news ToonKriticY2K and accusations of sexual misconduct

[Canteen_the_unstable 7,963]

@Starlight Nova you are saying no crime he is innocent all of this BUT lets twist this some, he doesnt go to trial goes free blah blah. He turns around and does it again, with another young girl who is naive to the world. He actually molests her or rapes her. Is the defense going to be like we never saw warning signs? Big red flags are going on and need to be dealt with

[Starlight Nova 3]

yes a call illegally record and logs that are heavily edited censored and whole sections are missing, i take that as a 1 sided twisted story to paint sally as the victim, yes he may not be charge he could be sued but u would first have to try him under american law and provide suffient proof of what he did and also toon could and can ineffect charge sally under the republic of the philippines child pornography law for which she broke by not only identifying as a child but also depicting herself as a child and creating and distributing revealing photos of herself over skype, which is a crime in the philippines and could end up putting her behind bars for 5 or more years

[TheRockARooster 51,191]

I've gotta say this and it's my opinion on this sicko known as Toon.

He doesn't deserve sympathy or defense, he's a sick pedophile and should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.

I hope he gets shunned from society and never gets redemption, he doesn't deserve it.

That's my opinion on the whole thing.

[Starlight Nova 3]

2 minutes ago, Arid_Blitz said:

@Starlight Nova you are saying no crime he is innocent all of this BUT lets twist this some, he doesnt go to trial goes free blah blah. He turns around and does it again, with another young girl who is naive to the world. He actually molests her or rapes her. Is the defense going to be like we never saw warning signs? Big red flags are going on and need to be dealt with

he is innocent of the current accusations against him he is being accused of grooming a minor from a foreign country over the internet, he is being accused of being guilty of pedophilia, he is being accused of breaking the law which would result in a class 4 felony under american law for soliciting a minor, he is innocent of these crimes, if he in turn then goes an molests a girl or boy or rapes them and there is sufficient evidence that this happened showing actual pics or film of this and a rape kit was done after the incident proving solid evidence against toon then no i would not defend him at that point as it would be clear that he broke the law. sure we can see warning signs all we want but its not a crime if its just raising some flags at the back of ur head, sure if we went with warning signs anyone here who has had suicidal tendencies or thoughts of sexual misconduct should be placed under 24/7 cctv with leg monitors for the sexual ones and 24/7 suicidal watch for the rest of their lives because it might happen they might do something.

[Gestum 2,493]

4 minutes ago, Starlight Nova said:

Which is a crime in the philippines and could end up putting her behind bars for 5 or more years

If she was over 18 maybe. However she was 14 when she sent those pitcures and in the Philippines you have to be 15 to recive legal punishment. And if she could be charged with producing child porn can't Toon be charged with possesing child porn?

[Starlight Nova 3]

Just now, Gestum said:

If she was over 18 maybe. However she was 14 when she sent those pitcures and in the Philippines you have to be 15 to recive legal punishment. And if she could be charged with producing child porn can't Toon be charged with possesing child porn?

http://www.lawphil.net/statutes/repacts/ra2009/ra_9775_2009.html
Section 3 A states ((a) "Child" refers to a person below eighteen (18) years of age or over, but is unable to fully take care of himself/herself from abuse, neglect, cruelty, exploitation or discrimination because of a physical or mental disability or condition.
For the purpose of this Act, a child shall also refer to: (1) a person regardless of age who is presented, depicted or portrayed as a child as defined herein; and (2) computer-generated, digitally or manually crafted images or graphics of a person who is represented or who is made to appear to be a child as defined herein.) sadly by depicting this 14 year old girl as a child clearly makes her in violation of child pornography laws in the philippines,

Section 3 B states ((b) "Child pornography" refers to any representation, whether visual, audio, or written combination thereof, by electronic, mechanical, digital, optical, magnetic or any other means, of child engaged or involved in real or simulated explicit sexual activities.)

Section 4. Unlawful or Prohibited Acts. - It shall be unlawful for any person: (b) To produce, direct, manufacture or create any form of child pornography;

Section 6. Who May File a Complaint. - Complaints on cases of any form of child pornography and other offenses punishable under this Act may be filed by the following: (a) Offended party;
(b) Parents or guardians;
(c) Ascendant or collateral relative within the third degree of consanguinity;
(d) Officer, social worker or representative of a licensed child-caring institution;
(e) Officer or social worker of the Department of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD);
(f) Local social welfare development officer;
(g) Barangay chairman;
(h) Any law enforcement officer;
(i) At least three (3) concerned responsible citizens residing in the place where the violation occurred; or
(j) Any person who has personal knowledge of the circumstances of the commission of any offense under this Act.

