By xDanx - 9 Jun 20 2:16 PM
Basically I am on the SOR for the next 7.5 years (10 year order) and I am under SHPO restrictions, I was charged for "making" of indecent images which in my opinion is wrong as technically it should be possession, but due to my solicitors not giving me any information regarding evidence, or any opportunity to dispute said evidence I am now stuck with this conviction. I will happily share more of my experiences at a later date when relevant, but for now I have an issue I hope some others could shed some light on regarding SHPO restrictions and there definitions.
One of my orders states I am not to intentionally delete history or any other file which records internet or file browsing history, my PPU officer claims that by deleting ANY form of data will be in breach of this order. An example would be, If i download a demo on to my console and then later purchase the full game, I no longer need the demo and want to delete it. Does the order really prohibit me from deleting a game that is essentially "offline"? example 2. I make a document on my computer which I print out and later do not need, Does this order legally stop me from deleting my own personal data?
I would appreciate any insight over this as it is seriously driving me crazy. I would just like to say for the record that I have followed my orders including the ridiculous ones imposed by my PPU officer.
|
By xDanx - 26 Jun 20 4:15 AM
+x+x+x+xpunter99 Speaking more on the whole 'making, possession', I dug through some of the emails I had sent my solicitor and he included a pdf file which was a guideline on sexual offences. Same file can be found here https://www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/Sexual-offences-definitive-guideline-Web.pdf. It states the following: "Production includes the taking or making of any image at source, for instance the original image. Making an image by simple downloading should be treated as possession for the purposes of sentencing"
I then found this online by the CPS dated from 2018 https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/indecent-and-prohibited-images-children which in my view contradicts what is said in the above guidelines ."Opening an attachment to an email containing an image"
"Downloading an image from a website onto a computer screen"
This was also quite an interesting read which I will also include http://www.dilloway.co.uk/definition-of-indecent-image-offences.htmlIn short, the courts are simply ignoring their own guidelines so that people get longer convictions because those who are issued with 'making' make better headlines which in turn, makes the public think the offence is more serious than it actually is. Followed by inconsistent restrictions given via SOPO / SHPO which are only place for individuals to fail. Moving on to my PPU, I am under no orders to have any monitoring software installed, and even if it was offered to me now I will not be accepting it. I am happy to comply with his instructions until I have all the information from impartial and legal advice which will later be challenged. I respect your statement about giving up article 8 if you allow it to be installed. However if one thing has been proven time and time again is that the police will use everything they can against you. Because in their eyes everyone is guilty until proven innocent. I did question my SHPO with the barrister however he completely failed to take any notes and pretty much skipped 80% of the issues I had. Ultimately the judge threw out his arguments and I was forced to have them imposed on me. In all honesty my head was not in the right place at the time and had I known what I know now the out come would of been completely different. But I suppose that is how certain cases are won, give as less defense to defendants as possible and cause panic and fear for better results. On the making point, you are right that it sounds worse, to the public, but you don't get a longer sentence for making a copy by downloading. Making, in that sense, is treated as possession, for sentencing purposes. I agree that sentencing guidelines are written to imply that making is the same as production and it's true that production is treated as a much worse offence than possession. But the judges all know that making a copy is to be treated as possession, when they pass sentence. My barrister made exactly that point, to the judge, just to remind him. I hope you don't mind me saying so, but you seem very aggreived. Angry at your legal team, the police, the law etc. I felt much the same emotions, after being arrested and convicted. I think it was really just anger at myself, for getting caught. Those feelings will pass, with time. The stress of the whole process, the trauma of the arrest, the fear I felt while waiting for sentencing, the intrusive visits from PPU etc. is immense and like you, my head wasn't in the right place, a lot of the time. My emotions were all over the place and from a mental health perspective, the effects are a lot like PTSD. You feel like the whole world is against you. But there are people on your side, like the guys on this forum for example. I wish you all the best, for the future. Take care. I find it interesting that your barrister reminded the judge of the guidelines regarding, mine did nothing of the sort. I had no idea until I started doing my own research which I have shared. you are right in thinking that I am aggrieved and angry not only at my solicitor / police, but the whole system. I am angry because police have twisted and reworded reports to fit their narrative, claimed all of my devices tested positive which I know to be untrue, but refuse to give me details. They claim my offence dates back 10+years which is also untrue plus impossible and has fallen on deaf ears. My solicitor despite many requests never informed me or allowed me any chance to review and dispute evidence later claiming it would be illegal, he simply told me to plead guilty and I would not go to prison which I did when brought to Magistrates. Even to this day I have little knowledge or understanding of what I have pleaded guilty to and they are still refusing to give me this information. I argued the charge of making with solicitor and said it should be possession but did nothing to change or even understand this. In short everyone I was involved with in my case have simply not done their jobs and I have felt for some years mistreated and a victim of negligence. I have struggled with my mental health over the years even before all this started, it is difficult to let go of how all this has made me feel but I can say I am using those feelings in a positive way to keep strong and fight for what I know is wrong. Mine was the same, I've yet to see an order thats inline with a court of appeal ruling https://www.casemine.com/judgement/uk/5a8ff7a360d03e7f57eb094c
Were you also denied access to review evidence being used against you?
|
|