

Giolla said...

@Leg-Iron, yeah that's been puzzling me too. There's nothing in the linked to report to give any clue as to why the police happened to be looking through the content of his phone.

Perhaps they thought he'd taken photo's of them and needed to check that he didn't have material liable to be of use to terrorists.

Cylon said...

Out of curiosity, what did the "evil" image show?

And why did police even search the kid's cell phone?

Looking at my HD, heck, some of my links on my machine, I'm pretty sure I'd be locked up in the UK.

I fear this will spread all over Europe. In Germany (and here in Austria, too), our so called "leaders" have already discussed using police trojans and internet censorship (officially to fight pedophiles -which is an issue, yes, but that can be done smarter-, but the truth is rather obvious: to shut up people like me, people who just want to live free without the bloody government poking its stinking nose into everything I do.)

JuliaM said...

"Shit, I looked at a picture of Jacqui Smith earlier today, but I didnt save it. Does that count?"

Was she naked? If so, probably.

"This is a bad case, since it is the first and unless I hear different, I'd guess it is animal porn. I rather suspect that none of the lawyers involved knew what they were dealing with."

They didn't know about animal porn? Blimey, where are we getting lawyers from now?

"Out of curiosity, what did the "evil" image show?"

An 'extreme' image. That's all you need know...

Cylon said...

But... but... but...

What is "extreme"?

I must know!

Oh wait, I get it. I'm only supposed to know what the state wants me to know. Oh yes. Funny... looking at the history of my own country... we've been there before. That was some, well, 75 years ago and the whole show was run by a small guy with a silly moustache.

Then the Brits and the Yanks gave those in charge a damn good thrashing and the spooky episode was over.

And now all our governments are copying exactly that idea.

Oh yeah. Very smart.

At this rate I'll really go and live in that cave I found in Japan.

Delphius1 said...

This highlights a very un-publicised bit of new legislation that will make thousands of people criminals.

I blogged about this part of the Criminal Justice and Immigration Act when it was first proposed.
The wording of the act is so vague it catches a lot of the sick stuff that most people have downloaded in the past for a laugh. Its an internet/mobile phone rite of passage, but:

The thing is, the CJ&I violent pornography act goes further than the old Obscene Publications Act. Its now illegal to OWN those photos, not just to publish them. Worse still, ownership can get you 3 years jail time and even risk being put on the sex offenders register. Pass the photos to your mates and you can get 5 years for publication/distribution.

Here's more info:

Anonymous said...

I find pictures of Gordon 'That Cunt' Brown extremely disturbing as they reinforce the fact that there's a delusional fuckwit in charge in the UK - can I be jailed for seeing them? WTF has this to do with terrorism? Fuck all in my opinion - just another excuse for Plod & allies & supporters to throw their bully boy weight about - AGAIN. BTW, anyone know what's happening to that Plod Cunt charged with attacking the girl at the G20 demo? Or the other Police Cunt charged over the death of that chap, not part of the demo, who was on his way home? Seems to have gone very quiet - we need to bring this back into the full glare of publicity.

libertyscott said...

The worst nonsense are the teenagers now being prosecuted for stupidly taking nude photos of themselves and sending them around. One in the US was prosecuted for producing child porn because the girl was 15, so she is now a registered sex offender and her life is ruined, because she was a bit silly.

How soon before the state jumps on this easy target and ruins a few lives, when all the kids need is to be warned that they're being foolish.

Ratings and Recommendations by outbrain


Related Posts with Thumbnails