Wednesday, 15 May 2013

Here We Go Again - The Usual, Greedy, Fools (If Only They Were Just That)

PUBLISHED: 01:18, 15 May 2013 | UPDATED: 10:08, 15 May 2013

Now Google is in the dock [hahahahaha] over Tia: Internet giant under pressure over easy access [hahahahaha] killer Hazell had to child pornography

">Stuart Hazell was obsessed by paedophile websites [sic]
>Habitually searched Google [hahahahaha] for child porn before he killed Tia Sharp
>Campaigners say internet gian [sic] must 'do more' to block access [to what?]

Obsessed: The Old Bailey heard how Stuart Hazell used his mobile phone [hahahahaha] to trawl the web for child porn [hahahahaha] before he killed 12-year-old Tia Sharp

Google is under pressure to act over the ease [hahahahaha] with which Stuart Hazell was able to use the internet to fuel his child-sex fantasies.

Hazell was obsessed by paedophile websites [sic - name one] and used his mobile phone to trawl the web for child porn before he killed 12-year-old Tia Sharp.

Police found searches [ah, searches] including the terms ‘naked little girlies’ [!], ‘illegal under-age incest pics’ and ‘schoolgirl abuse’ [homework?] in his Google browser.

There were also Google searches [ah, searches] for ‘violent forced rape’, ‘little girls in glasses’ [!], ‘daddy daughter pictures’ [!] and ‘under-age incest galleries’, and he visited a child abuse website [did he, which would that be?] on August 6 last year – as Tia’s body lay hidden in the loft of the home he shared with her grandmother.

Experts [sic] believe Hazell’s habitual use of violent and paedophile pornography [sic] on the internet saw him progress from petty criminal to child killer.

Last night child safety charities [sic], including the NSPCC, demanded Google introduce immediate controls to stop monsters [offensive and inflammatory] such as Hazell from getting access to child pornography.

John Carr, of the Children’s Charities’ Coalition on Internet Safety, said: ‘If these images were not available on the internet then men like Stuart Hazell might not go on to kill [hahahahaha - John, why are you still such a tool?].

‘We cannot blame the internet for the likes of Stuart Hazell but it has opened pathways that lead them on to violent pornography and paedophile material.’ [no we cannot - good, end of]"

"A report by the Child Exploitation and Online Protection (CEOP) Centre has identified a link between viewing child porn online and ‘contact’ sexual offences against children. [yes, and it's, essentially, bollocks, and we can prove it - shall we Peter, really?]

Jim Gamble, the former [mmmmmmm, why?] head of the Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre, said the internet could [could? - how, Jim?] create a ‘spiral of abuse’ [a what?] where offenders awakened their sexual interest in children [how does that work, Jim?] and met like-minded people [MAP] who normalised [does not matter whether it is normal or not, it is what they are] their behaviour.

He added: ‘Ultimately [ultimately?] what they find online is not enough to satisfy them [really, any cases, Jim?] and they can move to attacking a real child in the real world.’" [really, any cases, Jim?]

Move on folks, just the usual bullshit.

Google used ‘to fuel child-sex fantasies’ 

Tuesday 14 May 2013 17.41 BST 

Blaming online images of abuse for Stuart Hazell's horrific acts is simplistic

"Whatever the facts of the Tia Sharp case, we can't be sure of a causal link between internet images and abuse"

"Despite the proliferation of abuse imagery [sic], criminologists across the world are reporting surprising trends. Wherever there is reliable data, rates of child sexual abuse appear to be either remaining constant or declining, sometimes significantly. In the US from 1990 to 2007, cases of substantiated sexual abuse dropped by 53%. In 12 years to 2005, sexual assault against 12- to 17-year-olds fell by 52%. Research in American schools has shown the same trends, with falls of 28-30% in self-reported abuse since the mid-1990s."

Well, they are, all-in-all, simple people, Ally. 


Simple is, as simple does and says ...

Thursday 30 May 2013 13.39 BST 

Mark Bridger found guilty of the abduction and murder of April Jones 

"Detective Superintendent Andy John, the senior investigating officer ... John said he thought the abduction of a child was "premeditated", though he did not believe April was a specific target. He said images found on Bridger's laptop, including pictures of sadistic child sexual abuse, suggested the killer was building up to the crime.

"For me the computer evidence points towards an individual who is evil, manipulative and has premeditated this," said John. "The unhealthy interest he has in indecent images of children for me is a clear indicator that this individual was going to commit something as horrific as he did."

Though he had convictions for violence and deception dating back to when he was a teenager, Bridger had no convictions for sexual offences against children or for having indecent images. Since his arrest no other allegations have been made against Bridger. Nor is there any evidence that he has abused any of his children.

There are striking parallels, however, between the case of Bridger and that of Stuart Hazell, who earlier this month admitted murdering 12-year-old Tia Sharp in south London.

Both men had no previous convictions for abuse but carried out sexually motivated murders after viewing images of child sexual exploitation. [wonderful circular argument, here - can you spot it?]

Jim Gamble, the founding head of the Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre, said there was a theory that men such as Bridger and Hazell became caught up in a "spiral of abuse".

"They begin to want more, they want access not to still images but to video images, and then they want to get more real experience. And through the internet they realise that they are not alone," Gamble said.

No comments:

Post a Comment