A transsexual convicted of possessing child pornography has been spared jail because the judge thought being sent to a male prison “would be an appalling experience.”
The 20-year-old pre-operation transsexual, still biologically a man but legally considered a woman, was discovered to be in possession of a laptop containing 14 images police regarded as child pornography during the search of the transsexual’s Manchester home in connection with another investigation.
The defence gave courts a sob story about a youth of being bullied due to “gender insecurities,” saying that the images were part of an attempt to come to terms with this troubled youth, and maintained prison would be too dangerous:
“She’s clearly going to be extremely vulnerable in a male prison environment.”
Whilst still maintaining a plea of not guilty, the defendant “appreciated the harm these offences cause.”
The judge presiding said she sympathised, tacitly implying UK prisons are powerless to stop inmates being raped, not that this stops anyone else being sent to them:
“I take these offences very seriously; these are real children who are being abused so that people like you can look at them.
Frankly, you deserve to go to prison, but I can’t bring myself to send you to prison, entirely because I think prison would be an appalling experience for you.
I do not see how you could be kept safe in a prison environment with the best will in the world on the part of those who run such establishments.”
Instead the sentence was reduced to 100 hours of community service, with a 9-month prison sentence suspended for a year – should he be able to avoid committing any further offences in that period no time need be served at all.
A 5 year period of registration as a sex offender will also be required.
Transsexual inmates in UK prisons are frequently either housed with their identified gender, or held apart from the general prison population – apparently not considered appropriate in this case.
the judge´s brain popped out.
With one look at “its” teeth, you know its from either England or Texas.
What the…. I’m at a loss of words.
I still can’t get over the fact that she(let’s try not to offend anyone) was gonna be sent to jail for having CP pictures on her computer, just having 14 pics downloaded from the internet was enough to warrant her a living hell!!
I know that’s been the legislation for quite a while now but to me it’s just so…stupid!! I mean, does it really protect the children? I think if anything it serves to conceal perpetrators because no one will dare to spread this kind of material (which could actually help identify them) and will settle with doing it behind closed doors…
Abusing children is one thing, but isn’t being attracted to pubescent(and close ages) individuals natural for mammals?, I’m not sure where but I remember seeing somewhere that most mammals showed this preference.
I understand why it’s morally objectionable to allow an adult to have a relationship or freely pursue sex with a minor, but from that to condemn feeling sexual attraction towards them as it itself being so is ludicrous and a puritanical denial of human nature.
lEtS tRy NoT tO oFfEnD aNyOnE
well, just by clicking some child porn trap link prepared by FBI will earn you a jail too.
ah, a jail sentence is not a “to also be raped or beat up sentence”, if you get any of that that’s extra punishment. and clearly extra illegal. prisons make big money for big jerks, keep people in jail for as long as possible, they make extra money. if your a crappy criminal and get caught, you go to jail, …its a big school for criminals to help train each other to be better….criminals. law and government is sooo unaccountable. please try harder.