Crime Paedophile Labour councillor who worked in children's home walks free despite being caught with over one million child porn images

Article (Archive)

Paedophile Labour councillor who worked in children's home walks free despite being caught with over one million child porn images including 12-year-old girls being raped

Roger Spackman, 50, was a Labour councillor on Exeter City Council until 2017
Court heard he was part of underground internet network called The Other Place
Judge Peter Johnson jailed Spackman for ten months, suspended for two years

A paedophile Labour councillor who worked in a children's home has walked free despite being caught with over one million child porn images - including of 12-year-old girls being raped.
Roger Spackman, 50, who was a Labour councillor on Exeter City Council until his arrest in 2017, worked at a secure children's home at the time he started collecting the enormous hoard of images.
Exeter Crown Court heard that he was part of an underground internet network called The Other Place.
A police investigation in 2017 charged the two front runners with offences and other members were exposed.
But Judge Peter Johnson jailed Spackman for ten months, suspended for two years, with 40 days rehab for possessing a 'huge number of images'.
Spackman, of Exeter, Devon, was arrested and 68 electronic devices were found at his home and examined.
Judge Johnson said it was 'an astonishing number' of images which included the most serious category A images and others of category B and C.
The judge said he was of good character working hard in public service as a councillor in Exeter before his 'fall from grace which has been dramatic'.
He said Spackman had been abused as a child and played the role of an abused child in this forum.
Many of the images were inaccessible but the offences dated back to 2008 - seven years after he began working at the secure children's home.
The court heard the most graphic images showed young girls aged 12 being raped.
Spackman's barrister Barry White said: 'He likes to pretend he is a young girl who will be abused. He will pretend to be a young girl.'
Mr White stressed: 'None of the images are of people who he knows. He has never sexually assaulted any children nor would he do so.
'The images were sent to him by the other party in the fantasy which were indicative of what that person liked. He did not get to choose what images but he accepted them all.'
Prosecutor Thomas Faulkner said some of the worst images were found on two devices found in his bedroom.
He said: 'Those images depicted pre-pubescent girls forced to take part in sexual activity.'
Mr White said there had been 'considerable impact' on his life since his arrest in October 2017 - quitting his Labour seat the day after his arrest and avoiding going out in public because 'everyone knows what he has done'.
Spackman admitted between October 2007 and July 2017 possessing still and moving images of categories A, B and C as well as possessing a prohibited image and possessing 48 extreme pornographic images involving an animal.

 

[Getting tard comed]

One less pedophile who can harm children is a moral good, even though to kill is a moral evil.

Says who?

 

[idosometimes]

Spackman's barrister Barry White said: 'He likes to pretend he is a young girl who will be abused. He will pretend to be a young girl.'

If he changed "will pretend to be' to "identifies as" then he would have gotten an apology for the ordeal they caused him.

 

[KimCoppolaAficionado]

Says who?

God, the most high, in the Sixth Commandment: "Thou shalt not kill."
Spoken again through His son, Jesus Christ: "Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself".
You cannot kill out of love, and he who loves killing, even the killing of those who deserve to die, hates God.
For did the Pharisees and Romans not all deserve death, for they hated and killed the Lord God in person? And yet, Christ forbade the apostles from striking them down. Even in the Garden, when Simon Peter drew his sword and severed Malchus's ear, did Christ reward him for it? No: he rebuked Peter and healed Malchus. As Christ suffered the Passion, he prayed for the salvation of those who killed him, saying "Forgive them, Father, for they know not what they do". And when he rose, did he march against the Pharisees, slaughter them, and butcher the Romans, as he could? No: he instead charged the apostles to spread the path to salvation to those who condemned him to death.
To kill those deserving of death is still to kill, and one must still seek forgiveness and feel shame in doing it; for hands sullied for a better world are still sullied.
You call yourself a Christian and don't know this?

