|
In Reply to: Is this abuse? posted by CB on June 04, 2007 at 12:19:13:
Under child abuse statutes this is exploiting children for a sexual purpose. Possession of the pictures or film, unless in the hands of courts, police or academic researchers for a viable purpose is also a criminal offence. Many individuals have argued this statute under "artistic licence". Almost always they lose. It is also important to note that the family intended the pictures and films for a sexual purpose as many of TF letters and communications reveal. In criminal cases the intent to do the act is at the heart of the offence. Does anyone really doubt that the images on these films and pictures were wrapped up in sexual intent? Mo got off on sexually exploiting, abusing and harming children. It was the central purpose for a great deal of his actions.
