theForum is run by the charity Unlock. We do not actively moderate, monitor or edit contributions but we may intervene and take any action as we think necessary. Further details can be found in our terms of use. If you have any concerns over the contents on our site, please either register those concerns using the report-a-post button or email us at forum@unlock.org.uk.


illegal images allegedly distributed, but no devices seized?


illegal images allegedly distributed, but no devices seized?

Author
Message
punter99
punter99
Supreme Being
Supreme Being (55K reputation)Supreme Being (55K reputation)Supreme Being (55K reputation)Supreme Being (55K reputation)Supreme Being (55K reputation)Supreme Being (55K reputation)Supreme Being (55K reputation)Supreme Being (55K reputation)Supreme Being (55K reputation)

Group: Forum Members
Posts: 721, Visits: 5.3K
This is an odd situation. Everyone is obsessed with it being the BBC and wondering who the presenter is, but I'm more interested in the police procedure. If you leave aside the fact that it's the BBC and just imagine an ordinary person and an ordinary employer, then what is going on?

The parents complained to the employer first, and then to the papers, but not to the police. The employer initially ignored them, but then they called in the police, who say there is no formal investigation, because no formal allegation has been made?

We all know what would happen, if this were an ordinary person and not a celebrity. A dawn raid, all devices taken and the person left in limbo for 2 years, while the devices are waiting to be checked, before eventually finding out if charges are to be brought.

Surely the police should now be knocking on the individuals door at 6am and seizing every device in their property? It's nothing to do with the employer, unless the devices that were used, belonged to the employer.

By waiting, the police are giving the alleged suspect an opportunity to wipe their phone and destroy any evidence. There could be other images, of other young people, on that persons devices. There could be other conversations with other young people, which were illegal.

The only reason for not arresting and interviewing the suspect, is doubt over if and when the alleged offence occured. If it was 3 years ago, then the evidence may no longer exist, but the only way to establish that would be to seize all the devices and examine them.

The young person has denied that anything happened, but that's hardly surprising, because they would also be guilty of an offence, it it were true. So the police also need to seize the young person's devices and interview them as well, but it doesn't appear they have done that either. Again, by waiting they have allowed that young person to delete any incriminating conversations or images from their phone.

Of course these are all just allegations at this stage, but don't the police already have enough reasonable suspicion to bring someone in for a "voluntary" interview?

The only thing that makes this case different, is that the police have lost the element of surprise. They may not think there is much point in doing an investigation anymore, because, thanks to the Sun, the suspects have had so much time to get rid of the evidence, that there will be nothing left for them to find.
GO


Similar Topics


As a small but national charity, we rely on charitable grants and individual donations to continue running theForum. We do not deliver government services. By being independent, we are able to respond to the needs of the people with convictions. Help us keep theForum going.

Donate Online

Login
Existing Account
Email Address:


Password:


Select a Forum....
























































































































































































theForum


Search