Tens of thousands of child porn images uncovered in Garda raids.

Captain Obvious

Hopefully 31 perverts are ****ting themselves about their lives being over.

GARDAÍ HAVE SEARCHED 31 premises in 12 counties across Ireland as part of an operation targeting those with pornographic and abusive images of children.
In those searches carried out as part of Operation Ketch between Friday and today, “tens of thousands” of abusive images of children were found

http://www.thejournal.ie/garda-searches-child-porn-operation-ketch-3835279-Feb2018/

If you want to help Europol find these people they are always looking for assistance identifying images here.

BoroMan32

31,000 images from private residences and no arrests made yet?

BoroMan32

BoroMan32 wrote: »

31,000 images from private residences and no arrests made yet?

I say they wanna make sure they get something like this locked down tight first - don't wanna risk making mistakes that'd let em walk away

wexie

bluewolf wrote: »

I say they wanna make sure they get something like this locked down tight first - don't wanna risk making mistakes that'd let em walk away

Would just having the images not be enough grounds to be arrested and taken in on the spot?

SEPT 23 1989

Is a premises the same as a house?

eviltwin

Really hate the phrase "child porn". Let's call it what it's, images of child ABUSE. Calling those images pornography is a minimisation of what the children involved suffer.

Captain Obvious

wexie wrote: »

Would just having the images not be enough grounds to be arrested and taken in on the spot?

Yes. Unfortunately Irish law allows for only 24 hours to question somebody. So generally all the images will be catloged and resulting leads investigated before the person is detained for questioning so everything can be put to them at once.

retro:electro

eviltwin wrote: »

Really hate the phrase "child porn". Let's call it what it's, images of child ABUSE. Calling those images pornography is a minimisation of what the children involved suffer.

I was just about to say the same. I hate the terminology. It's not child porn, they're child sex abuse images.

Vronsky

Captain Obvious wrote: »

Hopefully 31 perverts are ****ting themselves about their lives being over.



http://www.thejournal.ie/garda-searches-child-porn-operation-ketch-3835279-Feb2018/

If you want to help Europol find these people they are always looking for assistance identifying images here.

There is only one of those images that anyone will be able to identify - the urban drainage channel.

wexie

Captain Obvious wrote: »

Yes. Unfortunately Irish law allows for only 24 hours to question somebody. So generally all the images will be catloged and resulting leads investigated before the person is detained for questioning so everything can be put to them at once.

......

......

I'm actually kinda lost for words

So....surely they're not just free to do as they please in the mean time? I presume at the very least they'll have their passports taken off them?

That doesn't make any sense to me at all

s4uv3

The police that deal with this stuff and have to view images and hear the horror stories are nothing short of heroes.
I wouldn't last ten minutes in the job.

wexie

s4uv3 wrote: »

The police that deal with this stuff and have to view images and hear the horror stories are nothing short of heroes.
I wouldn't last ten minutes in the job.

I know, really wouldn't fancy that job. Hope they get decent counseling support.
Don't even want to click on the link above for fear of what's there?

Aint Eazy Being Cheezy

Vronsky wrote: »

There is only one of those images that anyone will be able to identify - the urban drainage channel.

Not true. I’ve just submitted a guess at where the boiler might be, looks similar to a holiday apartment I stayed in before.

wexie

Aint Eazy Being Cheezy wrote: »

Not true. I’ve just submitted a guess at where the boiler might be, looks similar to a holiday apartment I stayed in before.

Are the pictures just inanimate objects and surroundings taking from the 'other' pictures?

eviltwin

wexie wrote: »

Are the pictures just inanimate objects and surroundings taking from the 'other' pictures?

Just random objects and some clothing.

Irish Guitarist

wexie wrote: »

Are the pictures just inanimate objects and surroundings taking from the 'other' pictures?

There's nothing graphic but there are a couple of pictures of children sitting down with their faces cropped out. Someone said they're pictures of clothes, but there's definitely children wearing the clothes.

Allinall

Bloody Gardai doing proper police work instead of catching people with no car tax.

I’m sick of it.

wexie

Allinall wrote: »

Bloody Gardai doing proper police work instead of catching people with no car tax.

I’m sick of it.

Ya know, I'm all for a bit of banter and personally I think there aren't many things you shouldn't be allowed make fun of...

this is one of em though

eagle eye

Well hopefully these criminals get plenty of jail time. Sadly its unlikely they get much, if any, time behind bars with our awful justice system.

The_Valeyard

Say this was timed to coincide with internet safety day tomorrow. Was great how they kept quiet the last three days until the operation was complete. Otherwise evidence could have been destroyed.

khaldrogo

eviltwin wrote:

Really hate the phrase "child porn". Let's call it what it's, images of child ABUSE. Calling those images pornography is a minimisation of what the children involved suffer.

For sake of being pedantic, and while I abhor these scum, if someone has a telephotic lens and takes pics of kids from 100m or so away on a beach or something then its technically porn and not abuse.

Someone having images of kids and someone physically abusing kids are different levels of scum.

If someone took a pic of my kid from 100m away I'd probably make a gesture towards them to fug off but if someone touched my kid I literally kill them.

eviltwin

khaldrogo wrote: »

For sake of being pedantic, and while I abhor these scum, if someone has a telephotic lens and takes pics of kids from 100m or so away on a beach or something then its technically porn and not abuse.

Someone having images of kids and someone physically abusing kids are different levels of scum.

If someone took a pic of my kid from 100m away I'd probably make a gesture towards them to fug off but if someone touched my kid I literally kill them.

I wouldn't call a photo of a child doing something normal like playing on a beach porn either.

I get what you are saying and agree there are levels, I just feel using the word porn in relation to children is wrong and inappropriate.

retro:electro

khaldrogo wrote: »

For sake of being pedantic, and while I abhor these scum, if someone has a telephotic lens and takes pics of kids from 100m or so away on a beach or something then its technically porn and not abuse.

Someone having images of kids and someone physically abusing kids are different levels of scum.

If someone took a pic of my kid from 100m away I'd probably make a gesture towards them to fug off but if someone touched my kid I literally kill them.

The abuse angle is doesn't just come from the content of the image, but the intent behind the pictures. Having some dirty pervert getting his jollies from watching images of children is an abuse of their rights and that isn't minimised by whether or not the child is aware the pictures are being taken. It's never a victimless crime because the exploitation doesn't end when the image is taken, it only begins, and so the abuse continues.

bear1

I can't understand the minds of the people who get off to these sick acts.
They are kids, KIDS! Innocence ripped away from them for the pleasure of some sick pieces of **** humans who has no worth to the world other than to spread the diagustiness of child abuse.
I sincerely hope it's a life sentence and they then get to witness first hand and personally experience the abuse the children suffered.
Well done the guards.

baylah17

https://m.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/woman-accused-of-dressing-child-up-in-lingerie-to-be-raped-by-her-husband-36563934.html
How about this beauty? Dressed her 4 year old daughter in lingerie for her husband to rape.

Ulysses Gaze

Let's just hope that if any of these potential scum do go to trial, that "Suspended Sentence" Nolan is not presiding.

240 images and 2 videos? Suspended sentence

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/former-youth-worker-caught-with-child-pornography-avoids-jail-35583357.html

1,300 unique image files and 11 unique movies? Suspended Sentence

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/courts/circuit-court/suspended-sentence-for-music-teacher-who-had-child-pornography-1.3290479

5900+ images? Suspended Sentence

https://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/former-civil-servant-avoids-jail-term-for-child-pornography-613275.html

300 images? Suspended Sentence

https://www.thejournal.ie/darknet-3311338-Mar2017/

God help you if you smuggle Garlic though!

Dr Turk Turkelton

There won't be a relish milked in Ballymaloe tonight.

Summer wind

It makes me feel sick to think that we breathe the same air as these disgusting bastards.

McCrack

wexie wrote: »

......

......

I'm actually kinda lost for words

So....surely they're not just free to do as they please in the mean time? I presume at the very least they'll have their passports taken off them?

That doesn't make any sense to me at all

The gardai receive intelligence that someone is in possession/distributing child abuse pictures or videos. They get a warrant and search and seize electronic devices.

They then have to analyse them which could take weeks or months. Then they can make their arrests for the purposes of interview and charging.

Bail will normally be granted pending DPP directions and plea and unless there is a specific concern the accused will not appear again an application to surrender passport will be made but that would be unusual.

Signing on conditions at local garda station would be typical

khaldrogo

eviltwin wrote:

I get what you are saying and agree there are levels, I just feel using the word porn in relation to children is wrong and inappropriate.

100%

vicwatson

Dr Turk Turkelton wrote: »

There won't be a relish milked in Ballymaloe tonight.

Oh oh you mentioned the B word, thread lockdown coming

vicwatson

In fairness to RTE were using the term child abuse today

_Dara_

Vronsky wrote: »

There is only one of those images that anyone will be able to identify - the urban drainage channel.

Believe it or not, mundane details do help catch people. Someone can recognise something that seems unremarkable. They’re doing that because they’ve had success with it in the past.

Beanntraigheach

Surely all paedophiles, regardless of whether they've actually committed a crime or not, should be institutionalised for life. No exceptions. They should NEVER have any type of access to children.

In some cases castration may, perhaps, be an option.

