Okay, it has been literally years since I first wrote to you.
I'm now 24, no longer a virgin, and I'm living in London.
Their judgment was published in full, earlier this week, by blogger Obscenity Lawyer, a solicitor and one of the UK's leading legal experts providing advice to defendants on matters of obscenity and extreme porn.
The judgment states (par 21): There could be no sensible reason for the legislature having excluded otherwise obscene material from the scope of the legislation, merely because it was likely to be read by, and therefore liable to deprave and corrupt, only one person...
Another Winnipeg man His arrest followed a lengthy police investigation that started when somebody flagged an image of child sexual abuse uploaded onto a chat room site. A 32-year-old man was charged with possession of child pornography and importing, distributing, selling or possessing it for the purpose of distribution.
The owner of the computer, a 29-year-old Winnipeg man, was arrested on Wednesday.
The Winnipeg police internet child exploitation unit was told about a resident uploading child sexual abuse imagery in February.
Initially, the legal reaction was that such a case could not possibly succeed - and that was pretty much the view of the judge who threw it out when first it arrived at Maidstone Crown Court in November 2011.
But that was before an appeal brought by the prosecution in February of this year, and the appeal court ruling in which three appeal judges - Lord Justice Richards, Mr Justice Kenneth Parker and Mr Justice Lindblom - ruled unequivocally that publication to an individual did fall within the meaning of the OPA.