[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Internet-Hetze im Observer

http://www.demon.co.uk/obs.txt.  Könnte irgendeiner der Juristen hier
mal erläutern, was unter dem `not proven verdict' (letzter Absatz) zu
verstehen ist?

>From The Observer, 25 August 1996, under the Fair Use provisions of the Berne 

--------- quote -----------

[Page 1 Headline block, approx. 5" high:]

The pedlars of child abuse: We know who they are. Yet no one is stopping

[Photo of Clive Feather, to the right of which is:]

The school governor who sells access to photos of child rape

CLIVE FEATHER is a director of Demon Internet which for GBP14
provides paedophiles with access to thousands of photographs of children
being sexually abused.  One photograph is of a girl being forced to have
sex with a man described as her father.  He says his company will not
withdraw links to paedophile 'newsgroups' because it is 'unacceptable
censorship' and would not prevent child abuse.

[Photo of Johan Helsingius, to the right of which is:]

The Internet middleman who handles 90 per cent of all child pornography

JOHAN HELSINGIUS is the man US police experts charge with being at the
hub of 90 per cent of the child pornography on the Internet. Perverts
can log on to and participate in 'live' and 'interactive' filmed
sessions that involve the rape of infants. The producers of this
illegal material are almost untraceable because of 'remailers' like


COMMENT: Whose rights matter most?

LIBERTY, declared Tom Paine, should never be mistaken for licence. It is
too precious a prize to be degraded by those who accept no obligation to
others in the exercise of their freedoms.

The users of the Internet who aid and abet child pornography and abuse
plead liberty as their defence. They protest that they cannot be
responsible for how others use the service they provide.

What they plead for is not liberty but society's licence to permit
unalloyed horror: The argument is inadmissible. The Observer
unhesitatingly backs all those - from the police to children's groups -
calling for control and prohibition. Liberty deserves no less.

David Connett and Jon Henley's special report begins on page 19

[/bold off]

Page 19:

These men are not paedophiles: they are the Internet abusers

by David Connett
and Jon Henley

[Large photos right of Clive, captioned "Clive Feather: 'If we could
block this stuff without doing more harm to ourselves, we would'" and
Johan, captioned "Johan Helsingius: Claims Finnish privacy laws prevent
him from monitoring his system."]

CLIVE FEATHER, a 35 year-old school governor and family man, and Johan
Helsingius, a Helsinki-based computer 'remailer', are key links in the
international paedophile chain.  One is a director of a company that
provides access to thousands of illegal photographs of young children
being sexually assaulted, the other provides a service which allows
those who abuse children for the pornography trade to supply the
Internet without fear of detection.

They may not know each other, and both claim they cannot beat the
paedophiles. But police forces in Britain and around the world are
pressing both to do more. They are increasingly aware that the Internet
is being used by paedophiles to fuel their fantasies and even supply
victims. Four men in the San Francisco area used a computer-mounted
camera to transmit a brutal session of child abuse.

Many think outrages like these happen in 'cyberspace', a different
dimension, miles away from our daily lives.  But the trail begins much
closer to home.  Feather, a software engineer, is an associate director
and spokesman for Demon Internet, the oldest and largest Internet
service provider in Britain. It provides access to virtually all of more
than 150 high-risk 'newsgroups' identified by police, including ones
clearly titled to attract paedophile interest.

For GBP14 and a further GBP11 a month, subscribers are given
access to photographs of children as young as eight being subjected to
harrowing abuse.

Scotland Yard detectives asked Feather and representatives of 39 other
Internet service providers to block access to these photographs. Almost
all agreed except Feather, who told officers that their request amounted
to 'unacceptable censorship'.

Feather, whose company has an estimated 65,000 subscribers, told the
Observer yesterday that he did not believe blocking access would prevent
children being abused.  Indeed, he believed it could lead to further
abuse by those who had previously only fantasised. 'If blocking access
to these groups would stop one child being abused then it is possibly
worth it. I am not convinced it will. Some people claim if they
[paedophiles] can get hold of pictures like these then it will be enough
to satisfy their urges. If they cannot get the material, they will go
out and attack real children.'

