Thrown to the Tigers
A North Wales man has been cleared of possessing an extreme pornographic image involving a tiger having sex with a woman.
The prosecution offered no evidence when it was accepted that the tiger in the clip was not real, and that it was all a joke.
It emerged in court that police and prosecutors had not previously listened to the film with the sound on. Following the act, the tiger turned to the camera and roared: That beats the Frosties advert! .
Defendant Andrew Holland appeared at Mold Crown Court today and pleaded not guilty.
Prosecutor Elizabeth Bell said that the prosecution had decided to offer no evidence against him.
When asked by Judge John Rogers QC why that was being done, she said that when the case was previously reviewed the film had no sound track. It had been further reviewed, the sound track could be heard, and it was clear that the film had been
produced for the purposes of a joke rather than for sexual gratification.
The sound track confirmed that the person watching the image would realise that it was not actually a real tiger that was involved in the fact, she said.
The judge recorded a formal not guilty verdict.
The court heard how the film had been blue toothed to the defendant as a joke.
Following the hearing, defending barrister David Potter said that the prosecution now accepted that any reasonable person viewing the video would not consider it to be real and that it was produced for the purposes of a joke.
The sound track showed the tiger describing himself as Tony the Tiger, the Frosties advert character, who roars and says 'that beats the Frosties advert', he explained.
The joke meant that Holland had found himself accused in court - and on various Internet sites - of possessing an extreme pornographic image which portrayed a person performing an act of intercourse with a tiger which was grossly offensive,
disgusting or otherwise of an obscene character.
Unfortunately the persecution is not an an end, Holland faces another charge under the Dangerous Pictures Act involving the 'serious injury' clause. This will be heard in court on 17th March.
Offsite: Tiger has its day in court
3rd January 2010. See
It's oddly appropriate that the last day of a year notable for its stories about police powers, questionable prosecutions and state intrusion should have seen what must be one of the strangest cases on record come to court.