On the theme of PC the strangeness that infects the Western world at the present time .....
...... a female art student at Lincoln University was charged with"revenge porn".
The reason .... for submitting a photo of a male nude, as a normal part of her coursework. The picture was 'artistic' in that there was no genitalia, not even an identifiable face on the study, which would have been displayed at the end of term, when its normal for art students work to be shown in a studio.
Now, all would have been well, if that was all there was to the story ..... but she was proud of her work and was in the habit of uploading her course work on to her Facebook page. It was at this point that things went awry. An ex-boyfriend(?) saw the image of the male nude on the page, and identified it as being his torso.
The fact that it had been cropped, so that the head wasn't visible, nor indeed any other identifying features, didn't prevent this self obsessed narcissistic idiot from claiming that it was him. Now this immediately brought up the question of 'revenge porn,' which, since 2014, has been a criminal offence in the UK. In the words of the government, it applies to any person "who maliciously shares sexually explicit pictures of former partners, will face prosecution under new laws".
However one might think that the highly paid lawyers who advise the police and Crown Prosecution Service on how to interpret laws, and when they have been broken, might have said that the intention of the act was not meant to cover artistic endeavours, or even simply that as no one could possibly identify the unnamed figure in the image, then it couldn't be 'revenge porn,' as it couldn't have been 'maliciously shared.'
Unfortunately as is also usual these days, common sense didn't stop this actually getting to court. Where the case promptly collapsed, when the prosecutors declined to present any evidence to support the prosecution (mainly as there was none) .... one has to ask why it was only at this stage, while in the court room at great public expense, that the prosecutors suddenly realised that their case had no substance.
The Judge, Philip St John, didn't see any humour in the situation, and took the prosecutors to task, pointing out that the fact that the image was impossible to be identified as anyone, and didn't breach any decency laws, meant that there was, and never had been any case to answer. The student was cleared of the charges of 'disclosing a private sexual photo with intent to distress' and also got £240 costs.
Frankly, the lawyers who were involved in this fiasco should have been dismissed ..... If Francisco Goya was still alive and painting, he would have risked revenge porn charges in the UK from these clowns, with his painting of The Nude Maja (which was rumoured to be a portrait of his then mistress).
With episodes like this, its no wonder that the public has no faith in the criminal justice system.
 |
| The Body Beautiful - But Anonymous ..... |
...... a female art student at Lincoln University was charged with"revenge porn".
The reason .... for submitting a photo of a male nude, as a normal part of her coursework. The picture was 'artistic' in that there was no genitalia, not even an identifiable face on the study, which would have been displayed at the end of term, when its normal for art students work to be shown in a studio.
Now, all would have been well, if that was all there was to the story ..... but she was proud of her work and was in the habit of uploading her course work on to her Facebook page. It was at this point that things went awry. An ex-boyfriend(?) saw the image of the male nude on the page, and identified it as being his torso.
The fact that it had been cropped, so that the head wasn't visible, nor indeed any other identifying features, didn't prevent this self obsessed narcissistic idiot from claiming that it was him. Now this immediately brought up the question of 'revenge porn,' which, since 2014, has been a criminal offence in the UK. In the words of the government, it applies to any person "who maliciously shares sexually explicit pictures of former partners, will face prosecution under new laws".
However one might think that the highly paid lawyers who advise the police and Crown Prosecution Service on how to interpret laws, and when they have been broken, might have said that the intention of the act was not meant to cover artistic endeavours, or even simply that as no one could possibly identify the unnamed figure in the image, then it couldn't be 'revenge porn,' as it couldn't have been 'maliciously shared.'
 |
| The Nude Maja - Goya Risks Revenge Porn Charge With This Picture - Rumoured To Be Of His Mistress |
Unfortunately as is also usual these days, common sense didn't stop this actually getting to court. Where the case promptly collapsed, when the prosecutors declined to present any evidence to support the prosecution (mainly as there was none) .... one has to ask why it was only at this stage, while in the court room at great public expense, that the prosecutors suddenly realised that their case had no substance.
The Judge, Philip St John, didn't see any humour in the situation, and took the prosecutors to task, pointing out that the fact that the image was impossible to be identified as anyone, and didn't breach any decency laws, meant that there was, and never had been any case to answer. The student was cleared of the charges of 'disclosing a private sexual photo with intent to distress' and also got £240 costs.
Frankly, the lawyers who were involved in this fiasco should have been dismissed ..... If Francisco Goya was still alive and painting, he would have risked revenge porn charges in the UK from these clowns, with his painting of The Nude Maja (which was rumoured to be a portrait of his then mistress).
With episodes like this, its no wonder that the public has no faith in the criminal justice system.
No comments:
Post a Comment
All comments are welcomed, or even just thanks if you enjoyed the post. But please make any comment relevant to the post it appears under. Off topic comments will be blocked or removed.
Moderation is on for older posts to stop spamming and comments that are off topic or inappropriate from being posted .... comments are reviewed within 48 hours. I don't block normal comments that are on topic and not inappropriate. Vexatious comments that may cause upset to other commentators, or that are attempting to espouse a particular wider political view, are reviewed before acceptance. But a certain amount of debate around a post topic is accepted, as long as it remains generally on topic and is not an attempt to become sounding board for some other cause.
Final decision on all comments is held by the blog author and is final.
Comments are always monitored for bad or abusive language, and or illegal statements i.e. overtly racist or sexist content. Spam is not tolerated and is removed.
Commentaires ne sont surveillés que pour le mauvais ou abusif langue ou déclarations illégales ie contenu ouvertement raciste ou sexiste. Spam ne est pas toléré et est éliminé.