Myles Jackman: Der Ner Ner Ner Ner Ner Ner... BATMAN!

Top dude Myles Jackman is in the Guardian!

'Fisting was Jackman's next focus...'

Porn: The Following Content Is Not Acceptable

The following content is not acceptable from the 1st December 2014

Today marks the beginning of a new phase in a sustained campaign of internet censorship which has wide-reaching consequences beyond the mere production and consumption of pornography.

These new regulations impose even more draconian restrictions on the types of pornography that can be depicted on regulated Video on Demand services. Previously the Crown Prosecution Service’s Guidance on the OPA provided a list of sexual activities which were deemed illegal to publish.

However these new Regulations specifically state that only sexual content that is equivalent to the BBFC R18 Category can be sold via VoD service. This is a significantly lower threshold.

According to Nikki Whiplash, a regulated video on demand service provider who attended a recent ATVOD and BBFC led seminar on the impact of the new regulations, the following sexual activities will be deemed either acceptable or unacceptable at R18 classification level:

Watersports and Squirting
Peeing and squirting are acceptable if not performed onto another person and/or then consumed.

Squirting during sex or masturbation is acceptable if fairly brief, isolated and not deliberately consumed or put onto a body. It would be acceptable to imply that it was licked up if could be deemed as to be simulated.

Fisting

Fisting is not acceptable. Penetration with all five digits beyond last knuckle is not acceptable; but all five digits of two or more hands would be acceptable as long as not past last knuckle.

Ofcom have sought medical guidance on fisting and don't believe it to be a dangerous act to perform. However, as the CPS’ Guidelines specifically cite fisting as obscene the BBFC can't pass fisting for classification. The BBFC acknowledge that they are well aware of the decision in R v Peacock but are obliged to have regard to CPS’ OPA Guidelines.

Amputee Insertion
Since the BBFC haven't ever needed to consider amputee insertion, they reserve their position on the matter.

Enemas
Enemas are acceptable if once they are squirted out they don't hit anyone else and does not contain feces. It is not acceptable to subsequently lick up what has been expelled; unless this is simulated (for example switched for another substance).

Catheters
Catheterisation is acceptable, even if catheter connected to mouth; presuming that the tube is not transparent so that the liquid moving through cannot be seen.

Eating ejaculate
Any form of consumption of (male) ejaculate is acceptable.

Vomiting
Vomiting may be acceptable if it is not performed as part of a sexual act; and is not visibly enjoyed by the participants.

‘Public’ Sex
Should the content features any nudity or other activity which might outrage the public decency, then the BBFC must be assured that the material in question was shot on private land with no public access or shot abroad. However, simulating the impression that it is in public is acceptable, fir example a vehicle with tinted windows. The key consideration that the material has not been created in the public eye.

‘Age Play’
Anything which might ‘encourage’ incest or sex with children under the age of eighteen is absolutely unacceptable.

However school uniforms are acceptable presuming that there are no references to the performer pretending to be under eighteen; and participants clearly 'of legal age' and participating in a consensual adult role play

Weapons
Sexual activities performed at gunpoint are unacceptable if it is “believable”. This will depend on tone and believability. Basically if it looks like it could be a non-consensual activity then it is not acceptable.

Bondage and Restraint
Full bondage in conjunction with a gag is unacceptable, since there needs to be an obvious (to the viewer) means to signal to stop. Hence it is acceptable if not all four limbs are tied. Thus a means to indicate the withdrawal of consent must be visible to the viewer. For example full bondage and gagging would be acceptable if there is a safe signal which is defined as part of the scene.

Thus elements like artistic license, storyline and context become important. Hence a straightforward bondage scenario with no surrounding context is less likely to be acceptable than something with features a clearly signaled role play component.

BDSM Pain play
Acts which if copied by the uninitiated have the potential to cause injuries more than transient and trifling are extremely unlikely to be acceptable.

Only "moderate" pain play is acceptable. Thus reddening of the skin acceptable but no raised welts, blood and bruising are not.

