uk.people.disability

On Sep 6, 4:51 pm, Cynic wrote:
> On Thu, 06 Sep 2007 15:17:44 +0100, judith wrote:

> On a beach in fact. No particular context - nothing sexual, ( . no
> erection, no "erotic posing"). Size IIRC 120 X 75 pixels - almost a
> thumbnail. Nothing that I would have considered indecent at all. In
> the Windows temporary directory together with several other
> miscellaneous images (not pornographic, not sexy, not of children)
> that were quite obviously cached from web pages. It was certainly not
> used as wallpaper either.
>
> --
> Cynic

Another lie

The picture was actually the torso of a naked young boy photographed
from the neck down so you couldn't see the boy's head and it was a
full sized image not a thumbnail image.

You admitted in Court that you had bulk downloaded pictures from
newsgroups called , and
overnight and you said that those newsgroups
only contained legal images.

You then said that you viewed the pictures with a program called
Thumbsplus to see what you had downloaded.

You told us that although you had Windows installed on your computer
you were old fashioned and you didn't use a mouse to operate your
computer but only used the keyboard to control it.

You said that you looked at the pictures you had downloaded in
Thumbsplus and when you saw the image that you were charged with you
were shocked and tried to delete it by pressing the Control and D
buttons on your keyboard but you accidentally pushed the Control and W
buttons (the W button is close to the D button on the keyboard) which
made a copy of the file in your Windows temp directory and turned the
picture into your desktop wallpaper.

Do you still operate your computer without a mouse?