 

[Getting tard comed]

God, the most high, in the Sixth Commandment: "Thou shalt not kill."
Spoken again through His son, Jesus Christ: "Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself".
You cannot kill out of love, and he who loves killing, even the killing of those who deserve to die, hates God.
For did the Pharisees and Romans not all deserve death, for they hated and killed the Lord God in person? And yet, Christ forbade the apostles from striking them down. Even in the Garden, when Simon Peter drew his sword and severed Malchus's ear, did Christ reward him for it? No: he rebuked Peter and healed Malchus. As Christ suffered the Passion, he prayed for the salvation of those who killed him, saying "Forgive them, Father, for they know not what they do". And when he rose, did he march against the Pharisees, slaughter them, and butcher the Romans, as he could? No: he instead charged the apostles to spread the path to salvation to those who condemned him to death.
To kill those deserving of death is still to kill, and one must still seek forgiveness and feel shame in doing it; for hands sullied for a better world are still sullied.
You call yourself a Christian and don't know this?

Though shall not murder moralfag. Not kill. Get a better translation or learn to read Greek.

Edit: Jesus also said it would be better to walk into the sea with a millstone around your neck than suffer what's going to happen to those who harm kids. Somehow I don't think he's too upset about this.

 

[KimCoppolaAficionado]

Though shall not murder moralfag. Not kill. Get a better translation or learn to read Greek.

Edit: Jesus also said it would be better to walk into the sea with a millstone around your neck than suffer what's going to happen to those who harm kids. Somehow I don't think he's too upset about this.

If that is the only counter-argument you can give, even though my position does not even hinge on the exact words of the Ten Commandments, or even if the Ten Commandments can be considered as equal to Christ's teaching, you don't have a counter-argument.
Edit: Morality is not about others: those who see it as such are tainted by Enlightenment doctrine. Morality is about God's will and the soul.
Any crime committed upon a sinful human is infinitely less deserving of punishment than killing God's son. If Christ did not punish, nor allow the punishment of, those who condemned him to death, and spoke again and again that, as Christians, we are forbidden from judging others or committing any act of violence, even preserving our own lives, it is right to assume that God's son meant what he said, and did not mean what you wished he had said. Evil shall be punished in the next life, not this one; indeed, as the world is awash in sin, it is the sinful who are rewarded.
I pray that, if God wills it, this man will convert and repent for his sins; if God does not will it, that he does not harm a child; if he does, I give it up to God that he will be punished in the next life. If another should kill him, that may also be God's will, but it will stain the soul of the one who kills, as surely as the soul of every soldier is stained, although some may be saints.
To believe punishment should come in this life is a human desire, and we are meant to forsake those as Christians. What good is punishment in this sinful world? It is corrupted, and passing away.

 

[Disc]

you could probably count on the one hand the british politicians that arent paedophiles, ok two hands.

And if you can’t count that high because you’re too young, you better fuckin’ watch out around any federal building.

 

[Ahriman]

I, not being a bong, have heard in passing about the murder of 2-year-old James Bulger. What I didn't know is that the British government goes to extreme lengths to protect the new identities of the murderers, Robert Thompson and Jon Venables. Dankula's video about the case was very, very enlightening and infuriating.

What the fucking FUCK, Britain. Muslim grooming gangs are a-ok, protecting the identities of murderers and pedophiles is a-ok, but god forbid you tweet something "problematic" to a bong troon, lest you get London's Finest up your ass in less than a day.

Mind you, I am absolutely sure many bongs feel the same wrath I feel about this subject, but the inability of their government transcends boundaries, this is beyond vile.

Why is it we can no longer think of the British Isles without the phrase "Pedoph" over them?

I fucking love Brass Eye.

 

[potato fan]

A suspended sentence, so he will never see the inside of a jail.

One million images of child rape. One million.

Jesus wept. How can you defend this.

how much porn can one person consume? going thru 100 images a day it's still barely 36500 pics per year, so a million pic would last for 27 years at this rate

also fuck investigators for not injecting his porn stash with some edgy groyper meme images, they knew he'd get a slap on the wrist for cp, but for fascist hate propaganda he might have been given some years behind the bars

 

[Fareal]