Section 8. Jurisdiction. - Jurisdiction over cases for the violation of this Act shall be vested in the Family Court which has territorial jurisdiction over the place where the offense or any of its essential elements was committed pursuant to Republic Act No. 8369, otherwise known as "Family Courts Act of 1997".

[Total Lunar Eclipse 516]

Bringing up other country's laws is a common defense by pedophiles. It has nothing to do with Toon.

[Starlight Nova 3]

2 minutes ago, Gestum said:

If she was over 18 maybe. However she was 14 when she sent those pitcures and in the Philippines you have to be 15 to recive legal punishment. And if she could be charged with producing child porn can't Toon be charged with possesing child porn?

yes he could if u can prove he still has them

 

Just now, Total Lunar Eclipse said:

Bringing up other country's laws is a common defense by pedophiles. It has nothing to do with Toon.

bringing up other country's law is normal when proving a point she identified as a child she stated she was a child and she sent him revealing pics of herself in turn breaking filipino law for creating and distributing child pornography

[Brawny Hoof 2]

This is why I love the internet: In the real world, we have a policy called "Innocent until Proven Guilty."  On the internet, the policy is "Guilty.  Always Guilty."

 

[Starlight Nova 3]

remember she is from the philippines this law isnt out of context

3 minutes ago, Total Lunar Eclipse said:

Bringing up other country's laws is a common defense by pedophiles. It has nothing to do with Toon.

did u just insinuate that i'm a pedophile by bringing up another countries law

7 minutes ago, Gestum said:

If she was over 18 maybe. However she was 14 when she sent those pitcures and in the Philippines you have to be 15 to recive legal punishment. And if she could be charged with producing child porn can't Toon be charged with possesing child porn?

well actually at this point in time she is 15 years old or older which means she can face legal punishment

[Black Sabbath 2,486]

8 minutes ago, Starlight Nova said:

well actually at this point in time she is 15 years old or older which means she can face legal punishment

True, but not for a crime she committed while 14. 

[Starlight Nova 3]

Just now, Yamet said:

True, but not for a crime she committed while 14. 

ah but thats the fun part this event in which she revealed herself isnt in the screenshots but is stated in josh's vid and is stated further down do we even know how old she was when she posted that revealing pic remember there are over 300 days worth of screenshot content missing from those that were shared

[Black Sabbath 2,486]

Just now, Starlight Nova said:

ah but thats the fun part this event in which she revealed herself isnt in the screenshots but is stated in josh's vid and is stated further down do we even know how old she was when she posted that revealing pic remember there are over 300 days worth of screenshot content missing from those that were shared

True, but what happened with innocent before proven guilty?

[Gestum 2,493]

23 minutes ago, Starlight Nova said:

well actually at this point in time she is 15 years old or older which means she can face legal punishment

"A child fifteen (15) years of age or under at the time of the commission of the offense shall be exempt from criminal liability." 

That means that she had to be 16 or older at the time of the crime in order to beheld accountable in court.

Source:https://www.lawphil.net/statutes/repacts/ra2006/ra_9344_2006.html

 

Edited May 15, 2018 by Gestum

[Black Sabbath 2,486]

7 minutes ago, Gestum said:

"A child fifteen (15) years of age or under at the time of the commission of the offense shall be exempt from criminal liability." 

That means that she had to be 16 or older at the time of the crime in order to beheld accountable in court.

And maybe not even then, since those above 15 (but under 18) are still exempt from criminal liability unless they acted with discernment. 

[Starlight Nova 3]

3 minutes ago, Yamet said:

True, but what happened with innocent before proven guilty?

well for 1 we have screenshots that show she stated she was 14 she identified as a child and she shared a revealing picture of herself which by accounts and evidence provided or was removed from evidence was of pornographic quality, as stated by joshscorcher, in turn the wording in which the law stats she identified and portrayed herself as a child in turn is considered a child under this law and is guilty of creating and distributing child pornography now as for the minimum age of criminal liability for the philippines isnt just the 15 mark there are subparagraphs that divide how she presented giving consent knowingly or not knowingly give consent at the start of the contact with toon and his request to erp, 

 

C. Content-related Offenses:

1. Any person found guilty of Child Pornography shall be punished in accordance with the penalties set forth in Republic Act No. 9775 or the “Anti-Child Pornography Act of 2009”: Provided, That the penalty to be imposed shall be one (1) degree higher than that provided for in Republic Act No. 9775 if committed through a computer system.

