Catholic Church child protection chief caught with 4,000 child porn pictures
88 replies, posted
[img]http://images.mirror.co.uk/upl/m4/jul2011/2/1/image-40-for-editorial-pics-31-july-2011-gallery-510604009.jpg[/img]
[quote][b]A child protection official for the Catholic Church has been caught with 4,000 pictures of child porn.[/b]
Father-of-four Christopher Jarvis was arrested after uploading pictures of children being abused to a website.
Married Jarvis, 49, a former social worker, was employed by the church following sex scandals about pervert priests.
His job was to monitor church groups to ensure paedophiles did not gain access to children in the church’s congregations.
But he was caught by police in March with more than 4,000 child porn images on his home computer and his work laptop.
He admitted 12 counts of making, *possessing and distributing indecent *images when he appeared before *magistrates in Plymouth and is likely to face jail when he returns to court for sentencing next month.
Jarvis, who has been sacked from his job as child safeguarding *officer, worked the Diocese of *Plymouth for nine years.
Church spokesman *David Pond said: “Mr Jarvis was suspended from his position as soon as the diocese became aware in March of the police investigation.
“The Bishop took that action and since then the Church has worked closely with the police.”[/quote]
Source: [url]http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/top-stories/2011/07/31/church-child-protection-chief-caught-with-child-porn-pictures-115875-23308972/[/url]
Yes I know it's the mirror but this doesn't seem to be very big on the news.
[quote]A CHURCH worker who admitted possession of more than 4,000 pornographic images has returned to Plymouth Magistrates' Court.
Christopher Jarvis, aged 49, has been ordered to sign the sex offender register – which should have been done at the first hearing.
Christopher Jarvis, of Salisbury Road, St Judes, admitted 12 counts of [b]making, possessing and distributing indecent images[/b]. His job with the Roman Catholic Diocese of Plymouth was to protect young people from abuse.
Jarvis will be sentenced on August 19, when the length of the time he has to sign the register will be set.
[/quote]
Source: [url]http://www.thisisplymouth.co.uk/Sex-offender-register-order/story-13053917-detail/story.html[/url]
Oh the irony. Why is he only being made to sign the register when he has [quote]admitted 12 counts of making, possessing and distributing indecent images[/quote]
hahaha oh Catholic church, never stop being you
[editline]2nd August 2011[/editline]
wait no, please do
The irony is absolutely bananas.
Jesus Christ what are these people doing
Okay they need to do something about this.
The only reason this is being publicized is because it's the Catholic Church we're talking about here.
If it was your random joe I doubt it would be posted in S.H.
it's still very ironic, though.
Although it must be hard to fight corruption when the people in charge of fighting the corruption are corrupt.
I think it's posted because it's a [B]Child Protection official[/B] that is in possession of all these images. The fact that he's doing this work for the Catholic Church comes after that.
How I feel about it, anyway.
That guy must have felt so smart when he got that job.
I wonder what the pope shall do about this
[QUOTE=redBadger;31490015]The only reason this is being publicized is because it's the Catholic Church we're talking about here.
If it was your random joe I doubt it would be posted in S.H.[/QUOTE]
It's only been reported in two newspapers, one being local.
[editline]2nd August 2011[/editline]
Further I think there's some slight bias to him being a catholic official as he is only being made to sign the register, no other charges as of yet.
[editline]2nd August 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=Canned Induvidual;31490063]I wonder what the pope shall do about this[/QUOTE]
Fap.
How the hell did he get 4000 images without anyone noticing? I mean aren't cops like right infront your house once they even see the hint of CP?
[QUOTE=Canned Induvidual;31490063]I wonder what the pope shall do about this[/QUOTE]
Fap.
[editline]2nd August 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=commander204;31490114]How the hell did he get 4000 images without anyone noticing? I mean aren't cops like right infront your house once they even see the hint of CP?[/QUOTE]
He is a cop.
[QUOTE=Canned Induvidual;31490063]I wonder what the pope shall do about this[/QUOTE]
Shake his hand and suck his cock.
[QUOTE=Canned Induvidual;31490063]I wonder what the pope shall do about this[/QUOTE]
Make an apology he doesn't really mean, throw out a few bullshit comments, and life will proceed as usual. What needs to happen is a joint effort by world police agencies to do a full scale investigation of the Catholic Church. Its disgusting how much shit they've gotten away with under the clause of religious immunity shit.
