Chris Langham

[dynatech]

I've never seen any child abuse online either, in 7 years of looking at porn on the net and in the early days also checking out all the spam I was sent too. But, on the other hand, a mere 15 images does not a paedo make, while I find all the alleged images somewhat unpalatable, I'm also uncomfortable with the concept that clicking a button on a computer autimatically makes you guilty of producing a forbidden picture, and that in doing that you also 'become' a perpitrator of what the images are of... In a less emotive (i.e hysterical) case, such thinking would be blasted out of the water by all the legal eagles and human rights would be brought into the frame, but this particular crime, as we know, is the worst crime of any kind committed in the good old UK

[Deuce Bigolo]

He's either very stupid or he's got the P disease

Just very sad

Won't stop me watching smith & jones and seeing him make an ass of himself again & again as the halfwit in the panel of 4 talkfest

[mrmcfister]

This guy had level 5..bestiality and rape..one showed an 11 year old girl tied up and being beaten..if blokes like him did not pay for this stuff it would not get made.He's looking at 12 to 18 months.

[Pervert]

Langham and people like him are the tip of the iceberg. Important though it is to deal with them, and try to drive the hideous stuff they download out of existence, shouldn't we be concentrating more on the dregs that carry out assaults on children?

To use an analogy, this is rather like picking up heroin users and allowing the dealers to carry on working.

[dynatech]

Good analogy... the police do use similar tactics with 'drug pushers', they rarely bother with the big leaguers whom everybody knows about but are very to actually catch 'at it' but target the foolish 'pushers' who deal to fund their own habit and take all the risks, they are the ones paraded like trophies in the papers - they are a nuisance but are far from big league, and sorting them will not stop the problems of drug availabilty one iota however much they claim it will, similarly labelling someone a paedo for downloading a handful of images does nothing to halt child abuse, it's just a way of pandering to the demands of the misinformed public and trying to give them the impression that this is an ever-growing threat (which I don't believe it is - most 'abusers' seem to have been 'abused' themselves, all back in the good old days before mass media exposure and the t'interweb when you 'knew who to trust' and could leave your doors unlocked - which is completely lost on the majority who genuinely believe this is all something that has happened in the past 20 years)

[colonel]

I'd always liked Chris Langham- not just in the last five years; but back since 1979 when he was on the first series of Not The Nine O'Clock News. He had been a regular member of Spike Milligan's Q series since 1969, leaving university to join after Spike saw him perform.

He was a lead writer on the Muppet Show from 1979- 1981...and then he fell from grace- which everyone now forgets- due to drink and drug abuse.

So he had a second chance- and blew that too.

He was found guilty of downloading extreme images of abuse of girls. Level 5- as bad as it gets. That's why he will be getting a 1-3 year stretch.

Ok- so he didn't abuse anyone himself; but if people didn't buy the abuse from online, kids wouldn't get abused online.

[Trumpton]

warren zevon rip wrote:

> Trumpton wrote:
>
> > I just read that Langham's solictor is "delighted" at the
> > sentence
>
> Not sentenced until next week, Trumpty - been at the booze
> again?

Just quoting what his solictor said to the press.

Me, booze, I never touch it!!