specimen charges - anyone understand how this works?

[ThatllDoPig]

Been looking online, but finding it really hard to understand. Can anyone explain how this works legally?

I see that one charge (crime) reprisents many identical crimes.
But are there limits to the number each can reprisent?

And is this system ever used by the CPS/police to sort of 'bolster up' crimes. And WHY would they do this? Could the specimen charge EVER be 'worse' than the many other charges.
For example -
Could a specimen charge of an illegal image involving child abuse of a pre pubesent child, possibly be used to reprisent many other images of say, 17 or 18 year olds, who may or may not be legally consenting?

I think I am being expected to believe bullshit, and this is causing a lot of family disagreement and pain. But I just don't know where to start in finding real answers to prove my gut feeling that we are being fed lies by a sex offender. Please help if you can.

[prh47bridge]

Specimen charges should accurately reflect the accused's alleged conduct over the period in question. They cannot be used to "bolster up" crimes and a specimen charge certainly cannot be used to represent things that are not criminal offences.

The specimen charge you mention suggests you are dealing with a paedophile. There is no common profile of paedophiles but they tend to be good with children and very plausible.

[ThatllDoPig]

thanks for replying. Feeling really isolated here.
The person has pleaded guilty to child sex offences and other extreme porn offences. He has a suspended sentence and is on the sex offenders register. He wants to have contact with my kids. (Not alone as that goes against his sex offenders register conditions.)
He is claiming that a number of the pictures were children. But that this number has been used as specimen charges, to reprisent many many other images which he is claiming could never be proved to be illegal, unless the birth certificates of the people in the pictures could be provided. He's claiming this was 'normal' legal porn that lots of men have. And a much smaller bank of illegal porn which came in an email has been used to unfairly reprisent this 'normal' bank. He says he pleaded guilty to avoid costs and publicity.
I think he's lying. But when I say that sex offenders lie and manipulate people other family members think I have 'skewed' suspisious views on these things due to issues from my past and lots of counselling.

[prh47bridge]

By his own admission he had illegal images. If he was innocent he would have deleted the illegal ones as soon as he realised what they were. And such images are not sent randomly to people. The sender would have had some reason to believe he wanted them. Even if his claim that all the other images were legal is true (unlikely) he has committed child sex offences. Personally I wouldn't allow him anywhere near my children even with supervision.

[RedHelenB]

Is he related to the children?

Think if he is then it needs to be a matter for the courts to decide. If not, then personally I would say no.

[ThatllDoPig]

Thanks prh It does help to hear this from someone else.

[Midge25]

Agree withprh. Specimen offences are usually used when there is a large number of matters, spanning a lengthy period and/or in situations where it is complex and costly (beyond what is felt to be justifiable wrt to the public purse) to deal with each individual offence. If he, as he claims, had images in possession which were not illegal, then these would attract no conviction at all, specimen or otherwise. I think you're right to question this man's account. Those who view indecent images must seek them out. Often they have to pay for them. They do not 'appear' on someone's computer. If you are in doubt, you could contact the police in your local area; given this person is seeking contact w/ your children, they may be able to give you objective info re risk to allow you to safeguard/protect.

[ThatllDoPig]

redHelen there wasn't a proper court case as he pleaded guilty.
He is family member. Now expecting us to believe things with no proof.

[RedHelenB]

No, I wouldn't allow contact even if it was supervised in this instance as there is a possibility that a relationship would grow & the children feel safe with him if he did manage to see them unsupervised. However, if he is the dad then I feel a court couldorder supervised access.