Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris
Police need a warrant to seize someone’s computer, and to get a warrant they need enough evidence from other sources to convince a magistrate of their reasonable suspicion.
Having an interest in legal teenagers is not grounds for suspicion and certainly not enough for the police to be authorised to go on a fishing expedition. You might, for example, have a neighbour who you know has an interest in the ‘teen’ section of your favourite -ahem- adult tube site …. the very category that is well known to attract uploads of content featuring teenagers who are not yet 18. However if you went to the police and told them about your neighbour, there is no way on earth that would justify them raiding his computers looking for videos of girls who are under 18.
|
One of the allegations is that he communicated with another 17-year-old.
So when haven't the police raided computers, when this sort of accusation has been made?
Eg there was a case where a teacher was accused of using certain terms(eg child XXX) in a search on school computers. The police raided his computer, but not much was found because he had been tipped off about the impending raid. Not much in the way of evidence required there.
As I've pointed out, the BBC wouldn't know anything, the victim wouldn't want to say anything, especially as it would've also been a crime for him to provide any pictures, and the family are just glad that he has been stopped.
Eg There was a publicised case, where a public figure reported that he had been mugged, The police found the culprit and recovered the stolen items. Slam dunk for a conviction you would think, except the "victim" refused to identify the person and was labelled as being an unreliable witness by the CPS. So the case was conveniently dropped and the embarrassing details withheld.
The computers and phones records will now NOT be examined. Convenient or what? If somebody is dealing in "jail bait" territory, then it's quite possible, they went under age. They may not have, by being extra careful or by LUCK, but the likelihood is still there.