Pedozoophilia. The term is only rarely used in the courts as what it evokes is repugnant. Paul, born in 1995, is accused of having obtained and possessed around a hundred child pornography images, some of which depicted children and animals. Between 2013 and 2020, the defendant downloaded around 100,000 pornographic files, some of which were therefore child pornography.
“It’s true, I was downloading movies and videos related to bestiality or bondage. But children don’t interest me, I’m not a pedophile. On the download platform that I used, we download by whole folders where everything is not necessarily sorted and where we find everything. I trusted people and there were these images in it. To access the file, you had to download it first. I had no intention of viewing child pornography, but it happened.”
It was the Dropbox platform that reported Paul’s IP address to the judicial authorities, after seeing a photo and 6 pornographic videos, in May 2019.
Substitute Reusens explains: “A home visit took place on May 14, 2019. 2 computers, an Ipad and an Iphone were seized. The defendant immediately informed the investigators that they were going to find child pornography on these machines. He therefore knowingly possessed these contents. He first said that he had deleted some files, before stating that he had forgotten to delete some others. These images featuring children and animals were disgusting. While the first visit by the police should have prompted the defendant to be cautious when downloading, new images of zoophilia involving children were found on his new iPhone before his second hearing.“
For the representative of the public prosecutor’s office, the acquisition and possession of the problematic images have been established. A sentence of 10 months accompanied by a probationary suspension is required, the substitute Reusens opposing a probationary suspension of the pronouncement of the conviction.
Counsel for Paul pleads acquittal. “He declares in fact downloading these images in packets. Of the 100,000 files, he was probably not able to read all of them, 100 involved minors and were therefore of an offending nature. It has not been established that he wanted to obtain these files in a conscious way. If the Forensic Psychopathology Unit notes a disharmonious sexuality and advises him to be psychologically monitored for his attraction to zoophilia, he is not considered dangerous and the risk of recidivism is considered as weak.”
Judgment on June 24.
–
