Presumably the material available on SexView that is deemed obscene by the authorities is fisting and urolagnia (pissing in a sex scene). Surely harmless and consensual activities, particularly as these were recordings are from European
licensed channels. I guess juries could still declare these to be obscene but the authorities never really seem to like to push it to a contested trial as maybe they don't like the precedents set if they lose.
Also not that politicians, prosecutors and police bang on about the protection of children. In this case children simply have no bearing on the case. Yet this proves no mitigation to the persecutors. I don't think the establishment have much interest
in children , they just use the kids as a convenient handle to justify their vindictive and repressive laws.
Merged from Braintree's posts on the Melon Farmers Discussions
I was selling DVDs recorded from Sexview, SCT etc. This was over a year ago. Extasi was not even there at the time. They rumbled me by answering my newspaper ad. Everything they bought or was offered was blank discs with satellite recordings. They
were charging me with 7 satellite recordings under the VRA. 3 of the satellite recordings they deem to be obscene, but counsel and I have to view them to see what they are calling obscene.
However, when they raided they found one scat and one animal DVD in addition to about 30 Ben Dover type titles. They have charged me with possession with intent to supply of the scat/animal ones, even though I never supplied, or offered to supply any
pre-records, let alone material of that extreme nature. Their "evidence" is that as I supplied those TV recordings I was obviously going to sell the prerecords (3 obscene ones) despite never supplying prerecords EVER, and never supplying
material of this extreme nature (all supplied stuff was from satellite).
6 months later the police raided again, having moved from VRA to OPA and they found 16 satellite recordings that I had done after the initial raid. However, they were never offered or intended for sale, but they have still charged me with 4 of them
"intent to supply".
The whole thing stinks. I have held my hands up and admitted the 7 charges of selling satellite recordings but that's not enough. The CPS refused to accept my Guilty plea of 7 charges of supplying DVD's recorded from various Euro porn channels. The
other 14 charges relate to DVD's seized by the police 6 months later and a bag of prerecorded discs found in my house.
Even my counsel was implying that pleading guilty to all charges and saving the cost of a trial was a good way to go, as I could not rely on any jury being sympathetic towards me. I am lead to believe that if I am found guilty after trial I may go to
prison if I do not give early guilty pleas. I can see how miscarriages of justice happen if this pathetic charade of "Justice" is what happens in courts everyday.
I do not want to plead guilty to offences I am not guilty of. The fact that I bough a new DVD recorder one month after my original one was seized "implies" that I continued selling, according to Plod. How can you escape this kind of moronic
Counsel seemed to think the banning of EXTASI works in my favour as it shows that Ofcom and the Government have never said that any of the channels I recorded from were unacceptable-so how can they be showing obscene material?
The frightening thing is, from what counsel says, it all depends on the jury. Great. The fact there is zero evidence to support the charges of intent to supply the obscene discs or the 16 subsequent satellite recordings from my garage (apart from the
fact I replaced the DVD recorder and satellite receiver) does not seem to matter. Counsel says its circumstantial evidence. But surely that does not prove" beyond a reasonable doubt" that they were for supply.
If I had faith in the Justice system I would know that only 7 of the 21 charges would stick as they have no evidence of the rest, but as I get further into this mess it seems that the outcome of my trial is based on a system similar to the National
Lottery. I need some super high paid London lawyer who can pull their case apart.
One more pertinent fact before I go off to contemplate a prison term, one of my 21 charges was for an offence under the Obscene Publications Act in relation to Ben Dover's Anal Spunkfest . As pointed out before ,this has an R18 certificate in
its uncut state. I believe my DVD was a US one. Now some UK Ben Dover titles show girls pissing, but as its not over anyone they pass it. Now even these scenes are cut from the US versions, so could the CPS really be stupid enough to have put it
under the OPA due to the extra 4 minute running time resulting from the PAL/NTSC frame rate difference? Its going to be fun asking them to show me what extra footage there is over the R18 version to make it obscene.
I wonder if C4 or the BBC would be interested in this shambles. Can't be many obscenity trials these days
Update 1st May:
Viewed DVD`s today and as expected offending material was fisting and pissing.
3 of the 4 charges (including Sticky Side up and Anal Spunkfest ) were incorrect and the material related to the second film on each of these home recorded discs.
So there was I in Crown Court expected to plead to charges relating to films that were not even in the case. This case should be thrown as for the sheer incompetence of the CPS. So 3 of the charges I cannot plead guilty to anyway, but counsel says
they will simply add new charges relating to the correct films.
Disc 1 was a sexview recording with a very brief (less then 5 minutes) of a woman pissing on another man and woman.
Disc 2 was an Ultra Blue recording of a woman fisting herself.
