I would have said that a head teacher at a primary school who was convicted of having 457 indecent images of children on his computer, is a worse case than actor Chris Langham. However, a judge begs to differ and the former has been ordered to perform 150 hours of community service, and was also placed on probation for three years. Whereas Langham was sentenced to 10 months in custody for a lot less. Apparently, the judge justified the lenient sentence on "the fact that a relatively small number of images were involved". In my view, this is not a fact but fiction. I would hardly call 457 a relatively small number. Relative to what, your honour, the amount you have on your computer? Sheriff Alistair Noble, you should be completely ashamed of yourself! And so should the female teacher who tried to cover up for the head teacher!
4 comments:
Chris Langham's sentence was almost as ludicrous as your headline.
I seriously hope you've got some evidence to support your allegation against the Sheriff...
That's what Gary Glitter supporters said about the conviction of Paul Gadd....
Anonymous: You a pedo yerself?
Funny handshake brigade. *arf arf!*
I fink u absolootly riyt! I jus don a project for school on paedophilia an posted it on me blog.
I fink paedophiles have a well ard tiyme if they not the nasty buggers who do bad stuff to kids. Them that do stuff to kids r the worsest. But I fink if this teecha as onlee got pictas then is ee a bad man?
If u got pictas of women on ur bedroom r u goin to rape one?
Chris Langham ad level 5 pictas an they r well bad shit. So indecent can be jus a picta of a kid naked in som peeples eyes. My Mam as pictas of me naked an she no Peapod.
Pleese reed me blog an comment for my project.
Fanks.
Post a Comment