If that is the only counter-argument you can give, even though my position does not even hinge on the exact words of the Ten Commandments, or even if the Ten Commandments can be considered as equal to Christ's teaching, you don't have a counter-argument.
Edit: Morality is not about others: those who see it as such are tainted by Enlightenment doctrine. Morality is about God's will and the soul.
Any crime committed upon a sinful human is infinitely less deserving of punishment than killing God's son. If Christ did not punish, nor allow the punishment of, those who condemned him to death, and spoke again and again that, as Christians, we are forbidden from judging others or committing any act of violence, even preserving our own lives, it is right to assume that God's son meant what he said, and did not mean what you wished he had said. Evil shall be punished in the next life, not this one; indeed, as the world is awash in sin, it is the sinful who are rewarded.
I pray that, if God wills it, this man will convert and repent for his sins; if God does not will it, that he does not harm a child; if he does, I give it up to God that he will be punished in the next life. If another should kill him, that may also be God's will, but it will stain the soul of the one who kills, as surely as the soul of every soldier is stained, although some may be saints.
To believe punishment should come in this life is a human desire, and we are meant to forsake those as Christians. What good is punishment in this sinful world? It is corrupted, and passing away.

And yet, Matthew 18:3-10 comforts us that anyone who owns one million images of child rape has a date with hellfire. Also, Christ our saviour encourages such people in this passage to poke out their own eyes. We can get behind that, I feel.

 

[Smaug's Smokey Hole]

I always wonder how many of those officials become alcohonics.

There was a guy on very old SA that worked in that field in Australia(?). I think he said their shifts of viewing/documenting that shit was broken up up into 2x3 hours and getting therapy was a scheduled part of the job.

And I think they run a program that goes through every image and flags the known ones, probably not a hash check at this point but something more advanced, if there's anything in there that it doesn't recognize it requires manual review because it might be a new child that they don't know about or something completely unrelated, maybe he accidentally saved some boomer memes from 9gag into his childporn folder.

 

[OttoWest]

I, not being a bong, have heard in passing about the murder of 2-year-old James Bulger. What I didn't know is that the British government goes to extreme lengths to protect the new identities of the murderers, Robert Thompson and Jon Venables. Dankula's video about the case was very, very enlightening and infuriating.

What the fucking FUCK, Britain. Muslim grooming gangs are a-ok, protecting the identities of murderers and pedophiles is a-ok, but god forbid you tweet something "problematic" to a bong troon, lest you get London's Finest up your ass in less than a day.

Mind you, I am absolutely sure many bongs feel the same wrath I feel about this subject, but the inability of their government transcends boundaries, this is beyond vile.

I fucking love Brass Eye.

Venables even has an A&H thread.

 

[muh_moobs]

Not even surprised, just

If they found “over one million” supposed files, even just 1% of them being cp is too many.

Even a SINGLE image is too many.

 

[Titos]

is every judge in the UK a pedo or something?

General rule of thumb is people in "highly educated" professions are either pedos or psychopaths. Show me a CEO or Politician that isn't one and I'll show you my perfectly clean liver.

 

[Death Grip]

Britain what the everloving fuck happened to you

We are a nation of sheeple. We accept this and don't fight against it. Along with all sorts of other things that should not be happening.

 

[Fork Cartel]

I, not being a bong, have heard in passing about the murder of 2-year-old James Bulger. What I didn't know is that the British government goes to extreme lengths to protect the new identities of the murderers, Robert Thompson and Jon Venables. Dankula's video about the case was very, very enlightening and infuriating.

What the fucking FUCK, Britain. Muslim grooming gangs are a-ok, protecting the identities of murderers and pedophiles is a-ok, but god forbid you tweet something "problematic" to a bong troon, lest you get London's Finest up your ass in less than a day.

Mind you, I am absolutely sure many bongs feel the same wrath I feel about this subject, but the inability of their government transcends boundaries, this is beyond vile.

I fucking love Brass Eye.

This is what ultimately happens when some groups' actions are deliberately placed above scrutiny and law enforcement capability is hamstrung. I think there's a lesson to take across the pond here.

 

[Unassuming Local Guy]

Someone had to manually view the images to come up with details like that. Either one of their investigators or they used the INTERPOL (or similar agency) database of file hashes for known cp which categorizes the images.

I read an article once about FBI agents whose job was to find and catch pedophiles online. Apparently spending every day pretending to be a Fellow MAP while listening to 50 year olds talk about fucking babies, and especially being the one to have to manually verify "yep, it's CP", is so psychologically damaging that you're only allowed to be on the job for a very brief period, and you have to take multiple psychological evaluations while you're doing it to make sure you don't kill yourself. Plus the whole problem of people who are suspiciously willing to find CP for a living.

