Raise The Colours Figure Accused of Making Indecent Images of Children

[quintessentone]

From what i can establish, the law in the UK.

In particular, "the Protection of Children Act 1978 and Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008."

Covers indecent or prohibited images of children, which can include drawings or digital art.

And possession alone can be deemed an offence, even without a real victim.

Our courts assess the intent and the evidence.

And people can indeed still be placed on the sex offender register if they are convicted.

My own opinion on the matter would be that people who choose to create fantasy kiddie porn images.

Are in the same boat as those who choose to view or participate in the real sorts.

They are apt to eventually act out or graduate to committing crimes of sexual depravity in the real world.

The unbelievable increase in AI-generated images/videos is creating problems for law enforcement, in that, they may be chasing 'fake' imagery and falling behind by the shear amount of work involved, in saving real children.

----

"The Internet Watch Foundation (IWF), based in Histon, near Cambridge, finds, flags, and removes images and videos of child sexual abuse from the web.
 However, the ever-increasing use of AI images - a 300% increase in 2024 compared to the previous year - has added another layer of complexity to their work.
 
Dan Sexton, IWF chief technology officer, said there was now a risk that law enforcement and other agencies could be "trying to rescue children that don't exist or not trying to rescue children because they think they're AI".
"About two years ago we first started seeing this content being circulated, and there were little 'tells' - it looked distinctly different," Mr Sexton said.
 
But developments in the technology meant that at times it had become indistinguishable.
 
"There will be imagery in there that is so realistic or so similar to the content we see, you cannot tell the difference," Mr Sexton added.
 
"What creates a lot of concern is the ability of our people in law enforcement and others - those people who are out there trying to rescue children at risk - knowing whether a child is a real child and needs to be rescued and is at current harm, or they are AI-generated and they don't exist.
 
"The risk there, is, we and policing end up trying to rescue children that don't exist or not trying to rescue children because they think they're AI.""

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cgeqdxyqvexo

---

For this reason alone, I think the perps should be prosecuted with other charges related to bogging down police.

[andy06shake]

The unbelievable increase in AI-generated images/videos is creating problems for law enforcement, in that, they may be chasing 'fake' imagery and falling behind by the shear amount of work involved, in saving real children.

----

"The Internet Watch Foundation (IWF), based in Histon, near Cambridge, finds, flags, and removes images and videos of child sexual abuse from the web.
 However, the ever-increasing use of AI images - a 300% increase in 2024 compared to the previous year - has added another layer of complexity to their work.
 
Dan Sexton, IWF chief technology officer, said there was now a risk that law enforcement and other agencies could be "trying to rescue children that don't exist or not trying to rescue children because they think they're AI".
"About two years ago we first started seeing this content being circulated, and there were little 'tells' - it looked distinctly different," Mr Sexton said.
 
But developments in the technology meant that at times it had become indistinguishable.
 
"There will be imagery in there that is so realistic or so similar to the content we see, you cannot tell the difference," Mr Sexton added.
 
"What creates a lot of concern is the ability of our people in law enforcement and others - those people who are out there trying to rescue children at risk - knowing whether a child is a real child and needs to be rescued and is at current harm, or they are AI-generated and they don't exist.
 
"The risk there, is, we and policing end up trying to rescue children that don't exist or not trying to rescue children because they think they're AI.""

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cgeqdxyqvexo

---

For this reason alone, I think the perps should be prosecuted with other charges related to bogging down police.

Yeah, I agree.

Making fake sexual abuse images can and will indeed waste police time.

Quite possibly, even slow down the detection of real sexual offences, or prevent the rescue of kids. 

Adding extra charges for that kind of harm seems prudent...

[ArMaP]

My own opinion on the matter would be that people who choose to create fantasy kiddie porn images.

Are in the same boat as those who choose to view or participate in the real sorts.

I think that's why most countries consider real or fantasy images the same, as the intent is there.

They are apt to eventually act out or graduate to committing crimes of sexual depravity in the real world.

With that I do not agree, it's usually a different kind of mentality, but we never know.

[ArMaP]

Dan Sexton, IWF chief technology officer, said there was now a risk that law enforcement and other agencies could be "trying to rescue children that don't exist or not trying to rescue children because they think they're AI".
"About two years ago we first started seeing this content being circulated, and there were little 'tells' - it looked distinctly different," Mr Sexton said.
 
But developments in the technology meant that at times it had become indistinguishable.

I don't think that's really true, that they do not have a way of finding if an image is real or faked.
Even without using any special tools, one thing I have noticed about AI images is that they result in smaller file sizes because they compress better, as they have less noise than a real photo.

[andy06shake]

With that I do not agree, it's usually a different kind of mentality, but we never know.

