1398 users online (272 members and 1126 guests)  



Websleuths News


Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 42
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    10,579

    UK - Respected British lecturer, child protection expert hit with child porn charges

    Another fox in the chicken house. Just like William Ayres and James Krivaksca, this slimy doctor trained and wrote about child protection!! No doubt he will find a million reasons as to why he needed to have child porn on his computer. But please note that he's not just charged with possession but also production of child pornography. Released on unconditional bail. Does this mean, like with so many other wealthy offenders, that we'll spend the next five years looking for him while he continues his crimes?

    http://www.eveningstar.co.uk/news/le...yPageLayout.ot


    Lecturer and child protection expert on child porn charges


    "A UNIVERSITY Campus Suffolk lecturer and child protection expert has appeared in court on child pornography charges. Kevin Pettican, a programme leader for social work at the Ipswich university, is facing nine allegations of making indecent photographs of a child and a further accusation of possessing indecent photographs of a child...."

    and


    "....The magistrates were told the allegations centre on 92 images. These images are said to range from level one to four. Level four is the second most serious category of child pornography...."

    and

    "Pettican also focused on teaching and learning opportunities for child care and child protection professionals. He also spoke about working with non-government organisations and regional government to create a child protection system...."

    more at link

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    1,072
    He pled guilty today. He will be sentenced the week of 9/27/2010.

    http://www.eadt.co.uk/news/lecturer_...arges_1_623325
    My posts contain my opinions only.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    10,579
    From the link above:

    "Kevin Pettican appeared at Ipswich Crown Court this morning where he admitted nine charges of making indecent images of children and one of possessing indecent photographs of children."


    I'm assuming that "making indecent images of children" means the production of child pornography. So this man photographed a child in an indecent manner. Shame. There is no way that this just suddenly "happened" at age 63. This highly respected man has traveled extensively. Hopefully past victims will now feel validated enough to come forward. My prayers are with his victims.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    12
    I am not defending the charges against Mr Pettican at all, but I did want to clarify that "making indecent images of children" is mainly related to the downloading of images from the internet. Therefore there is no proof from the articles relating to the case that he took part in the activity of photographing children.
    I just wanted to say that because sometimes the wording of legal matters makes things appear as they may not be.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Maryland
    Posts
    5,673
    Quote Originally Posted by JohnnyCashFan View Post
    I am not defending the charges against Mr Pettican at all, but I did want to clarify that "making indecent images of children" is mainly related to the downloading of images from the internet. Therefore there is no proof from the articles relating to the case that he took part in the activity of photographing children.
    I just wanted to say that because sometimes the wording of legal matters makes things appear as they may not be.

    I am not sure that you are correct. Downloading images is most commonly referred to as Possession of Child Pornography. Making Indecent Images usually refers to the Production of Child Pornography. Unless the definitions are different in the UK.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    12
    "The downloading and/or printing of computer data of indecent images of children from the internet, is capable of amounting to an offence of "making" the image contrary to section 1 (1) (a) of the Protection of Children Act 1978. See R v Bowden [2000] 1 Cr.App.R. 438 (Archbold: 31- 108a)" (http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/h_to_k/i...s_of_children/)

    Mr Pettican is from the UK and the law under which he is charged would be British law.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    10,579
    JohnnyCashFan--You bring up an interesting point. No doubt there are some differences and I really want to understand just what Mr. Pettican has done. I very much want to educate myself about this crime.

    The article states that "he admitted nine charges of making indecent images of children and one of possessing indecent photographs of children."

    I'd like to understand how these charges compare with the US version--possession and production. Downloading images or videos or collecting print copies is typically called possession of child porn. Photographing children is typically called the production of child porn. I'd also like to understand why the charges use the words, images and photographs. Are the terms interchangeable or not?

    Please, anyone jump in and correct me or help.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    10,579
    Not my favorite news source but I'll try anything I can to find info:

    http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage...rn-charge.html

    "Prosecutor Shini Cooksley said the allegations centred on 92 sick images he is accused of possessing, ranging from level one to 25 pictures graded level four.