 

[Sanshain]

God, the most high, in the Sixth Commandment: "Thou shalt not kill."

Spoken again through His son, Jesus Christ: "Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself".

You cannot kill out of love, and he who loves killing, even the killing of those who deserve to die, hates God.

For did the Pharisees and Romans not all deserve death, for they hated and killed the Lord God in person? And yet, Christ forbade the apostles from striking them down. Even in the Garden, when Simon Peter drew his sword and severed Malchus's ear, did Christ reward him for it? No: he rebuked Peter and healed Malchus. As Christ suffered the Passion, he prayed for the salvation of those who killed him, saying "Forgive them, Father, for they know not what they do". And when he rose, did he march against the Pharisees, slaughter them, and butcher the Romans, as he could? No: he instead charged the apostles to spread the path to salvation to those who condemned him to death.

To kill those deserving of death is still to kill, and one must still seek forgiveness and feel shame in doing it; for hands sullied for a better world are still sullied.
You call yourself a Christian and don't know this?

Added line breaks because this was a real slog to get through without them.

Okay so, this is one of those 'broadly true but lacking context' statements. Deuteronomy 32:35 reads 'It is mine [God's] to avenge; I will repay. In due time their foot will slip; their day of disaster is near and their doom rushes upon them.' This is referenced again in Paul's writings in Romans 12, 17-21, which includes the wording 'leave room for God's wrath'. [New International Version, aka the first non-awful translation google begrudgingly spat out at me.]

Basically, God's followers were disallowed from committing acts of grievous violence, but not exclusively because doing so was morally wrong. Instead, God was the one who ultimately punished wrongdoers, and it was up to him to decide how that punishment would occur. Many times in the Hebrew scriptures, he directed the Jews to destroy and eradicate tribes who worshiped wicked gods like Baal, who demanded that infant children be burned alive on his altars to ensure good rainfall. Other times, he chose to destroy cities that were unusually wicked by his own hands, such as Sodom and Gomorrah. Yet other times, he maneuvered political entities such as the Babylonians to wage war against nations that had persecuted his people, such as the Assyrians.

As for the Jews who rejected Jesus and deliberately impaled the savior their own prophets had spent centuries preaching to them about, they were punished by the Romans in 70 CE, when Jerusalem was utterly destroyed and the hypocritical Jewish priesthood completely annihilated. The context is also important; Jesus was not asking forgiveness on behalf of the priesthood who condemned him. He was asking forgiveness for the Roman soldiers who were executing him. These men had no familiarity with Jewish traditions, prophecies or laws. They really didn't have any idea what they were doing, and even Pilate himself tried quite hard to get Jesus freed, only caving to the demands of the Jewish mob when they threatened to declare an open insurrection if he let Jesus go. Meanwhile, these was absolutely no forgiveness for the Priesthood class.

So, in conclusion, while God forbids killing directly, he does not withhold consequences for deliberate evildoing and does not expect wicked people to be let free with a slap on the wrist. Forgiveness can only be obtained after punishment is administered. Absolutely nowhere in the bible does it say that an 'I'm sorry' absolves a person from the legal repercussions of his actions.

 

[KimCoppolaAficionado]

Added line breaks because this was a real slog to get through without them.

Okay so, this is one of those 'broadly true but lacking context' statements. Deuteronomy 32:35 reads 'It is mine [God's] to avenge; I will repay. In due time their foot will slip; their day of disaster is near and their doom rushes upon them.' This is referenced again in Paul's writings in Romans 12, 17-21, which includes the wording 'leave room for God's wrath'. [New International Version, aka the first non-awful translation google begrudgingly spat out at me.]

Basically, God's followers were disallowed from committing acts of grievous violence, but not exclusively because doing so was morally wrong. Instead, God was the one who ultimately punished wrongdoers, and it was up to him to decide how that punishment would occur. Many times in the Hebrew scriptures, he directed the Jews to destroy and eradicate tribes who worshiped wicked gods like Baal, who demanded that infant children be burned alive on his altars to ensure good rainfall. Other times, he chose to destroy cities that were unusually wicked by his own hands, such as Sodom and Gomorrah. Yet other times, he maneuvered political entities such as the Babylonians to wage war against nations that had persecuted his people, such as the Assyrians.

