Re: Blind Faith

I think I was suffering a bit from reply fatigue when I answered your comments, so apologies and ...

Anyway, I know there have been many cases of ridiculous accusations regarding what is obscene and what is art. I know all about Sally Mann, Jock Sturges, Ron Oliver, Graham Ovenden, etc. I doubt I have not heard about and seen the majority of these cases since I did as much searching (and ownership) as the next person attracted to beautiful young girls. But what I was saying was that these issues are really peripheral when considering the true amount of abusive images in circulation which mostly are actually abusive rather than art. Considering the COPINE scale ranges from 1 to 10 the "art" images might rate a 2 if they are considered at all indecent, which is a bit ludicrous considering most can be bought in bookshops or over the Internet. It seems that many people who are not paedophiles could get into trouble these days when photographing or videoing very young children, for Youtube perhaps, as although fully clothed they might pose in what could be construed as an erotic pose whilst dancing to music and emulating their pop idols. This would equate to level 5 on the COPINE scale. WTF???

However, the number and rating of images that would be considered to be grossly indecent or obscene is very large and as the 29 TB mention indicates these will not be about kids showing their panties or dancing erotically but are all about child abuse.

I can't speak for the LEA's as to why they will not disclose such information but you will find descriptions of what they depict if you look hard enough.