Needle-Play
Needles are more likely to be considered acceptable as they only cause transient and trifling injury similar to legal tattooing.



Facesitting as Breathing Restriction
Facesitting employed as a breathing restriction or any other form of smothering is unacceptable. However, facesitting without breathing restriction is acceptable. There is no flexibility on this. The airways must remain open. Apparently the rationale for this distinction is that men trying this at home might die.

Ballbusting
Ballbusting may be acceptable, depending on the level. OFCOM recommend submitting clips in question for review. It will come down to definition of moderate pain and whether viewers at home are likely to sustain serious injury if they try it at home. Hence ball-yanking is not acceptable; whereas controlled ball stretching is acceptable.

Trampling

This will depend on the surface upon which the person is being trampled on.

Urethral Sounds
The insertion of urethral sounds is acceptable presuming that they are not inserted so far in as to enter the bladder; and that appropriate sterile and safety considerations are taken such as the use of lubricant and gloves.

Insertion of objects like buttplugs
The insertion of other objects is acceptable presuming that it is clear that they couldn't get. Hence the use of buttplugs is acceptable. Hence a clip of a mobile phone vanishing up an anus would not be acceptable, despite being a spoof, on the basis that people might try it at home.

Power Tools

The use of power tools is unacceptable, since most people have one lying around at home. However purpose designed “fucking-machines” are acceptable. The test in question is the 'association with violence'.

Head-Scissoring
Head-scissoring is acceptable, presuming that it is gentle. However, if it is seen to be pushing on the carotid restricting blood flow then it is not acceptable. Hence, choking sounds or reddening of face as a result are not acceptable. As soon as any pressure is exerted it would be considered a choke hold and therefore not acceptable.

Wrestling
Wrestling is acceptable only if knockout moves are not deployed. Facesitting and seemingly non gentle scissoring are not acceptable.

Gagging
Gagging on cock and deep throat are acceptable if not for the whole scene. However, language of the 'gag on my cock' variety is unacceptable due to the reference to choking.

COMMENTARY – THE CONSEQUENCES OF THIS CENSORSHIP

Pornography is the canary in the coalmine of free speech: it is the first freedom to die. If this assault on liberty is allowed to go unchallenged, other freedoms will fall as a consequence.

This declaration of State censorship will affect millions of consenting adults who choose to view British pornography; impose an unnecessary trade barrier, which has already caused independent UK producers to shut down; result in a significant loss of revenue to The Treasury; is practically unworkable as it can be circumvented by proxy servers; and has implications for all forms of freedom of expression on the internet.

Of particular concern in terms of loss of freedom is the underlying intent to allow undesirable foreign websites to be blocked under UK ISP’s filtering systems. This has immeasurable implications on freedom of information and net neutrality.

Today, Backlash have launched a campaign to challenge this régime of State censorship disguised as regulation.

• Myles Jackman, The Obscenity Lawyer - reprinted by kind permission of the author. x

Worth re-publishing at length for its sheer comedy value - the above is just a rough guide.

Please note this only applies to UK-made 'Video On Demand' (VoD) content - thus far... and if you've never seen British porn, well, you ain't missed much.

The whole thing is so silly, it can't stand.

Its affect will probably be slight, so I wouldn't get too hysterical about it - but as an example of our current state of anti-porn hysteria it speaks volumes.

For the status of other porn, please read Myles' article in full on his blog. He says he'll be posting soon on how these rulings will actually impact.

PS Other porn is available, and hotter.

TwinkTrial: Justice

A man whose life was ruined when he was charged with child sex offences after looking at legal gay pornography in a hotel room has accused the police and Crown Prosecution Service of a “homophobic witch-hunt” after his case was finally thrown out. The defendant endured a “two-year nightmare” after being arrested in front of his family, charged with 10 offences almost a year later and repeatedly bailed, before every charge was dropped. If convicted he would have faced jail and been forced to sign the sex offenders’ register. His father died while he was awaiting trial.

