Surely one in­de­cent im­age is one too many?

Evening Telegraph (First Edition) - - Uk World Today -

I WAS as­tounded to read in the Tele that a teacher is likely to avoid jail de­spite be­ing found in pos­ses­sion of in­de­cent im­ages of chil­dren.

I re­peat, he was a pri­mary school teacher.

Am I the only per­son who thinks this is lu­di­crous?

Ap­par­ently he only had a “very low num­ber” of im­ages in his pos­ses­sion.

Does this make his be­hav­iour — this man who has been in a class­room with young chil­dren — more for­giv­able?

In my view, one im­age is one too many.

His sen­tence has been de­ferred un­til May.

I hope in the in­terim the sher­iff has a good think about the crime.

On the same page in the Tele there was a story about a man who hid a mo­bile phone in a sham­poo bot­tle so he could se­cretly film a woman tak­ing a bath.

He pleaded guilty to the charge — yet this sneaky and in­tru­sive crime doesn’t merit a jail sen­tence ei­ther.

The man has been rec­om­mended for a com­mu­ni­ty­based dis­posal as he has no pre­vi­ous con­vic­tions.

These ridicu­lous rul­ings prove the law re­ally is an ass.

Bam­boo­zled.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from UK

© PressReader. All rights reserved.