‘Rape porn’ ban would not close any supposed loophole

Myles Jackman, legal adviser to Backlash, has written a forensic analysis of the case for banning rape porn for Lexis®PSL Crime, reproduced on his blog. Here is a key section:

How do the Government’s proposals fit in with the law on the possession of extreme pornography?

 In brief: they don’t. According to the CPS’ Guidance the elements of the offence can be found here; and according to section 63 (7) of the CJIA 2008, such an image must be “explicit and realistic”. It would seem inconceivable for a consensually created adult image depicting a simulated act to be considered “realistic”. Thus the attempt to shoehorn the rape-porn amendment into s63 would seem to be defeated by the existing legislation’s “realistic” test.
 

The “realistic” test was applied… where the defendant was charged with possession of “fake-snuff” pornography; in which the same performer demonstrated a Lazarus-like resurrection ability to die seven times subject to different make-up, wardrobe and location changes. An expert witness for the defence called the images “less realistic than the average British soap-opera”. The jury found the defendant Not Guilty.

Jackman also spoke to TechRadar about the legal perils of online pornography.