Man posted intimate images of ex online, court hears

7 comments
  1. How thick can you be in fairness.

    Understandable (to protect the victim), but unfortunate that he won’t be named. People who interact with him in the future deserve to know who he is and what he’s capable of.

  2. Scumbag. I would hope that there is some education going on about social media in school? Maybe instead of forcing kid into a religion module we could teach them useful things like how to budget and not send naked pictures to people.

  3. > James McCullough BL, defending, said his client was “immature” and “naive”. He has ADHD and was under the care of Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services (CAMHS) until he turned 18, the court heard.

    > Once discharged from this service, he stopped taking his prescribed medication. He is someone who “acts without thinking of the consequences”, the court heard.

    > Defence counsel said that when the man committed this offence, the legislation making it a crime had only come into effect some months previously.

    See the excuses stacking up there already? He’ll walk away.

    Makes me mad.

  4. The court will use this case as an example of revenge porn legislation.
    With intent to distribute images of revenge porn it’s up to 7 years imprisonment and an unlimited fine.

    No intent to distribute and passed from one person to another. 1 year imprisoned and an undetermined fine.

    With this eejit. Probably 18 months in prison, but will be 7 years probation.

Leave a Reply