Member's statement: Indecent Images of Children: Sentencing
Member's statement by Mr Jonathan Buckley on .
- MLA
- Mr Jonathan Buckley
- Party at the time
- Democratic Unionist Party
- Date
- 11 February 2025
- Type
- Member's statement
- Business
- Members' Statements
- Heading
- Indecent Images of Children: Sentencing
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4793330
Read the official Assembly record
Text
I am fortunate to follow two Members who focused their remarks on young people, children and, indeed, the unborn, because I will address an injustice that has left many people in my constituency with a sense of utter disgust and bewilderment at the state of our legal system. Yesterday, it was reported that a 28-year-old man was found to be in possession of 77 grossly indecent images and videos of children.
It was evidence of real abuse and real suffering. That man contributed to a cycle of harrowing abuse. Members, let me be clear: they were not just images and videos. Each one represented a child who was exploited and had their innocence stolen and their pain recorded for the pleasure of predators to consume. By possessing them, that man contributed to the cycle of abuse. He was not just a bystander; he was complicit. Yet, instead of a lengthy prison sentence, he was handed just 80 hours of community service and two years' probation.
We cannot blame the police in this instance. They carried out a robust, thorough investigation, only to be failed once again by our judiciary. His case is not in isolation. Let us look at the BBC's former journalist, Huw Edwards. Again, there was possession of indecent images and videos. He avoided jail, and those who supplied him with the images avoided jail. In 2023, the National Crime Agency said that eight out of 10 people in the United Kingdom caught with indecent images of children being sexually abused avoided jail. That is absolutely shocking. Members often talk in the Chamber about the dangerous place that this society is for women, and that is true, but please let us put a laser-like focus on the abuse that our young people and children face throughout this country. It is not just the issues that I have raised. Look at the shocking testimonies of those who were involved in grooming-gang abuse across the United Kingdom, whether it be Telford, Rochdale or other areas. Are the police aware of similar grooming gangs in Northern Ireland? We simply do not know how deep it could go. How does this protect our children? How is this justice? Our judiciary is failing our police force and our children, and it is time that we took action.
384 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.
Assessment
Jev’s structured answers met the documented threshold for “not flagged”.
- Overall probability that the activity is being used to promote, exploit or escalate an identity-based controversy: 0.08 (flagging needs at least 0.70; at or below 0.30 is not flagged).
- None of the five culture-war criteria was met (each was below 0.60).
- Assessed as legitimate policy scrutiny (0.83).
- No identity-based framing was identified (1.00).
- Subject area: Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups.
- The overall probability was at or below the not-flagging threshold.
This is an AI-generated assessment of the text, made against published criteria. It is not a finding of fact about the MLA or their intentions. The Assembly record itself is the fact.
Jev’s structured answers
| Question | Probability | Met? |
|---|---|---|
| Identity framing | 0.05 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.04 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.01 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.06 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.06 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.83 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.08 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 1.00 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.00 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.00 |
| Adopts it | 0.00 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups | 0.49 |
| Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues | 0.45 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.06 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
| Parades, bonfires and commemorations | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 11:57 UTC by jev-1.13.0 (requested as typesafe/jev) under rubric 2026.10-r9, methodology 1.9.
Disagree with this assessment?
Classifications can be challenged. A person reads every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.