XPost: alt.sex.stories.d

Ex-school governor who imported child sex doll is jailed
UK
8 September 2017

David Turner arriving at Canterbury Crown CourtImage copyrightPA
Image caption
David Turner owned a number of child sex dolls, and possessed images of
child sexual abuse
A former school governor and church warden who imported a child sex doll
has been jailed for 16 months.
David Turner, 72, admitted importing the child-size item and possessing
34,000 images of child sexual abuse.
An investigation began when the UK Border Force intercepted a package in November, imported from China.
The National Crime Agency (NCA) then discovered that Turner, of
Ramsgate, Kent, had two other child sex dolls, and indecent images of
children.
Legal first
Turner was sentenced by Judge Simon James at Canterbury Crown Court for possessing a doll that was 3ft 10in (1.16m) tall, which he had also
bought clothes for.
He was sentenced to eight months for owning the doll and eight months
for possessing images of child sexual abuse.
He was officially convicted of one charge of importing a child sex doll,
three charges of possession of indecent images of a child, three charges
of making indecent images, and a charge of possessing extreme
pornographic images.
Child sex doll imported by David TurnerImage copyrightNATIONAL CRIME AGENCY Image caption
David Turner dressed the black haired doll himself
In July, a court ruled the child sex doll was an obscene item, after
Turner's lawyers had argued it was not covered by a law banning their importation.
Other men have been convicted for importing child sex dolls, but this
was the first case where the question of whether a doll is indecent or
obscene had been tested by the courts.
'Jail sentence inevitable'
Analysis: Danny Shaw, home affairs correspondent
What a terrible fall from grace for David Turner who until his arrest
last November was a much-respected member of the Ramsgate community.
Even though he had no previous convictions a jail sentence was
inevitable given the number of abuse images he'd amassed, including 138
of the most serious kind, and the need to send out a message to other
people contemplating ordering child sex dolls.
Investigators believe it's a growing problem facilitated by the internet.
This week, Simon Bailey, the chief constable who leads on child
protection for the National Police Chiefs' Council, said it wouldn't be
long before there were virtual reality videos of child sexual abuse -
and robots engineered for the task.
"Trust me, it will happen," he said.
In a police interview, Turner said he preferred viewing indecent images
of girls aged between four and 10 and added he had secretly taken
pictures of minors in public. Children in the images were as young as three.
He was placed on the sex offenders register for 10 years and given an indefinite sexual harm prevention order.
Officers also found that he had 29 fictional stories which described the
rape of children, but the accounts fell outside the Obscene Publications
Act.
The NCA's Hazel Stewart said: "Importing child dolls to have sex with -
as David Turner did - is a crucial flag to potential offending against children.
"In this case it enabled us to uncover Turner's long-standing sexual
interest in children. He should not be near them and I am delighted that
our investigation has seen him convicted and jailed."
'Swift action'
Turner is one of seven people in the UK to have been convicted for
possessing the obscene dolls to-date.
The Border Force has seized 123 dolls from 120 individuals since March 2016. They were convicted using a 19th Century law, called the Customs
Consolidation Act of 1876.
The Crown Prosecution Service's Donna East said: "Given the nature of
the offence, which is very much modern day, with people ordering these
sex dolls online, it is perhaps surprising that we are using laws dating
back to the end of the 19th century, but this demonstrates how the law
can apply to many circumstances."
Child sex dollsImage copyrightPA
Image caption
Child sex dolls are considered a relatively new phenomenon, which have
seen only a handful of convictions
The NSPCC has complained that the dolls offer a "legal loophole" to
potential child sex abusers, and has called for them to be criminalised
in the same way as indecent images.
The charity's chief executive Peter Wanless said: "At present in England
and Wales it is only illegal to import an obscene or indecent item. It
is not a crime to make these dolls, to distribute them or to possess them. "This is baffling and needs to be changed so that the law in relation to
child sex dolls is brought in line with the law on prohibited images.
"I urge [the home secretary] to take swift action and remedy this issue
at the earliest available opportunity."
Share this story About sharing

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-41203239

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: alt.sex.stories.d

I do have misgivings about criminalising the dolls but the whole sad thing
in this story is that nowhere does it seem that anyone is trying to find out exactly what it is that makes people sexually attracted to such young
people. I certainly don't get it. I can understand the naughty schoolgirl spanking role play, but that is a a completely different thing to abusing children as its not actually involving children.


I think more research is needed here as to why the brain becomes addicted to this sort of thing.
its sad and of course wrong to involve people who are not able to give
consent in this way.
Brian

--

-----
[email protected] is the alter ego of
Brian G.
Please note I am not a sexual predator or an axe murderer,
and despite some of the fantasies I may write,
I am only interested in consensual activities
and role playing, so please no insults,
as they will be ignored!:-)
"a425couple" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...

