stupid court cases

Man faces prison for posting swinger video

I like a good sensationalised heading. Did you happen to catch the YouTube video doing the rounds a few months back of a guy swinging a baby around in an aerobatic manner? It was on the Today Show and picked up all over the place. I won’t post it here – because doing so might land me in jail.

“Chelsea Emery, of Ryan and Bosscher Lawyers in Maroochydore, represents Chris Illingworth, who was charged with accessing and uploading child abuse material.

Illingworth, 61, published the three-minute clip on Liveleak, a site similar to YouTube but focused on news and current events.

Illingworth has uploaded hundreds of videos to the website. The one he was charged over, thought to have been created by a Russian circus performer, had already been published widely across the internet and shown on US TV news shows.”

That’s so incredibly stupid. Who on earth made the decision to pursue that prosecution.

Nanny state

I hate stupid legal proceedings. And this one takes the cake. The court in the UK should be absolutely ashamed of this.

Here’s the summary of the story:

The couple’s nightmare started in October 2003 when Mrs Webster took their second son to hospital with a swollen leg.

He was found to have a number of small fractures which doctors said could be caused only by physical abuse.

The following year they were permanently removed and put up for adoption after a one-day court hearing.

Medical experts later concluded that the injuries were not caused by violent twisting and shaking, but were symptoms of rare case of scurvy.

Mr Webster, 35, and his 27-year-old wife fled to Ireland in 2006 to stop their fourth child, Brandon,  being taken into care at birth.

The Appeal Court ruled on Wednesday that even though the Websters ‘may well’ have been victims of a miscarriage of justice the adoption order on their eldest three children could not be revoked because the youngsters are now settled with their adoptive parents.

Apparently the principle of “innocent until proven guilty” and a parent’s fundamental right to raise their children are both things of the past in the UK.

Scroll to Top