The CPS, which spent tens of thousands of pounds of taxpayers’ money pursuing the case, offered no evidence in court – in effect conceding there was no case to answer. His lawyers say they gave the CPS conclusive documentary evidence three months ago that all models featured in the pornography were of legal age.

The Independent is not naming the man, a professional in his thirties, and has agreed not to disclose which court the hearing took place in, to protect his identity. He has never been in trouble with the law before.

The defendant’s nightmare began during a business trip in September 2011 when he viewed images on a website specialising in “twink” pornography. Twink is a well-known term in gay slang for young-looking men who are aged 18 or over.

When a female guest who stayed in the same room the following week saw the computer’s browsing history she complained to the hotel and staff called the police. Six months later, in March 2012, the man was arrested at his father’s home.

Speaking after the trial closed the man said: “While I feel utter relief and a sense of euphoria that the nightmare has ended, I am at the same time extremely angry: angry at the CPS, the police and, above all, angry that my father, who never doubted me and stood by me, never got to see this day. I’m angrier that that was the last year of his life and that I just couldn’t be the son during this time that I wanted to be to him.

“I can only conclude that the police officers and the CPS showed institutional homophobia throughout this case. I doubt I would have been treated the same way if heterosexual pornography was involved. Police... were obviously clueless about pornography – as were the CPS.”

The Independent.

580 days to decide the whole thing was too ludicrous to proceed.
Impossible to summarise the stupidity, cruelty and outrageousness of this - so please read the article in full. 
Never understood how watching any porn can be a crime - nor why you can have sex with someone who's 16, but not look at a photo of them in the nuddy - but maybe that's just me...

The man was represented by Myles Jackman - Obscenity Lawyer - and his team.
An heroic figure, he has also successfully defended the GLA's Simon Walsh against charges of possessing "extreme pornography", and "Sleazy Michael" Peacock over distributing "obscene" DVDs.
ie It's not a crime to have a wank.
The latter case was ignored by the British gay news media.
Walsh got sympathetic coverage, one can assume the fact that he's a leading gay Tory was but coincidental.

Jackman writes about the most recent case here; “The CPS has at best showed an ignorance of gay culture and at worst showed itself to be institutionally homophobic.”

Thank you, Myles, and please pass on my apologies to your client for our country's crapitude.
What a load of wank!

#Porntrial: Wanking Is Not A Crime

Charges of possessing extreme pornography are enough to destroy any man. When the Crown Prosecution Service added the allegation that the pornography included an image of child abuse, Simon Walsh's disgrace seemed complete. He was a barrister, a City of London alderman, a magistrate and one of Boris Johnson's appointees on the London Fire Authority. The mention of paedophile porn, and gay porn at that, sent these venerable institutions running.
I know it is hopeless to seek to dent Boris Johnson's self-portrait of a carefree British patriot in this moment of Olympic euphoria, but it's all an act. In the 1930s, a journalist confronted Brendan Bracken, Churchill's bumptious sidekick, and bellowed: "You're phoney! Everything about you is phoney! Even your hair that looks like a wig – isn't!" Bracken had a mop of red hair to match Johnson's mop of blond. If Johnson were a true, plain-speaking patriot, he would have stood by Britain's best principle that a citizen is innocent until proven guilty. But he is a phoney, and his officials fired Walsh without a second's thought. The best that can be said of London's mayor is that he did not behave as badly as Walsh's colleagues. His fellow magistrates bailed him on condition he stayed at a house where he had not lived for 18 months. Walsh had to sleep on its floor. His fellow barristers at London's 5 Essex Court Chambers forgot everything they had learned about the presumption of innocence, and asked the police to seize his pass so that he could not re-enter their offices.
The Crown Prosecution Service under the current director of public prosecutions, Keir Starmer, is earning a deservedly bad reputation for its vexatious litigation. Her Majesty's chief inspector estimates that almost one in 10 of its prosecutions is baseless Thousands of people plead guilty, nevertheless, just to get the CPS off their backs.
Thirty years ago, the homosexual element in the affair would have made Walsh cop a plea and slink away into obscurity. But Walsh is an openly gay man in the 21st century. "I've never hidden what I am," he told me. "I knew I had done nothing wrong and was not going to run away."

