230 arrests in Hampshire last year for indecent images of children

Daily Echo: 230 arrests last year for indecent images of children 230 arrests last year for indecent images of children

A TOTAL of 230 people were arrested for taking, distributing or possessing indecent images of children in Hampshire last year.

The figures have prompted the NSPCC charity to call for action to stamp out the trade in child abuse images.

Julie Cole, regional head of service for South London and the South East, said: “It’s time the Government and industry got together to find an answer to this corrosive problem which cannot be allowed to continue.

“There are obviously paedophile rings which make a sordid business of sharing these images. But there are now so many in circulation that people from all walks of life are getting caught with them. They have to understand these are not just images – they are crime scenes. ”

Last month the Daily Echo reported how depraved Scout leader Earl Adams tied up a young boy for sick photographs and made another perform perverted sex acts and then shared the images with other paedophiles.

The 43-year-old, from Bitterne, Southampton, understood to have been a Scout leader in the Fareham and Gosport area, was convicted of 13 counts of possessing and distributing indecent images of children, before being convicted of two charges of sexual activity with a child and a further count of gross indecency with a child.

He was jailed for five years.

Comments (2)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

10:20am Sun 21 Oct 12

huckit P says...

Are these figures identifying those actually convicted or just those arrested, because they will be completely different numbers. Just asking because some years ago I was arrested for something but later absolved of any wrongdoing. Therefore arrest numbers differ from conviction numbers.
Are these figures identifying those actually convicted or just those arrested, because they will be completely different numbers. Just asking because some years ago I was arrested for something but later absolved of any wrongdoing. Therefore arrest numbers differ from conviction numbers. huckit P

3:36am Mon 22 Oct 12

Vonnie says...

huckit P wrote:
Are these figures identifying those actually convicted or just those arrested, because they will be completely different numbers. Just asking because some years ago I was arrested for something but later absolved of any wrongdoing. Therefore arrest numbers differ from conviction numbers.
Arrest numbers also differ from the number of cases that even make it to any Court.

Today, arrests seem to be made as a precautionary measure, and placate the public, not because that person has done anything wrong.

This headline/article is just another case of the Echo using emotional wording to create an impression of doom, gloom, and sensationalism for those who are dim enough not to actually read what it says.
[quote][p][bold]huckit P[/bold] wrote: Are these figures identifying those actually convicted or just those arrested, because they will be completely different numbers. Just asking because some years ago I was arrested for something but later absolved of any wrongdoing. Therefore arrest numbers differ from conviction numbers.[/p][/quote]Arrest numbers also differ from the number of cases that even make it to any Court. Today, arrests seem to be made as a precautionary measure, and placate the public, not because that person has done anything wrong. This headline/article is just another case of the Echo using emotional wording to create an impression of doom, gloom, and sensationalism for those who are dim enough not to actually read what it says. Vonnie

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree