uk.people.disability

On Fri, 7 Sep 2007 17:11:40 +0100, PeteM wrote:



>
>"If the test for deciding whether a photograph is indecent or not is
>whether or not it is the kind of photograph which appears in medical
>text books, then many of the photographs with which these courts are all
>too familiar could not be classified as indecent."
>
>... and from this they drew the stupid conclusion that the fact that
>similar photos had appeared in medical textbooks was irrelevant.

There is nothing even very slightly silly about that obviously correct
conclusion, never mind "stupid".

And note that they did NOT suggest that the same image in a medical
textbook would not be "indecent", merely that there is an exemption
for such works.

Whether this particular image is one which was objectively indecent,
we will never know without looking at it, but whether it is similar to
ones which could be found in a medical textbook *is* irrelevant,
because of that exception.

--
Alex Heney, Global Villager
All computers wait at the same speed.
To reply by email, my address is alexATheneyDOTplusDOTcom