Cracking piece in The Observer by Nick Cohen - not usually someone we're a big fan of here at Fagburn Towers.
Simon Walsh was acussed of possessing images of fisting, basically - a legal act - under a loopy law brought in by New Labour.
He was defended by the great Myles Jackman, who also defended and won a similar - and similarly stupid - case in January about Michael Peacock who was charged with distributing gay S&M DVDs.
More from Myles Jackman on his blog.
I think the only gay media which covered the Peacock trial were QX and Disco Damaged (and moi).
This time round, after much nagging by Jackman and others (and moi) on Twitter (Jackman was allowed to tweet live in court and set up the hashtag #porntrial) most UK gay news sites covered it.
Including a good piece on Gay Star News - again not something I'm used to saying - by Jane Fae here. 
Jackman's colleague, Alex Dymock, wrote about the ludicrousness of the trial with great wit in Friday's Guardian.
Pretty sure the only other newspaper to have covered this was the Daily Mail, in their usual faux outraged prurient graphic style.

PS Note The Observer have chosen not to illustrate this with a photo of Simon Walsh, but of Twitter joker Paul Chambers, who's only mentioned in passing. For shame?

Pornography Trial: Extreme

'Today the Crown Prosecution Service will attempt to persuade a jury that images of fisting should be classified as “extreme pornography” with the risk to the defendant of three years in custody, inclusion on the sex offenders' register and damage to his personal and professional standing.
All for a type of image which is commonly viewed, of an activity which is itself is legal to perform and is even discussed in the book Fifty Shades of Grey.
Nonetheless the defendant, Simon Walsh, has been charged with being in possession of extreme pornographic images under section 63 of the Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008: so the Prosecution must prove that the act of fisting is “likely to result in serious injury to a person’s anus”...'

More from Myles Jackman@ObscenityLawyer, who is representing Simon Walsh, on his blog.
Earlier this year Myles Jackman successfully represented Michael Peacock in a landmark trial that saw a jury find Peacock not guilty of a charge of obscenity for distributing gay SM DVDS.
I believe the coverage of this in the gay news media was zero.
Now that's obscene.

Obscenity: Put Your Hands Together...

"I welcome the news that a jury have returned not guity verdicts in a landmark obscenity trial before Southwark crown court on Friday. However, despite the jury's unanimous decision, the legislation under which the trial was brought is still effective law.

"The defendant, Michael Peacock, was charged with distributing DVDs featuring male fisting, urination (watersports), and BDSM. Peacock ran a gay escort site called Sleazy Michael and advertised pornographic  DVDs for sale on the website Craigslist. He was charged under the Obscene Publication Act 1959 (OPA) with six counts of publishing obscene articles likely to "deprave and corrupt".

"While some of the sexual acts depicted in the DVDs are legal to perform, such as fisting and urination, the representation of them is potentially criminalised under the OPA. The Act features the contentious and ambiguous deprave and corrupt test, whereby an article (for example a DVD) is obscene if it tends to and corrupt the reader, viewer or listener.

"As the recorder, James Dingemans QC, emphasised in his summing up, it was a matter for the jury to decide whether the acts depicted were obscene if they "deprave and corrupt" the viewer. He also emphasised that: "in a civilised society lines must be drawn".

"However, the OPA has become an anachronism in the internet age. While previous cases speak in terms of pornography being covertly accessed by men in "rugby clubs" and at stag parties; now it is readily available to people of all genders, orientations and social classes. Hence this jury's verdict - in the first contested obscenity trial in the digital age - which seems to suggest "normal" members of the public accept that consensual adult pornography is an unremarkable fact."

Myles Jackman via Obscenity Lawyer.