Disc 3 was also sexview and was a man pissing on a woman.
Disc 4 is interesting. While the material contains a man with 2 fists up his arse simultaneously, then a foot, the recording is from Extasi. Now I know that I never had Extasi when TS performed the original raid. When the police came months later,
paperwork they stole included a receipt for a new sat receiver and on the same receipt an Extasi card. So the disc was never sold and was recorded after I stopped selling. I`m sure that if Extasi were even broadcasting by 11/02/04 their card ads had
Am I right in thinking that R18 allows anal penetration by dildo?
Now if I go to trial and rely on a jury, I`m not sure they would disagree that the urolagnia and fisting are not obscene. While the BBFC happily pass DVD`s of girls pissing, they still class pissing during any sex as obscene. Taking the piss or what!
The Melon Farmers' Forum , Kit Ryan 27-Apr-2005:
It`s bizarre that they are trying to do you for possessing videos of activities that aren`t illegal to perform in the privacy of your own home. Urolagnia has even been referred to in an episode of Sex and the City for goodness sake. A brief
look at the BGAFD site shows how common this activity is in UK-made films (although they are then edited to get an R18 classification). Perhaps it might be useful to get a list of some of these films (including the notes that appear on the site) to
show that this is an accepted activity elsewhere in Europe.
Anal penetration with a dildo is certainly allowed under R18. It was even shown quite a few times on the Playboy channels when they had a brief flirtation with showing lesbian R18 episodes (particularly the Sandy Babe Abroad episodes). I don`t
think the BBFC make any distinction between vaginal and anal sex.
I presume you know about the case of R. v Perrin that others have referred to. In this case the appellant was found innocent on two counts of coprophilia (far stronger than the material you had in your possession). He was only found guilty on a
charge relating to material that was available to anyone (as a trailer). Indeed the judge made reference to the fact that this material was available to the young and vulnerable as part of the reason for dismissing the appeal (this does not seem to
apply in your case):
Update 16th May:
I have been "forced" to plead guilty to 3 Obscene Publications Act charges as a final offer to avoid a trial. By forced, I mean my solicitor recommended that this was a way out of the trial, possibly.
As I will face 21 charges if a trial occurs I cut my losses. But it depends if the CPS accept it. If they don't I will plead not guilty to these 3. It is quite obvious that many extraneous trumped up charges have been added, along with extra charges
for which there is only circumstantial evidence in order to get me to plead guilty to certain charges. The regulations strictly forbid this practice but it does not help at all.
Innocent until proved guilty is total bollocks, and needing to be proved guilty "beyond a reasonable doubt" is also.
My solicitor said he clarified the law on what is obscene, urination is fine, but if it touches another person at any point then its obscene. Ridiculous. He also clarified the BBFC definition of fisting. So its fine to insert 5 fingers up a woman on
screen, but if it goes beyond the last knuckle then suddenly its obscene.
I commented that I would expect a jury to see the stupidity of the law, but my solicitor said "the law is the law" and if the judge directs the jury you cannot win. So much for trial by jury.
Melon Farmers: One must point out the at the Obscene Publications Act does not spell out exactly what is obscene. Therefore the solicitor's clarification can only be based upon the opinion of the police or Home Office as to what is obscene. This is
hardly a clarification of the law.
Update 26th May:
The CPS have accepted my guilty pleas so I suppose that means another "successful prosecution" against urolagnia and fisting.
All that remains now is to see what happens when I attend court to plead guilty. There will be a pre-sentence report but I hope its not an "all options" one as that indicates the possibility of prison
Update 27th June:
Had to visit a probation officer this week for my pre-sentence report and I have to say what a load of old bollocks it was.
He was asking about my opinion on the morality of porn, Did I feel responsible about creating a market for the stuff? and what do I think about the actors and actresses in porn? How would I feel if my daughter was in it? whether I would allow my kids
to watch it at 18? (as if I had any choice) and other claptrap.
I may not have helped my cause by saying I thought it was a lot of fuss over nothing and not really expressing any remorse about it. I simply admitted that I had mistakenly followed other who seemed immune to the law, and shops that continue to this
day to sell (non porn) unclassified dvd`s over the counter everyday.
I told him that had TSO advised me on their first or second meetings that they found the trading unacceptable then that would have been the end of that.
Anyone who finds themselves in a similar situation should follow my advice and offer no cooperation with any investigating agency whatsoever, despite the new warning issued by police on arrest. Stick to your right to silence until you get to court.
My "cooperation" with TSO and police simply resulted in them using it against me. And if you end up at a probation office,just tell them what they want to hear. The truth don't cut it
Update 21st July:
Braintree was sentenced to four months in prison (pretty near automatic that he will serve two months)