Ex-school governor who imported child sex doll is jailed
UK
8 September 2017

David Turner arriving at Canterbury Crown CourtImage copyrightPA
Image caption
David Turner owned a number of child sex dolls, and possessed images of
child sexual abuse
A former school governor and church warden who imported a child sex doll
has been jailed for 16 months.
David Turner, 72, admitted importing the child-size item and possessing 34,000 images of child sexual abuse.
An investigation began when the UK Border Force intercepted a package in November, imported from China.
The National Crime Agency (NCA) then discovered that Turner, of Ramsgate, Kent, had two other child sex dolls, and indecent images of children.
Legal first
Turner was sentenced by Judge Simon James at Canterbury Crown Court for possessing a doll that was 3ft 10in (1.16m) tall, which he had also bought clothes for.
He was sentenced to eight months for owning the doll and eight months for possessing images of child sexual abuse.
He was officially convicted of one charge of importing a child sex doll, three charges of possession of indecent images of a child, three charges
of making indecent images, and a charge of possessing extreme pornographic images.
Child sex doll imported by David TurnerImage copyrightNATIONAL CRIME
AGENCY
Image caption
David Turner dressed the black haired doll himself
In July, a court ruled the child sex doll was an obscene item, after
Turner's lawyers had argued it was not covered by a law banning their importation.
Other men have been convicted for importing child sex dolls, but this was
the first case where the question of whether a doll is indecent or obscene had been tested by the courts.
'Jail sentence inevitable'
Analysis: Danny Shaw, home affairs correspondent
What a terrible fall from grace for David Turner who until his arrest last November was a much-respected member of the Ramsgate community.
Even though he had no previous convictions a jail sentence was inevitable given the number of abuse images he'd amassed, including 138 of the most serious kind, and the need to send out a message to other people contemplating ordering child sex dolls.
Investigators believe it's a growing problem facilitated by the internet. This week, Simon Bailey, the chief constable who leads on child protection for the National Police Chiefs' Council, said it wouldn't be long before there were virtual reality videos of child sexual abuse - and robots engineered for the task.
"Trust me, it will happen," he said.
In a police interview, Turner said he preferred viewing indecent images of girls aged between four and 10 and added he had secretly taken pictures of minors in public. Children in the images were as young as three.
He was placed on the sex offenders register for 10 years and given an indefinite sexual harm prevention order.
Officers also found that he had 29 fictional stories which described the
rape of children, but the accounts fell outside the Obscene Publications
Act.
The NCA's Hazel Stewart said: "Importing child dolls to have sex with - as David Turner did - is a crucial flag to potential offending against
children.
"In this case it enabled us to uncover Turner's long-standing sexual
interest in children. He should not be near them and I am delighted that
our investigation has seen him convicted and jailed."
'Swift action'
Turner is one of seven people in the UK to have been convicted for
possessing the obscene dolls to-date.
The Border Force has seized 123 dolls from 120 individuals since March
2016.
They were convicted using a 19th Century law, called the Customs Consolidation Act of 1876.
The Crown Prosecution Service's Donna East said: "Given the nature of the offence, which is very much modern day, with people ordering these sex
dolls online, it is perhaps surprising that we are using laws dating back
to the end of the 19th century, but this demonstrates how the law can
apply to many circumstances."
Child sex dollsImage copyrightPA
Image caption
Child sex dolls are considered a relatively new phenomenon, which have
seen only a handful of convictions
The NSPCC has complained that the dolls offer a "legal loophole" to
potential child sex abusers, and has called for them to be criminalised in the same way as indecent images.
The charity's chief executive Peter Wanless said: "At present in England
and Wales it is only illegal to import an obscene or indecent item. It is
not a crime to make these dolls, to distribute them or to possess them.
"This is baffling and needs to be changed so that the law in relation to child sex dolls is brought in line with the law on prohibited images.
"I urge [the home secretary] to take swift action and remedy this issue at the earliest available opportunity."
Share this story About sharing

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-41203239

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: alt.sex.stories.d

On 2017-09-10 10:54, Brian G wrote:

I do have misgivings about criminalising the dolls but the whole sad thing
in this story is that nowhere does it seem that anyone is trying to find out exactly what it is that makes people sexually attracted to such young
people. I certainly don't get it. I can understand the naughty schoolgirl spanking role play, but that is a a completely different thing to abusing children as its not actually involving children.