Section 8. Liability under Other Laws. – A prosecution under the Act shall be without prejudice to any liability for violation of any provision of the Revised Penal Code, as amended, or special laws: Provided, That this provision shall not apply to the prosecution of an offender under (1) both Section 4(c)(4) of R.A. 10175 and Article 353 of the Revised Penal Code; and (2) both Section 4(c)(2) of R.A. 10175 and R.A. 9775 or the “Anti-Child Pornography Act of 2009”.

 

ineffect by breaking the child pornography law she can be tried and sentenced without violating the minimum age for criminal liability law 

[Black Sabbath 2,486]

Just now, Starlight Nova said:

well for 1 we have screenshots that show she stated she was 14 she identified as a child and she shared a revealing picture of herself which by accounts and evidence provided or was removed from evidence was of pornographic quality,

Right, so then she can't be charged with "producing child pornography" as you claim she can. 

[Gestum 2,493]

3 minutes ago, Starlight Nova said:

ineffect by breaking the child pornography law she can be tried and sentenced without violating the minimum age for criminal liability law 

You gotta give  me a source on that statement. 

[Starlight Nova 3]

Sec. 7. Determination ofAge. - The child in conflict with the law shall enjoy the presumption of minority. He/She shall enjoy all the rights of a child in conflict with the law until he/she is proven to be eighteen (18) years old or older. The age of a child may be determined from the child's birth certificate, baptismal certificate or any other pertinent documents. In the absence of these documents, age may be based on information from the child himself/herself, testimonies of other persons, the physical appearance of the child and other relevant evidence. In case of doubt as to the age of the child, it shall be resolved in his/her favor.

1 minute ago, Gestum said:

You gotta give  me a source on that statement. 

http://www.chanrobles.com/republicactno9344.htm#.Wvo4X4gvxdg
http://www.officialgazette.gov.ph/2015/08/12/implementing-rules-and-regulations-of-republic-act-no-10175/
enjoy

[Gestum 2,493]

2 minutes ago, Starlight Nova said:

http://www.chanrobles.com/republicactno9344.htm#.Wvo4X4gvxdg
http://www.officialgazette.gov.ph/2015/08/12/implementing-rules-and-regulations-of-republic-act-no-10175/
enjoy

First of. Sec 7 which you qouted is about how to determinte the if someone is a child or not. That's not relevant to this disscusion.

Secondly I skimmed both of those sources and I found nothing that supports your statement. Can you pinpoint what section that proves that you're right?

I did find this however: "Cybersex involving a child shall be punished in accordance with the provision on child pornography of the Act." Sounds like Toon commited a crime in the Phillipines as well.

[Starlight Nova 3]

10 minutes ago, Gestum said:

First of. Sec 7 which you qouted is about how to determinte the if someone is a child or not. That's not relevant to this disscusion.

Secondly I skimmed both of those sources and I found nothing that supports your statement. Can you pinpoint what section that proves that you're right?

I did find this however: "Cybersex involving a child shall be punished in accordance with the provision on child pornography of the Act." Sounds like Toon commited a crime in the Phillipines as well.