It's debatable with divergent schools of thought on the matter.

I mean, the vast majority of damaged, horrible people, who find that sort of material alluring, may well never go on to actual participation in the horrendous acts of depravity.

But there will be some...

Some people are just damaged and take pleasure in damaging others.

It's horrible to even contemplate their mentality.

Sickening.

[BeyondKnowledge]

If investigators are unsure of original intent of the crime then of course it will be moved to a court to fact find.

If the fantasy or deviant art does not depict an actual living person, then how is a crime committed? The creator may be considered as a sexual deviant, but has actually not harmed anyone. Not yet? Can someone be labelled a a sex offender through their deviant art?

As I mentioned with the case of that guy on Discord, role-playing with a mother and her underaged son, the judge dismissed all five charges because the defendant asserted that it was just fantasy role play and nothing more and they could not prove that it was not. He was, however, charged for sharing nude photos of himself and his wife.

You need to be careful using the words "deviant art". As DeviantArt is a legitimate art website, their lawyers may take offence. It's name came from it originally being a skins art hosting area for the Deviant media player.

[BeyondKnowledge]

I don't think that's really true, that they do not have a way of finding if an image is real or faked.
Even without using any special tools, one thing I have noticed about AI images is that they result in smaller file sizes because they compress better, as they have less noise than a real photo.

And you just gave them an idea to help make AI fakes look more real.

[BeyondKnowledge]

You don't need to trust our legal system, BeyondKnowledge, but the people who reside in the UK need to abide by the law of the land.

I agree that AI was in its infancy back in 2021.

But the charge actually says "images made using AI or graphics tools" so...

They would not prosecute without any evidence because the judge would simply fling the case out of court.

At the end of the day, it will be a judge and jury that makes the call as to the determination of his innocence or guilt.

AI tools available at the time would seem to include "Dall-E" "Vqgan+Clip" "Artbreeder" "Runway ML" "DeepAI Text to Image."

The image creation tools available are extensive, including the likes of "Adobe Photoshop", "GIMP", "Affinity Photo", etc...

As to your implication that we silence political rivals by means of law here in the UK, i would point out he's not a politician. 

And considering the kind of crap Trump has perpetrated and his weaponization of the DOJ to go after political opponents and naysayers, it might be best to find a mirror. 

Just keep in mind that this clown's story has gone from it being "the repair shop planted the images on the hard drive" to "lots of people had access to my laptop at the time" while we were all in COVID 19 lockdown. 

It's not a good look...

Then there is the fact that "Raise the Colours" is distancing itself from him.

And people like Tommy Robinson are coming away with lies like "Ive never met the c#nt" even though he's been pictured with Cullen on numerous occasions.

You would imagine if they thought he was innocent, they would be closing ranks, and standing behind him as opposed to disavowing him and running for the hills. 

Again, it's not a good look...

It is not a good look that is precisely why planting porn of any kind is such a strong weapon. 

How are you to defend against something that could randomly be hidden in every operating system? Random images copied in the original installation. The "experts" would know exactly how to find it.

I am not defending the sick images, I am questioning the proof of how it got there.

[andy06shake]

It is not a good look that is precisely why planting porn of any kind is such a strong weapon. 

How are you to defend against something that could randomly be hidden in every operating system? Random images copied in the original installation. The "experts" would know exactly how to find it.

I am not defending the sick images, I am questioning the proof of how it got there.

It's a possibility, BeyondKnowledge, because as we all know, that kind of mud simply does not wash off...
 
And it would be remiss not to at least contemplate that the images could have been planted.

I get that you're not defending him.

To be honest, playing devil's advocate is probably a good thing.
 
But again, cases tend not to reach actual court appearances and prosecution without sufficient evidence.
 
His story is changing, and his support base seems to be disavowing him or outright denying they know him.
 
It would have been nice to have been a fly on the wall during his police interview and subsequent court appearance, put it that way...

[BeyondKnowledge]

It's a possibility, BeyondKnowledge, because as we all know, that kind of mud simply does not wash off...
 
And it would be remiss not to at least contemplate that the images could have been planted.

I get that you're not defending him.

To be honest, playing devil's advocate is probably a good thing.
 
But again, cases tend not to reach actual court appearances and prosecution without sufficient evidence.
 
His story is changing, and his support base seems to be disavowing him or outright denying they know him.
 
It would have been nice to have been a fly on the wall during his police interview and subsequent court appearance, put it that way...

Yes, many are running in fear of getting the stink on them. 

I don't think his story changing is absolute proof of guilt. He may be just trying to figure out how to prove his innocence because he just doesn't know how the images got there. Then again, he could just be trying to get out of something he was legitimately cought doing.