Dorset Police officers have said it would be "unlawful" to delete photos of an abuse victim from a paedophile's laptop.
The man, a family member, was jailed in 2013 for nine years after admitting a string of sex offences, including assaulting a child under the age of 13.
He has now formally requested a laptop and a mobile telephone are handed back.
Liberty, which represents the victim's family, said photos of her in swimwear and leotards were on the laptop.
A Home Office spokesman said: "We are looking carefully at the detail of this case."
Dorset Police said they could not delete the family pictures as they were not legally classified as indecent or prohibited.
As a result, the sex offender, who is in his 50s but cannot be named to protect the identity of his victim, will have access to photos of the girl and her family when he is eventually released from jail.
The victim's mother said the family had been "traumatised" by the abuse.
"I am appalled that the man who abused my child can ask the police to hand over our family photos for him to keep for the rest of his life.
"My daughters struggle every day with the devastating consequences of his abuse and this will only make them feel more humiliated and degraded.
"Why should we continue to be traumatised further?"
Delete him instead then
Delete him instead then
“If you trust in yourself, and believe in your dreams, and follow your star. . . you'll still get beaten by people who spent their time working hard and learning things and weren't so lazy.”
Re: Delete him instead then
How about naming him in order to protect potential new victims in the community he was released in to after serving his ridiculously short sentence?As a result, the sex offender, who is in his 50s but cannot be named to protect the identity of his victim
Am I to understand that in the UK, rather than making the identity of convicted sex offenders publicly available, the policy is actually to proactively conceal their identities from the public? Even in the case of sexual assault on preteens? Out of some bizarre notion that this is somehow beneficial to their victims?
Please tell I've got the wrong end of the stick on that...
Please tell me that isn't so...
Because that would be




Re: Delete him instead then
In this case the perpetrator is a family member; identifying him would therefore identify his victim. Obviously that is not true in every circumstance.
And nine years is neither a short nor a long sentence without knowing what this "string" of sexual offences entailed.
And nine years is neither a short nor a long sentence without knowing what this "string" of sexual offences entailed.
"Hang on while I log in to the James Webb telescope to search the known universe for who the fuck asked you." -- James Fell
Re: Delete him instead then
The Dorset police appear to be trying to honestly apply complicated and subtle rules of behavior they have been given by your judiciary (you don't have a constitution so its more difficult for them). If you would prefer ass-kicking cowboys that string people up from the nearest tree when their 'gut' just tells them "he's guilty and I knowd it" you can hire police from any of the former confederate states here in Amurrica to do that.
You'll have to let them have guns, though. A lot of guns.
yrs,
rubato
You'll have to let them have guns, though. A lot of guns.
yrs,
rubato
Re: Delete him instead then
Rube, since that's so ridiculously removed from any meaningful relationship to the topic, I have to ask; is that supposed to be humor?If you would prefer ass-kicking cowboys that string people up from the nearest tree when their 'gut' just tells them "he's guilty and I knowd it" you can hire police from any of the former confederate states here in Amurrica to do that.
You'll have to let them have guns, though. A lot of guns.
yrs,
rubato
Or is that you just being your normal ignorant and simple-minded self?
Given your recent claims that you have been trying to be "funny", I feel compelled to ask; I don't want to accuse you of being an addle-brained moron when you're just attempting to do (a very convincing, might I add) impersonation of an addle-brained moron...
So if humor is what's intended here, just let me know...



Re: Delete him instead then
The victim's mother needs to get a grip. These are not pornographic photos, they are simply casual shots that one might find in any family album of pictures. Will this girl never be seen in public again in a BATHING SUIT? In leotards?
I suppose the only tenable solution would be to poke the bastard's eyes out, so he can never possibly see the victim - or a picture of the victim again. Better give him a lobotomy as well, so he doesn't imagine her either.
Has he been castrated yet?
I suppose the only tenable solution would be to poke the bastard's eyes out, so he can never possibly see the victim - or a picture of the victim again. Better give him a lobotomy as well, so he doesn't imagine her either.
Has he been castrated yet?