3. Philippines
The Philippines is among the top ten countries with rampant cyber pornographic activities involving mostly
boys and girls aged 10-14 years.45 Hence, the government decided to enact a comprehensive legislation,
the Anti-Child Pornography Act of 2009 (abbr.: ACPA), in order to combat all sectors of child pornography.
a. Definition
The relevant definition for the child pornography provisions provided for in section 3 ACPA states as follows:
“Child” refers to a person below eighteen (18) years of age or over, but is unable to fully take care
of himself/herself from abuse, neglect, cruelty, exploitation or discrimination because of a physical
or mental disability or condition.
For the purpose of this Act, a child shall also refer to:
(1) a person regardless of age who is presented, depicted or portrayed as a child as defined
herein; and
(2) computer-generated, digitally or manually crafted images or graphics of a person who is
represented or who is made to appear to be a child as defined herein.
“Child pornography” refers to any representation, whether visual, audio, or written combination thereof, by
electronic, mechanical, digital, optical,
entities, to distribute any form of child pornography;
(g) For a parent, legal guardian or person having custody or control of a child to knowingly permit
the child to engage, participate or assist in any form of child pornography;
(h) To engage in the luring or grooming of a child;
(i) To engage in pandering of any form of child pornography;
(j) To willfully access any form of child pornography;
(k) To conspire to commit any of the prohibited acts stated in this section. Conspiracy to commit
any form of child pornography shall be committed when two (2) or more persons come to an
agreement concerning the commission of any of the said prohibited acts and decide to commit it;
and
(l) To possess any form of child pornography.
As this provision contains different offences, the analysis will be split up in different groups.
First of all, section 4 (b), (c), (d), (i), (j) and (l) ACPA are in line with international standards regarding the
catalogue of offences. Special attention has to be paid to the differentiation of section 4 (d) and (l) ACPA.
Section 4 (d) ACPA deals with the possession of child pornography with the intention to sell, distribute,
publish or broadcast. If the perpetrators lacks this intention, he or she can still be sentenced with the mere
possession of child pornography according to section 4 (l) ACPA. The differentiation makes sense as the
range of sentence differs between the two offences according to section 15 ACPA: the sentence for an
offence like section 4 (d) ACPA is higher than for the mere possession of child pornography. In the overall
assessment, section 4 (b), (c), (d), (i), (j) and (l) ACPA meet the highest international standard.
Section 4 (a) ACPA states that it is unlawful for any person to hire, employ, use, persuade, induce or coerce
a child to perform in the creation or production of any form of child pornography. This offence has to be
qualified as an abstract endangerment offence. This means that the offence does not require that the action
of the perpetrator causes actual harm to the victim or infringes the legally protected right, hence causes
a criminal “success”. The mere endangerment of the legally protected right is already conflicting with the
legal order and therefore has to be criminalised. The hiring of a child in order to produce child pornography
does not cause any harm to the child if the perpetrator never reaches the level of actually using the child
for the production of child pornography. Hence, the criminalised action (hiring of a child in order to use
it for the production of child pornography) and the actual violation of the child’s right (use of the child
for the production of child pornography) are two different offences under the Philippine legislation. This
differentiation is problematic as section 15 (b) sets the same range of sentence for section 4 (a) and section
4 (b) ACPA. This might violate the principle of proportionality. As an abstract endangerment offence such as
section 4 (a) ACPA does not violate and harm the potential victim to the same extent as the actual offence
(production of child pornography), there has to be a differentiation in the range of sentence. Otherwise, the
provision might be declared unconstitutional.
Section 4 (e) ACPA criminalises the provision of a venue for the commission of prohibited acts. This section
is redundant as this conduct is already covered by the regular criminal rules of support actions. Furthermore,
the provision lacks legal certainty as it does not specify the “prohibited acts”. Even though it most likely
refers to other acts enumerated in section 4 ACPA, the law is not precise enough in this regard.
Section 4 (f) ACPA is redundant as the distribution of child pornography is already criminalised in section 4
(c) ACPA and there is no recognisable added value to make a special provision for film distributors, theatres
and telecommunication companies. 
This definition is equal to Art 2 c) OPSC, however, the definition does not specifically refer to children.
Section 2 APA defines the term “child” as every person below the age of eighteen years.
The catalogue of offences in section 14 (1) APA criminalises following conduct:
A person who produces, participates in the production of, traffics in, publishes, broadcasts,
procures, imports, exports or in any way abets pornography depicting images of children, commits
an offence and is liable on conviction to a fine not exceeding seven hundred and fifty currency
points or imprisonment not exceeding fifteen years or both.
This provision does not meet international standards as it does not criminalise the possession and the
accessing of child pornography. Furthermore, it narrows the application scope to “images”. Hence, video,
text and sound are not included.
b. Computer Misuse Act, 2011
Section 23 Computer Misuse Act, 2011 (abbr.: CMA) regulates child pornography as follows:
(1) A person who-
(a) produces child pornography for the purposes of its distribution through a computer;
(b) offers or makes available child pornography through a computer;
(c) distributes or transmits child pornography through a computer;
(d) procures child pornography through a computer for himself or herself or another person; or
(e) unlawfully possesses child pornography on a computer, commits an offence.
(2) A person who makes available pornographic materials to a child commits an offence.
(3) For the purposes of this section “child pornography” includes pornographic material that
depicts-
(a) a child engaged in sexually suggestive or explicit conduct;
(b) a person appearing to be a child engaged in sexually suggestive or explicit conduct; or
(c) realistic images representing children engaged in sexually suggestive or explicit conduct.
(4) A person who commits an offence under this section is liable on conviction to a fine not
exceeding three hundred and sixty currency points or imprisonment not exceeding fifteen years or
both.
This provision equals almost entirely the provision in Art 9 BC. Hence, reference is made to the
explanatory notes regarding Art 9 BC. The only difference is that section 23 (3) CMA does not limit
the scope of applicability to visual depictions, but covers all pornographic material.
c. Best Practices
It is interesting to note that the act which intends to provide a comprehensive regulation of pornography
related offences fails the international standard and is poorly drafted compared to the earlier provision in
the Computer Misuse Act.
Even though section 23 CMA covers many aspects of child pornography, it does not include mere erotic
posing pictures and does not tackle the issue of sexting between minors. 

