Cybersex man jailed

Reported in many places, ‘Cybersex’ man given two years and while I’ve no time at all for men like this, such a punishment for what happened seems odd.
It’s not what he did (like we don’t know what a “lewd act” really is”) or that we don’t know what he would have done had he met the girl (we do), it’s the very simple issue that he was not actually there and that despite anything he said, he cannot have made the girl do things she was not comfortable with anyway. And this case aside, it’s not what has been done to this person, it’s the legal precedent that has been set – lawyers love them, but so does the Government.

You know those phrases we sometimes use in a throwaway manner ? Things like “I could kill him for this !” Effectively, with this law, haven’t the Govt just made YOU arrestable should you agree with someone who says that over the net and then does it ? Even though it was “just a saying” and “meant in jest” ? That’s how it seems to me.
It’s very easy to start by using such laws on the pondlife of our society as no-one will kick up a stink – in fact we may all be quite pleased that the pervy little bastard was caught, but it just isn’t such a great leap to using that law more widely, and using it quite selectively

2 thoughts on “Cybersex man jailed

  1. I see what you are saying, though I’m not sure the manipulation of a 13yr old girl compares well to an offhand phrase posted on the net. They are two completely seperate things, and even though I have little faith in our justice system I think our courts would see through that.

    You say he can’t have made the girl do anything she didn’t want to, and in a literal sense I agree. But it seems to me that this particular perv was a lot more subtle in his methods – I imagine he’d have used pyschological manipulation rather than outright force. Both methods however have the same end result – a sicko taking advantage of a 13yr old girl.

  2. I totally agree that he is sicko taking advantage, and having two girls (one in her teens) who use the webcam, if he lived near me I’d have had words (so to speak).

    Yet I do have suspicions about the judicial system and the internet.
    I absolutely do not believe in the fairness of our judiciary to the extent that I totally trust them, and while internet use like this is certainly to be hammered, it is still a step closer to putting people at the scenes of crimes when they clearly may not be – and given the relative power of the system vs the individual, it’s the person that will lose every time.

    If this is a new approach to law (which it is) then such a first use is a vote winner, or alternatively, it gets the tacit nod of approval from the ‘moral majority’ and so creeps into being the norm, a norm which is not – by design – clearly defined. Dodgy.

Comments are closed.