https://www.google.com/accounts/o8/id?id=AItOawnxkUo31vHfpiMD_jClgvjuvNv4JrSkZBc

Comment Threads

• JayGee commented on Rule 34, meet Kafka
  Errrr.... What legitimate reason would an aide working in a policy unit have to retain material like this in his possession? I mean, yes, he might reasonably have been exposed to this stuff in briefings so that he knows what sort of material needs to be addressed, he might even need regular updates if the nature of the material is changing, but actually retaining the stuff??? Not one little bit convinced......
• Greg. Tingey commented on Rule 34, meet Kafka
  Yes / No / Maybe I can think of all sorts of "reasons" for having it, including the "guilty" one, & the others I've mentioned above. Simply forgot to delete those particular files? The current working directory for the ongoing investigation? "Legit" stuff (as in work) mis-filed? Whatever happens, it (again) shows the problem of "Strict Liability" - which was the point I was trying to make, of course....
• paws4thot commented on Rule 34, meet Kafka
  Et seq - And, of course, Scamoron's response of "it was not appropriate for us to comment until the case was reported" or "We'll say nothing and hope that none of the press actually notice"....
• Greg. Tingey commented on Rule 34, meet Kafka
  And agian This guy has been around sibce the madwoman was in charge & some of that crew were (& a few still are) distinctly unsavoury types. Aitken, Sherman ("Giftzwerg") & "slimy Cecil Prick" (as Private eye called him) spring immediately to mind. But that's guilt-by-association, exactly the same as the daily Nazi is trying to smear one H Harman with....
• lovingboth commented on Rule 34, meet Kafka
  It's better than that - there are specific exemptions for members of the security services in the UK laws against porn, including child porn. See for example, Section 1B of the Protection of Children Act 1978 (c. 37): (1)In proceedings for an offence under section 1(1)(a) of making an indecent photograph or pseudo-photograph of a child, the defendant is not guilty of the offence if he proves that— .. (c)at the time of the offence charged he was a member of GCHQ, and it was necessary for him to make the photograph or pseudo-photograph for the exercise of any of...