    Level four is the second most serious category of child pornography."


    This tells us that 25 of the 92 images he possessed were quite horrid. However, it still does not address the "nine counts of making indecent photographs". It could be a technicality but I am still curious. I notice that each article is careful to say "possess the image" and "make the photograph". That's what concerns me.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    10,579
    A definition of the five levels of child pornography in the UK:

    http://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/pro...PornographyLaw

    "...The UK Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) accepted, subject to one revision, the Panel's analysis of increasing seriousness by reference to five different levels of activity:

    1) images depicting erotic posing with no sexual activity
    2) sexual activity between children, or solo masturbation by a child
    3) non-penetrative sexual activity between adults and children
    4) penetrative sexual activity between children and adults
    5) sadism or bestiality


    Just to be clear, Mr. Pettican possessed 25 images graded Level 4. Not OK.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    10,579
    Another interesting site full of explanations of the laws pertaining to child pornography in the UK:

    http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/h_to_k/i...s_of_children/

    Definitions of images, photographs, pseudo-photographs, tracings, and electronic tracings. I'm not certain but electronic tracing sounds like downloading on the computer.


  11. #11
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    10,579
    I guess Mr. Pettican couldn't plead ignorance. Here's a powerpoint presentation he did with social workers urging them to "find the child's voice in your work" and reminding them about dignity and respect. He also helpfully points out that sexual abuse includes the exploitation of children through pornography.

    http://www.laurea.fi/internet/en/03_...inPettican.pdf

    Mr. Pettican, the more I read, the more disgusted I am!!

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    910
    What is wrong with these people? Do we have to start putting our guard up with every pediatrician, psychiatrist and other doctors who work with kids?

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    2,401
    Quote Originally Posted by Mercyneal View Post
    What is wrong with these people? Do we have to start putting our guard up with every pediatrician, psychiatrist and other doctors who work with kids?
    Yes.
    The predators hunt where they have the most and easiest access to the most vulnerable prey.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    12
    I believe the legal terminology is different in the UK.
    Level 1 photos could technically be as simple as your own daughter in a swimming costume doing some kind of 'model' pose. I know some people have had pictures like that of their own children and been investigated. So for someone to be charged with that, it'd have to be viewed in context i.e. not their own children.
    Beyond that, in my mind EVERY category of photos is wrong and like I previously said I do not even begin to defend the charges to which Mr Pettican has pleaded guilty and his background makes it difficult to 'stomach'.
    However, I do feel it's important to be aware of the terminology. My Pettican's life will be very difficult now and most would say they don't care about that but he shouldn't be found guilty in society of a crime he may not have committed.
    Also, newspapers select their wording carefully, that's how they sell papers. So there will always be an element of sensationalism.

    And in terms of 'putting our guard up....". I think you do need to be aware. If someone has a predatory nature then it could be they go into a profession whereby they can be close to those they are a danger to. That isn't just limited to children, it could also be towards the elderly or those who can be 'overpowered' such as those with a disability.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Maryland
    Posts
    5,673
    Also, newspapers select their wording carefully, that's how they sell papers. So there will always be an element of sensationalism.
    I disagree with this. Yes, newspapers sensationalize, however they are also generally careful to have their facts straight for fear of being sued. I can't see that they would change the wording of the charges against this man. I think the charges are what they are. Possession, as well as making child pornography. They are two different activities that have been separately charged.

Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast


Similar Threads

  1. GUILTY CA - HS coach Melvin Flemings faces child sex assault & child porn charges
    By Missizzy in forum Recently Sentenced and Beyond
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 07-22-2016, 04:01 AM
  2. PA - Child Porn Charges Filed-massive amounts of online child pornography.
    By mysteriew in forum Crimes-Spotlight on Children
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 12-03-2013, 12:34 PM
  3. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 02-14-2012, 12:28 PM
  4. Replies: 10
    Last Post: 12-17-2010, 01:56 AM
  5. Child Online Protection Act; Feds seek Google data in child porn case
    By PrayersForMaura in forum General Information & Discussion
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 01-25-2006, 02:46 PM