Philippines[edit]

The minimum age for consensual sex is 12 years. United States' Country Reports on Human Rights Practices lists the age of consent of Philippines as 12.^[71] Sexual intercourse with a person under the age of 12 is defined as rape, under Chapter 3, Article 266 of the Anti-Rape Law of 1997.^[72]

https://www.terredeshommes.nl/sites/tdh/files/uploads/hr_17021_tdh_report_webcam_manilla.pdf

another thing u can read 

[Gestum 2,493]

@[Starlight Nova] That doesn't prove your point. Give me a source that says that she can be "tried and sentenced without violating the minimum age for criminal liability law " because she broke the law regarding child porn. 

And if you are just going to link/copy and paste some random shit can you at least link me a funny video instead of some random law?

[Starlight Nova 3]

https://www.unicef.org/namibia/na.COP_Legal_Analysis.pdf

oh sorry i figured u did ur research into the laws of the philippines in regards to criminal liability so i am giving u context u just have to read thru till u find it 

[Lucid_Nightlight 923]

6 minutes ago, Starlight Nova said:

3. Philippines
The Philippines is among the top ten countries with rampant cyber pornographic activities involving mostly
boys and girls aged 10-14 years.45 Hence, the government decided to enact a comprehensive legislation,
the Anti-Child Pornography Act of 2009 (abbr.: ACPA), in order to combat all sectors of child pornography.
a. Definition
The relevant definition for the child pornography provisions provided for in section 3 ACPA states as follows:
“Child” refers to a person below eighteen (18) years of age or over, but is unable to fully take care
of himself/herself from abuse, neglect, cruelty, exploitation or discrimination because of a physical
or mental disability or condition.
For the purpose of this Act, a child shall also refer to:
(1) a person regardless of age who is presented, depicted or portrayed as a child as defined
herein; and
(2) computer-generated, digitally or manually crafted images or graphics of a person who is
represented or who is made to appear to be a child as defined herein.
“Child pornography” refers to any representation, whether visual, audio, or written combination thereof, by
electronic, mechanical, digital, optical,
entities, to distribute any form of child pornography;
(g) For a parent, legal guardian or person having custody or control of a child to knowingly permit
the child to engage, participate or assist in any form of child pornography;
(h) To engage in the luring or grooming of a child;
(i) To engage in pandering of any form of child pornography;
(j) To willfully access any form of child pornography;
(k) To conspire to commit any of the prohibited acts stated in this section. Conspiracy to commit
any form of child pornography shall be committed when two (2) or more persons come to an
agreement concerning the commission of any of the said prohibited acts and decide to commit it;
and
(l) To possess any form of child pornography.
As this provision contains different offences, the analysis will be split up in different groups.
First of all, section 4 (b), (c), (d), (i), (j) and (l) ACPA are in line with international standards regarding the
catalogue of offences. Special attention has to be paid to the differentiation of section 4 (d) and (l) ACPA.
Section 4 (d) ACPA deals with the possession of child pornography with the intention to sell, distribute,
publish or broadcast. If the perpetrators lacks this intention, he or she can still be sentenced with the mere
possession of child pornography according to section 4 (l) ACPA. The differentiation makes sense as the
range of sentence differs between the two offences according to section 15 ACPA: the sentence for an
offence like section 4 (d) ACPA is higher than for the mere possession of child pornography. In the overall
assessment, section 4 (b), (c), (d), (i), (j) and (l) ACPA meet the highest international standard.
Section 4 (a) ACPA states that it is unlawful for any person to hire, employ, use, persuade, induce or coerce
a child to perform in the creation or production of any form of child pornography. This offence has to be
qualified as an abstract endangerment offence. This means that the offence does not require that the action
of the perpetrator causes actual harm to the victim or infringes the legally protected right, hence causes
a criminal “success”. The mere endangerment of the legally protected right is already conflicting with the
legal order and therefore has to be criminalised. The hiring of a child in order to produce child pornography
does not cause any harm to the child if the perpetrator never reaches the level of actually using the child