_Dara_

khaldrogo wrote: »

For sake of being pedantic, and while I abhor these scum, if someone has a telephotic lens and takes pics of kids from 100m or so away on a beach or something then its technically porn and not abuse.

Someone having images of kids and someone physically abusing kids are different levels of scum.

If someone took a pic of my kid from 100m away I'd probably make a gesture towards them to fug off but if someone touched my kid I literally kill them.

Children are abused in the making of the images and it’s the demand for the images by downloaders that results in these videos and photos being made. Anyone who downloads this stuff is complicit in the abuse that happens. It’s totally different to someone taking a distant photo of an unsuspecting kid who is not being abused. That’s still creepy and wrong but different from someone consuming images and videos featuring child abuse. The demand is created by these lowlifes.

nozzferrahhtoo

Beanntraigheach wrote: »

Surely all paedophiles, regardless of whether they've actually committed a crime or not, should be institutionalised for life. No exceptions. They should NEVER have any type of access to children. In some cases castration may, perhaps, be an option.

I think I prefer living in a country where we do not make a habit of locking up the innocent, curtailing their rights, or creating incentives for engaging in the sexual equivalent of witch hunts.

Maybe you should move to Canada and revive the 1960s "Gaydar" project to create a "fruit machine" that detected homosexuality. The government there used to think homosexual public servants a threat to national security. So if you find people old and sanctimonious enough you might still find some will there to revive attempts to ascertain a person's sexuality by artificial means in an attempt to curtail their rights, freedoms and job opportunities.

There are probably even a few defunct manufacturing companies that would LOVE the chance to start churning out a few plethysmographs for you in that country, or you could import them from america where there is probably a few lying around after being used to show that the more homophobic you are, the more likely you are to be turned on by homosexual pornography. An effect I have often wondered as to whether it transfers over to the more extreme reactions to pedophilia.

TomSweeney

eviltwin wrote: »

I wouldn't call a photo of a child doing something normal like playing on a beach porn either.

I get what you are saying and agree there are levels, I just feel using the word porn in relation to children is wrong and inappropriate.

I was about to ask that, I have pics of my own kids on a beach ... playing ... with bare bums, these are on my flickr account (not public) but technically I could be in trouble ??

I mean I'm not worried they are obviously innocent in nature, but I wonder how the police make that cataloging decision etc..

but yeah, horrible job to have to go through all this, I guess these guys probably need councelling.

Wibbs

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

I think I prefer living in a country where we do not make a habit of locking up the innocent, curtailing their rights, or creating incentives for engaging in the sexual equivalent of witch hunts.

Maybe you should move to Canada and revive the 1960s "Gaydar" project to create a "fruit machine" that detected homosexuality. The government there used to think homosexual public servants a threat to national security. So if you find people old and sanctimonious enough you might still find some will there to revive attempts to ascertain a person's sexuality by artificial means in an attempt to curtail their rights, freedoms and job opportunities.

There are probably even a few defunct manufacturing companies that would LOVE the chance to start churning out a few plethysmographs for you in that country, or you could import them from america where there is probably a few lying around after being used to show that the more homophobic you are, the more likely you are to be turned on by homosexual pornography. An effect I have often wondered as to whether it transfers over to the more extreme reactions to pedophilia.

Wow, you're actually comparing homosexuality between consenting adults with paedophilia? Brilliant. *slow handclap*

nozzferrahhtoo

Wibbs wrote: »

Wow, you're actually comparing homosexuality between consenting adults with paedophilia?

Nope. Not even a little bit. Try reading it again there rather than rushing to pecksniffery to find a way to use a pretty GIF you had lying around.

What I WAS comparing was the psyche of those who want to hunt out people innocent of any crime, by using dubious witch hunt methods, and suggesting that the type of person who wanted to hunt out homosexuals is probably the type of person that would support the ridiculous notion put forward by Beanntraigheach above that innocent people should be put away, or castrated.

Dakota Dan

SEPT 23 1989 wrote: »

Is a premises the same as a house?

Don't know, what if someone accidentally downloaded, would they be branded for the rest of their lives?

Lackey

Dakota Dan wrote: »

Don't know, what if someone accidentally downloaded, would they be branded for the rest of their lives?

Not sure how it could happen?
But if it did surely first port of call would be to the guards to report the site that the images of abuse were on?

Bridge93

Beanntraigheach wrote: »

Surely all paedophiles, regardless of whether they've actually committed a crime or not, should be institutionalised for life. No exceptions. They should NEVER have any type of access to children.

In some cases castration may, perhaps, be an option.

Leaving aside the illegalities on both an Irish and international level, this would be literally impossible to try carry out

TomSweeney

It's almost impossible to "accidentally" download this material, it's not just lying around regular porn sites.
Those that get it know exactly what they want and how to get it - also its usually 1000s of images that are found - impossible to download this many by accident.