As for the Jews who rejected Jesus and deliberately impaled the savior their own prophets had spent centuries preaching to them about, they were punished by the Romans in 70 CE, when Jerusalem was utterly destroyed and the hypocritical Jewish priesthood completely annihilated. The context is also important; Jesus was not asking forgiveness on behalf of the priesthood who condemned him. He was asking forgiveness for the Roman soldiers who were executing him. These men had no familiarity with Jewish traditions, prophecies or laws. They really didn't have any idea what they were doing, and even Pilate himself tried quite hard to get Jesus freed, only caving to the demands of the Jewish mob when they threatened to declare an open insurrection if he let Jesus go. Meanwhile, these was absolutely no forgiveness for the Priesthood class.

So, in conclusion, while God forbids killing directly, he does not withhold consequences for deliberate evildoing and does not expect wicked people to be let free with a slap on the wrist. Forgiveness can only be obtained after punishment is administered. Absolutely nowhere in the bible does it say that an 'I'm sorry' absolves a person from the legal repercussions of his actions.

1. It is God's place to decide when and where punishment shall take place. Not man's. If it is God's will that this man die, then he will die, but it is not the place of any man to say "I shall kill him". If God should send a man direction to kill him, he should do that, for it is God's will: but if a man do it not because God has sent him a vision, but because his own heart desires that death, then he has sinned, for in his arrogance he has taken God's place.
2. If forgiveness can only be obtained after punishment is administered, there is no forgiveness at all: for the just and true punishment for every person, no matter how righteous or wicked in deeds, by the crime of their birth, is eternal damnation. All are tainted by original sin, and only by the blood of Christ are we forgiven. None are deserving of salvation. None are deserving of forgiveness. God's love is given freely and mercifully, not because we deserve it. Both of us deserve nothing but infinite suffering, followed by annihilation. This is foundational Christian doctrine and your conclusion overlooks it.
3. Man's law has already judged him. Render unto Caesar what belongs to Caesar, and unto God what belongs to God.

 

[Sanshain]

1. It is God's place to decide when and where punishment shall take place. Not man's. If it is God's will that this man die, then he will die, but it is not the place of any man to say "I shall kill him". If God should send a man direction to kill him, he should do that, for it is God's will: but if a man do it not because God has sent him a vision, but because his own heart desires that death, then he has sinned, for in his arrogance he has taken God's place.

Uhm... yes. That's what I said. Thank you for restating it, I guess?

2. If forgiveness can only be obtained after punishment is administered, there is no forgiveness at all: for the just and true punishment for every person, no matter how righteous or wicked in deeds, by the crime of their birth, is eternal damnation.

This is, ironically, a conflation with your next point, which was also mine. If secular authorities want to sentence a man to death, that's their problem. What Caesar does is what Caesar wills; he will render an account to God like everyone else. If you'd actually read what I wrote instead of invented by reply in your own head, you'd have gotten my actual message, which was that nothing in the biblical canon allows a man to escape the legal punishment for any criminal actions he may have committed, so you can't just say 'oh, we should love thy neighbor' as a get-out-of-jail-free card.

Both of us deserve nothing but infinite suffering, followed by annihilation. This is foundational Christian doctrine and your conclusion overlooks it.

Except this is, again, said absolutely nowhere in the bible. Hellfire and eternal damnation is a complete fiction created out of a desire by the Church to scare people into conversion. The wages sin pay is death; nothing more, nothing less. Death is the eternal sleep of the grave. Everyone is born sinful, because they are all children of the first man, Adam, who sinned. I really don't care what some corrupt Church official decided to write down as an easy justification for tithes; I am only interested in what the scriptures say, and what they don't say is anything about hellfire or eternal damnation. When you die, you sleep until the Revelation, and then, unless you knowingly committed blasphemy in your time on earth, you are resurrected and given a chance to make amends. If you fail that chance, you die the second death and are forever gone. You don't get poked by forks for all eternity by a bunch of bored demonic sub-interns.

 

[Defensive Ella Purnell]

This shit is becoming disturbingly common in the UK to the point of being a regular occurrence.

Call me a conspiracy theorist but I feel like now that it's getting so easy to expose & put pedos on blast via the internet etc, people in power are trying to normalise it instead of hiding it.