I find a number of things foggy here. He was arrested a year and a half ago for kiddy porn. If they had enough evidence to make the arrest he should be convicted and hammer his ass, …...but he wasn't convicted for that.

A half year later he WAS convicted for not giving the system what they wanted. …………… but not sentenced for over a year.


"Drage was previously of good character so the immediate custodial sentence handed down by the judge in this case shows just how seriously the courts take this kind of offence…"

"It sends a robust message out to those intent on trying to mask their online criminal activities that they will be taken before the courts with the ultimate sanction,…."

It would seem that the courts concern is not the protection of our kids, but is a frustrated fist for a lack of power at the present moment. I need more info to have an opinion about this.

__________________