Three (3) aspects off the top of my head:

- Firstly and primarily is that children are, by definition, non-sexual
humans (e.g. absence of developed sexual body marks doesn't trip genetically-determined triggers). So, sex with children is
sex-without-sex, so to speak, the act, but not the thing/intent. If you
are unconsciously afraid of sex (which is the rule), it amounts to a
(far from optimal) way of relief that doesn't trigger the super-ego.
Same underlying reason as for fantasies of being raped (prevalent among
women, but not only).

- Secondly, there's the control aspect. Children are weak and hence,
the domination is implicit. At the same time, I would imagine that
fantasies of being raped/seduced by a child (thus no domination) must be widespread as well, since that basically double downs on the first point
(sex, but not with a sexual being, so not really sex, *and* against
one's will, so really no guilt).

- Lastly, at least for the male actor, there's probably also a sadistic
aspect (hurting/destroying).

DF.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: alt.sex.stories.d

Hmm, not sure, since I do not have those feelings for children I guess its
hard to understand it.

My feelings are that most of us have crosstalk in our brains. they are not
like traditional computers and if a particular bit of crosstalk can produce pleasure at some level and we do that enough, those connections strengthen
and you have got a problem if those connections make you a bad person, so to speak. Its like gambling addiction which can work the same way of course. Indeed you only have to speak to any kind of addict to realise that they
will tell you black is white if it is a very strong addiction and deny the obvious.

The problem with us is that what passes for rationality in our conscious
mind is not the master of our subconscious, but the slave of it.
We just get fooled into thinking we are in control.
Brian

--

-----
[email protected] is the alter ego of
Brian G.
Please note I am not a sexual predator or an axe murderer,
and despite some of the fantasies I may write,
I am only interested in consensual activities
and role playing, so please no insults,
as they will be ignored!:-)
"Daniele Futtorovic" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...

On 2017-09-10 10:54, Brian G wrote:

I do have misgivings about criminalising the dolls but the whole sad
thing
in this story is that nowhere does it seem that anyone is trying to find
out
exactly what it is that makes people sexually attracted to such young
people. I certainly don't get it. I can understand the naughty schoolgirl
spanking role play, but that is a a completely different thing to abusing
children as its not actually involving children.

Three (3) aspects off the top of my head:

- Firstly and primarily is that children are, by definition, non-sexual humans (e.g. absence of developed sexual body marks doesn't trip genetically-determined triggers). So, sex with children is
sex-without-sex, so to speak, the act, but not the thing/intent. If you
are unconsciously afraid of sex (which is the rule), it amounts to a
(far from optimal) way of relief that doesn't trigger the super-ego.
Same underlying reason as for fantasies of being raped (prevalent among women, but not only).

- Secondly, there's the control aspect. Children are weak and hence,
the domination is implicit. At the same time, I would imagine that
fantasies of being raped/seduced by a child (thus no domination) must be widespread as well, since that basically double downs on the first point (sex, but not with a sexual being, so not really sex, *and* against
one's will, so really no guilt).

- Lastly, at least for the male actor, there's probably also a sadistic aspect (hurting/destroying).

DF.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: alt.sex.stories.d

On 2017-09-17 11:33, Brian G wrote:

Hmm, not sure, since I do not have those feelings for children I guess its hard to understand it.

My feelings are that most of us have crosstalk in our brains. they are not like traditional computers and if a particular bit of crosstalk can produce pleasure at some level and we do that enough, those connections strengthen and you have got a problem if those connections make you a bad person, so to speak. Its like gambling addiction which can work the same way of course. Indeed you only have to speak to any kind of addict to realise that they
will tell you black is white if it is a very strong addiction and deny the obvious.

The problem with us is that what passes for rationality in our conscious
mind is not the master of our subconscious, but the slave of it.
We just get fooled into thinking we are in control.
Brian

Neither do I have those feelings, but I feel confident that they can be extrapolated. Indeed, our rationality isn't the master of our
unconscious, but the unconscious is nevertheless rational; it only may
appear irrational to us because we don't know its inputs (as they are,
by definition, unconscious). In other words, if our unconscious weren't unconscious, that is, if we were aware of its tenets, its processes
would seem perfectly rational to us (modulo the rationality of
associations).
Pulsions, then, are another matter altogether -- they are beyond the
realm of the reason. Yet they too have a sense, at least in the evolutionary/biologic realm. They may or may not be controllable, but
like anything in this world, they have to be understood before that
question can be considered.

As for brain crosstalk and being a bad person... the latter's more a
matter of social norms, isn't it? Those have varied greatly across the
ages and areas, and still do. You can't quite demand that genetically-determined processes bow every whim of the moment.

Even today, it's still mainly the Anglo-Saxon world that's particularly
touchy about sex involving anything bu 18+-year olds. But hey, that's
the norm and that's that. And at any rate, in any society, if someone
initiates violence upon another, they ought to be held accountable. Does
it really matter what the circumstances are?

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)