[QUOTE=commander204;31490114]How the hell did he get 4000 images without anyone noticing? I mean aren't cops like right infront your house once they even see the hint of CP?[/QUOTE]
He also [b]made and distributed[/b] 12 of the images.
Edit:
[QUOTE=Miskav;31490233]12 counts of making images.
That could be 100 images per session, would still count as 1 "count" iirc.[/QUOTE]
Well fuck.
ahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah the fucking irony ahahahahahahahha...
Plus the pope will ask for his computer to see what sickeninig images these men are into and make sure that no one else gets into it
The Catholic Church is a big horrifying joke
[QUOTE=B-hazard;31490172]He also [b]made and distributed[/b] 12 of the images.[/QUOTE]
12 counts of making images.
That could be 100 images per session, would still count as 1 "count" iirc.
This made my day.
[editline]2nd August 2011[/editline]
Wow, seriously, it actually did...I was feeling all gloomy and stuff and now...
I'm looking forward to stuff! :v:
[QUOTE]A child protection official for the Catholic Church has been caught with [B]4,000 pictures of child porn.[/B][/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]But he was caught by police in March with [B]more than 4,000 child porn images[/B] on his home computer and his work laptop.[/QUOTE]
Contradictions. I don't think it is the case, but the fact that they can't give an exact number makes it possible that many of the images are legal and that many of them are merely questionable. Maybe there isn't even any real CP. I doubt it, but they should know this.
[QUOTE]Married Jarvis, 49, a former social worker, was employed by the church following sex scandals about pervert priests.[/QUOTE]
"Pervert priests" is terrible wording when news sites are supposed to be objective. How about [I]"sex scandals about priests commiting child sex abuse"[/I]?
[QUOTE]His job was to monitor church groups to ensure paedophiles did not gain access to children in the church’s congregations.[/QUOTE]
Child molesters. Not paedophiles.
Anyways, pretty strange stuff, I don't understand why this happens... Uh.
[QUOTE=Sherow_Xx;31490279]Contradictions. I don't think it is the case, but the fact that they can't give an exact number makes it possible that many of the images are legal and that many of them are merely questionable. Maybe there isn't even any real CP. I doubt it, but they should know this.[/QUOTE]
Or, you know, it's been rounded?
4000 is slightly easier to read and pronounced faster than 4397.
Oh yeah, that's a good reason to change the real numbers and give faulty information.
[QUOTE=Sherow_Xx;31490360]Oh yeah, that's a good reason to change the real numbers and give faulty information.[/QUOTE]
I bet you bitch about when a newspaper says the US debt is "14,3 trillion".
Because it's not accurate enough.
what next, Pope found with child's head up his arse
You're right, I just realized it myself that I'm being a bit bitchy :v:
But yeah, I do think news sites should give as accurate and objective information as possible, even if it isn't as easy to read or pronounce.
I stand by what I say, but I'm just nitpicking here, sorry :v:
[QUOTE=redBadger;31490015]The only reason this is being publicized is because it's the Catholic Church we're talking about here.
If it was your random joe I doubt it would be posted in S.H.
it's still very ironic, though.[/QUOTE]
Well, yeah.
If the President didn't like America it would be publicized, because it goes against his job and he's an important person. Same situation here.
That makes perfect sense really.
Why are there so many paedophiles in the catholic church? It's just plain bizarre
[QUOTE=carcarcargo;31490496]Why are there so many paedophiles in the catholic church? It's just plain bizarre[/QUOTE]
Buuut I think it's more important in cases like these because it is much less objective.
For example, if we go on a small scale example;
Say you have 4 pictures of children, 3 of which are completely normal pictures, and one which is questionable. [I](Who knows why, maybe it's your own child, it isn't unheard of)[/I]
In that case, if the last picture is deemed to be illegal, the other 3 might just be as well, because if they were in the same folder and they think you're getting off to them, they'll just say you had 4 child porn images.
It's easy to manipulate with, so "over 4000 images" is just not accurate enough.
But like I said, I doubt this case is one of those :v:
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.