R v (1) GRAHAM WESTGARTH SMITH (2) MIKE JAYSON (2002)

[Wendy Grossman]

In-Reply-To: <163239569412.20020426060149@dial.pipex.com>
On whenever this is Andrew Brown wrote:

> On Thursday, April 25, 2002, at 4:49:19 PM, Roland Perry wrote:
> 
> RP> It's a widely held belief (for example by rehabilitation clinics) 
> > that RPthe availability of images has both encouraged new 
> > offenders, and been RPused as bait to convince new victims that the 
> > offender's actions aren't RPas outlandish as might be their first 
> > impression.
> 
> Why should anyone doubt this? The effectiveness of images to alter
> behaviour is the principle on which the entire adveritising industry
> is based.

Two reasons.

1) Someone who gets off on looking at pictures of children in underwear 
or bathing suits does not have to rely on child porn.  There are umpteen 
clothing catalogues to choose from.

2) It is equally possible that having the images available channels the 
desires away from real children toward their images, which might be a 
good thing.

wg