Quote Originally Posted by jim.cox View Post
Pleaded guilty to three representative charges of having objectionable publications of child sexual exploitation and bestiality.
.
someone recently got 3 years for I think similar sort of offending but who really knows how they rate this sort of offending.
Boyd Mitchell, 54, was sentenced in the Greymouth District Court on Wednesday to six representative charges of possessing 107,000 objectionable images and 4000 videos downloaded between 2012 and 2024.
https://www.odt.co.nz/regions/west-coast/panel-beater-jailed-child-sex-abuse-material
His house was set on fire three times, his car also.

I wondered what was it broadly classed as and what the av sentence is he still appears to have got off light but who knows what sick shit he had or how they even rate it

Objectionable material under NZ law also includes "objectionable material" under the Films, Videos, and Publications Classification Act 1993 includes content dealing with sex, horror, crime, cruelty, or violence in a way likely injurious to the public good, especially anything exploiting or sexually abusing children, promoting terrorism, or degrading groups of people. Key elements are depictions of child sexual abuse, promotion of sexual exploitation/coercion, child nudity, terrorism.
What makes it objectionable (Key Criteria):
Child Exploitation: Any material depicting child sexual abuse, child pornography, or exploiting children for sexual purposes.
Sexual Violence: Content promoting violence or coercion to compel sexual acts.
Terrorism/Crime: Material that promotes or supports terrorism or criminal acts.
Group Degradation: Content representing any class of the public as inherently inferior (based on race, religion, etc.).
Public Good: Deals with sex, horror, crime, cruelty, or violence in a manner likely to be injurious to the public good (a broad standard).
Oddly A few on KB have claimed its their right to post such material on KB previously....(racist crap not child abuse)