This whole thing stinks of being a publicity stunt for a vtuber with under 500 twitch followers imo.
The bail documents pass the sniff test, so if it is real and not a very elaborate hoax I feel like there has to be more to it. UK digital forensics are so backlogged that it would make no procedural priority sense to target someone purely for having anime drawings when there's bigger fish to fry. There's only been one highly publicised conviction for drawings alone, and this is a guy that was already being monitored by police as a result of conditions imposed under a previous CSAM conviction.
I don't think it's impossible she had real material and got caught in a honeypot and is conveniently leaving that out.
It's important to note that the law considers non-real content differently to real content, they're categorised differently. Section 65 (3), used as a definition in Section 62 of the Coroners and Justice Act 2009 - the only part of the law under which non-real imagery is technically illegal - specifically says that
“Image” does not include an indecent photograph, or indecent pseudo-photograph, of a child when referring to non-real imagery ("pseudo-photographs" have to be indistinguishable from a real image).
If a conviction were to happen for non-real imagery, it would be tried under the lesser punishments for non-real imagery alone, not the extremely strict safeguarding conditions for real CSAM or contact offences about not being left alone with children that the bail documents appear to be referring to, and a Section 62 arrest alone likely wouldn't include such extreme conditions. Section 62 functions primarily as a supplementary charge to get people nabbed for contact offences or possessing real material in prison for longer or under stricter supervision conditions, if it were strictly enforced you'd be seeing dozens of highly publicised arrests a year if not more due to the sheer amount of material it covers on mainstream social media platforms that falls under the definitions, and the amount of lolicon et al. artists openly operating from the UK. If they opened the door to proactively prosecuting people for non-real material as a standard procedure it would be a resourcing disaster.
The most logical explanation given the forensics backlog (the UK's digital forensics system is in widely publicised crisis with backlogs of almost a year with forces under heavy pressure to not add to it unless absolutely necessary - so deploying officers to execute a warrant and make an arrest solely for drawn anime artwork would be a highly unusual allocation of police priority), the specific bail conditions, and how the law treats non-real imagery is that the police suspect the involvement of real material or contact offenses.