Kermit.de.frog

Beanntraigheach wrote: »

Surely all paedophiles, regardless of whether they've actually committed a crime or not, should be institutionalised for life.

Christ. Ok Columbo, how do we decipher who is a child abuser and who isn't?

I ask this in the context of the Garda corruption up and down the country uncovered targeting citizens of this country they simply did not like.

See where i'm going with this?

The_Valeyard

Dakota Dan wrote: »

Don't know, what if someone accidentally downloaded, would they be branded for the rest of their lives?

Id say the gardai are well aware of that and monitor a suspect for a long time before making a move on them. Consistent and repeated behaviour would be grounds for a raid, otherwise you could destroy someones liife and reputation.

nozzferrahhtoo

TomSweeney wrote: »

It's almost impossible to "accidentally" download this material, it's not just lying around regular porn sites.

Hard to say really. There are a number of user run porn sites. Where users upload images for others to download.

When "dodgy" or outright illegal images are uploaded, there is a community control of this where the images are reported and investigated and removed.

But there is a time delay there. And during that delay anyone can open and download an image that they otherwise would not, solely because it is there.

Sites like newbienudes and motherless spring to mind here as two examples where this could and can happen.

But as you say, when it gets into 100s or 1000s of images.... if even that many.......... we quickly reach a point where I do not think someone can plead error or accident.

wexie

TomSweeney wrote: »

It's almost impossible to "accidentally" download this material, it's not just lying around regular porn sites.
Those that get it know exactly what they want and how to get it - also its usually 1000s of images that are found - impossible to download this many by accident.

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

But as you say, when it gets into 100s or 1000s of images.... if even that many.......... we quickly reach a point where I do not think someone can plead error or accident.

That's exactly it, first of all these things aren't 'accidentally' downloaded by following a link off the likes of Pornhub.

Second, if you do happen to find yourself in some of the seedier parts of the net and 'accidentally' find one of these images you need to think long and hard about where you find yourself.

Accidentally downloading one or two of these images could maybe potentially happen if you have more 'adventurous' browsing habits. But if you then see what you have and choose to frequent the same site....

I'm no forensic expert but I'd find it hard to believe you could 'accidentally' end up with more than a few images of this kind.

And frankly, even if you manage to stumble upon a few I think perhaps you need to start re-evaluating your browsing habits.

Chrongen

wexie wrote: »

Would just having the images not be enough grounds to be arrested and taken in on the spot?

Not necessarily. It has to be precise and meticulous. The owner of the broadband connection may have nothing to do with the downloads/uploads. There may be multiple people at a residence sharing a connection and even a computer and even a neighbour's wifi :eek:
Knee-jerk reactions are never a good thing if you want to avoid fcuk-ups and people walking on technicalities. Also there could be a lot of innocent people involved, as I mentioned, housemates of the perpetrators who might be completely oblivious to the goings on of others. You don't want them to be wrongfully arrested or implicated in something as serious as this.

Chrongen

s4uv3 wrote: »

The police that deal with this stuff and have to view images and hear the horror stories are nothing short of heroes.
I wouldn't last ten minutes in the job.

My friend's brother is in a vice squad team who has to view and document this stuff. He has to receive psychological evaluations on a regular basis.

Nekarsulm

Dr Turk Turkelton wrote: »

There won't be a relish milked in Ballymaloe tonight.

They may have to move to a cottage in the garden .......

seamus

TomSweeney wrote: »

It's almost impossible to "accidentally" download this material, it's not just lying around regular porn sites.
Those that get it know exactly what they want and how to get it - also its usually 1000s of images that are found - impossible to download this many by accident.

Well that's not entirely true.

The people who run these sites have been known to use botnets for P2P distribution of material, meaning that someone's infected computer could be hosting the material completely without their knowledge.

It will also be present in torrents under innocent-looking names, and someone who has their machine set up automatically download and seed torrents will be inadvertently distributing this material too.

You also have things like 4chan, where every link is a risky click. If you click on something that brings up these images and then close it straight away, the material may still be sitting in the cache on your machine.

In all scenarios the material is being stored on your machine, and you may be completely unaware of it. While having the material is itself an offence whether you're aware of it or not, it's a very difficult case to prosecute because there's no intent.

Plus, what public good is served by prosecuting someone who's done nothing wrong?

This is why the people convicted, usually have hundreds or thousands of images. The investigators need to be sure that it was intentionally viewed, and the best way to do that is to show that it was intentionally stored.

Being accused of child sexual offences is arguably worse than being convicted of murder. So you need to be very sure you've got the right guy before you go pointing fingers.