His company's service carried more than two million items per day and
would be impossible to monitor. 'If we could block this stuff without
doing more harm to ourselves we would.'

The photographs made available to Demon's subscribers through the
Internet are supplied anonymously by remailing companies which repackage
images to ensure it is impossible to trace the material's origins.

The largest anonymous remailer in the world is owned by Johan Helsingius
and has 500,000 users. It handles about 10,000 messages a day. Toby
Tyler, an FBI adviser on child abuse and pornography, says somewhere
between 75 and 90 per cent of all the child pornography I see 'is
supplied through this remailer.'

Helsingius claims that he is prevented by Finnish privacy laws from
knowing what passes through his system.

Finnish police have seized information from the remailer on half-a-dozen
occasions, acting on requests from police forces, but no child
pornography has been found.

There are a million different ways on to the Internet,' Tyler said.
There will always be some way of doing it.' Material fed across the Net
is being used not just to satisfy private perversions, but as a 'lure'
to entice new victims into an ever-widening circle of child abuse.  Many
convicted paedophiles are known to have shown their victims pornographic
videos before assaulting them.

Metropolitan Police officers were alarmed to find one paedophile
photograph on the Internet was from a magazine which had been first
found in the possession of two men convicted of attempting to kidnap
an eight-year-old boy. The image showed pre-pubescent children having
intercourse with each other.

The men intended to video themselves having sex with the child but were
arrested beforehand.

Scotland Yard has warned British service providers that unless they
withdraw access to illegal material they will be prosecuted under the
Protection of Children and Obscene Publications Acts.

Detectives are currently negotiating with the Internet Service Providers
Association, which represents more than 60 of the UK's 140 providers, to
establish a code of practice.

Shez Hamill, the association's chairman, said responsible providers were
being undermined by companies like Demon. 'We are being portrayed as a
bunch of porn merchants. This is an image we need to change. Many of our
members have already acted to take away the worst of the Internet. But
Demon have taken every opportunity to stand alone in this regard. They
do not like the concept of our organisation.'

Detective Chief Inspector Stephen French said: 'The service providers
claim they are just the carriers and are not concerned about the
content. But this is a fruitless, redundant argument which we do not
accept. Morally you cannot adopt this position.'

However, police sources said enforcement of the Child Protection Act
would not begin until the industry had been given a chance to put its
house in order.

The Department of Trade and Industry, which is responsible for
monitoring the Internet, also believes self-regulation is the way

But children's charities warn that this is not enough. Nigel Williams,
director of Childnet International, a charity set up to protect children
using the Internet, said: 'Recent events in Belgium and elsewhere have
highlighted the international nature of paedophile networks and the
increasing use of the Internet for the exchange of the paedophilia.  The
Government has shown it is concerned. But actions speak louder than
words. They need to act internationally and fund essential research
and enforcement activities.'

The Internet has created a vile perpetual motion: no longer do
paedophiles have to make expensive trips to countries where laws are
lax: they can upload and download their sick fantasies from the
comfort of their homes, fuelling a demand for more abuse, and a need for
more child victims. 'The Net is heaven for the paedophile,' said Toby
Tyler of the FBI.

Anti-paedophile campaigners gathering in Stockholm tomorrow for the
first World Congress Against the Commercial Sexual Exploitation of
Children will work on an international strategy to police the
Internet and to curb the number of Western men travelling to developing
countries in search of under-age prostitutes.

Yesterday two British organisations said they would use the congress to
'float' proposals to add names of 'suspected paedophiles' to Home
Secretary Michael Howard's planned register of those with convictions.

Deryck Mead, chief executive of NCH Action for Children, called for the
introduction of the Scottish  not proven' verdict in English courts
hearing child abuse cases.

[end quote]

My thanks to however took the time to prepare this in machine-readable form.