for the production of child pornography. Hence, the criminalised action (hiring of a child in order to use
it for the production of child pornography) and the actual violation of the child’s right (use of the child
for the production of child pornography) are two different offences under the Philippine legislation. This
differentiation is problematic as section 15 (b) sets the same range of sentence for section 4 (a) and section
4 (b) ACPA. This might violate the principle of proportionality. As an abstract endangerment offence such as
section 4 (a) ACPA does not violate and harm the potential victim to the same extent as the actual offence
(production of child pornography), there has to be a differentiation in the range of sentence. Otherwise, the
provision might be declared unconstitutional.
Section 4 (e) ACPA criminalises the provision of a venue for the commission of prohibited acts. This section
is redundant as this conduct is already covered by the regular criminal rules of support actions. Furthermore,
the provision lacks legal certainty as it does not specify the “prohibited acts”. Even though it most likely
refers to other acts enumerated in section 4 ACPA, the law is not precise enough in this regard.
Section 4 (f) ACPA is redundant as the distribution of child pornography is already criminalised in section 4
(c) ACPA and there is no recognisable added value to make a special provision for film distributors, theatres
and telecommunication companies. 
This definition is equal to Art 2 c) OPSC, however, the definition does not specifically refer to children.
Section 2 APA defines the term “child” as every person below the age of eighteen years.
The catalogue of offences in section 14 (1) APA criminalises following conduct:
A person who produces, participates in the production of, traffics in, publishes, broadcasts,
procures, imports, exports or in any way abets pornography depicting images of children, commits
an offence and is liable on conviction to a fine not exceeding seven hundred and fifty currency
points or imprisonment not exceeding fifteen years or both.
This provision does not meet international standards as it does not criminalise the possession and the
accessing of child pornography. Furthermore, it narrows the application scope to “images”. Hence, video,
text and sound are not included.
b. Computer Misuse Act, 2011
Section 23 Computer Misuse Act, 2011 (abbr.: CMA) regulates child pornography as follows:
(1) A person who-
(a) produces child pornography for the purposes of its distribution through a computer;
(b) offers or makes available child pornography through a computer;
(c) distributes or transmits child pornography through a computer;
(d) procures child pornography through a computer for himself or herself or another person; or
(e) unlawfully possesses child pornography on a computer, commits an offence.
(2) A person who makes available pornographic materials to a child commits an offence.
(3) For the purposes of this section “child pornography” includes pornographic material that
depicts-
(a) a child engaged in sexually suggestive or explicit conduct;
(b) a person appearing to be a child engaged in sexually suggestive or explicit conduct; or
(c) realistic images representing children engaged in sexually suggestive or explicit conduct.
(4) A person who commits an offence under this section is liable on conviction to a fine not
exceeding three hundred and sixty currency points or imprisonment not exceeding fifteen years or
both.
This provision equals almost entirely the provision in Art 9 BC. Hence, reference is made to the
explanatory notes regarding Art 9 BC. The only difference is that section 23 (3) CMA does not limit
the scope of applicability to visual depictions, but covers all pornographic material.
c. Best Practices
It is interesting to note that the act which intends to provide a comprehensive regulation of pornography
related offences fails the international standard and is poorly drafted compared to the earlier provision in
the Computer Misuse Act.
Even though section 23 CMA covers many aspects of child pornography, it does not include mere erotic
posing pictures and does not tackle the issue of sexting between minors. 

Although it's good to be skeptical, Toon has actually admitted to his actions. If he truly was innocent, he could easily show sufficient evidence, which he did not, he admitted that the claims against him are true.

[Gestum 2,493]

4 minutes ago, Starlight Nova said:

https://www.unicef.org/namibia/na.COP_Legal_Analysis.pdf

That's just the article you copied from your last post. And again it doesn't prove what your trying to prove. Are you just posting random sources in hope that they prove you right?