Viewing Violent Porn Outlawed

The bereaved mother whose two-year campaign inspired the forthcoming ban on viewing violent pornography said yesterday that the measure would be a memorial to her daughter. Liz Longhurst began her battle to change the law after her daughter Jane was killed in 2003 by a man said to be obsessed with violent internet pornography. More than 50,000 people signed a petition supporting her.

“My daughter Sue and myself are very pleased that after 30 months of intensive campaigning we have persuaded the government to take action against these horrific internet sites which can have such a corrupting influence and glorify extreme sexual violence,” she said.

“I think about her every day and I think how terrible it all was, but if what’s been proposed can be passed into law, it will be a terrific memorial for her.”

Ministers have promised to introduce a bill outlawing the possession of images of extreme sexual violence, necrophilia and bestiality as soon as possible. It is already illegal to produce or distribute such material. Jane Longhurst’s killer, Graham Coutts, had his murder conviction quashed last month but remains in custody. The Crown Prosecution Service is to apply for a retrial.

The law lords concluded that the jury at his trial should have been offered a manslaughter verdict because he claimed that he had strangled Ms Longhurst accidentally during consensual sex. Lewes crown court heard that Coutts was a regular user of sites devoted to snuff movies and necrophilia. He kept Ms Longhurst’s body in a storage unit for almost a month, visiting it repeatedly before dumping it on a common in West Sussex.

Asked what role she thought violent pornography had played in her daughter’s death, Liz Longhurst told BBC Radio 4’s PM programme: “I don’t think we can ever prove it 100%, but there is very strong circumstantial evidence it played a very large part … This material is extremely dangerous. Some people I’m sure can look at it and no harm is done. But I think for quite a lot of people, especially if they are rather impressionable, it can be very harmful indeed.” She added: “I do have some misgivings [about the law] – whether there will be enough money to make sure it is enforced properly.”

There is no evidence of a direct link between viewing violent images and committing violent acts, but the British Psychological Society has backed the government’s proposals, citing developing research suggesting that individuals who were predisposed to commit violent or other sexual offences might become more likely to do so when exposed to such material. Some BPS members disagreed.

Many other organisations – including the CPS, the Police Federation, women’s rights organisations and child welfare groups – urged the government to introduce the ban. But libertarian campaigners accused the government of creating thought crimes and warned that images of consensual sexual activity would be outlawed.

“Government proposals to criminalise the possession of ‘violent pornography’ will do nothing to reduce real crime. They will treat consenting adults like children. And they run the risk of imposing much wider limits on freedom of speech than they intend,” Backlash said in a statement. A spokesman for the coalition – whose members include Feminists Against Censorship, the Sexual Freedom Coalition and the Libertarian Alliance – said: “A picture can look graphic and not involve harm, or look innocuous and involve a great deal of harm.”

According to a Home Office document published yesterday, which outlined responses to the proposals, 223 individuals opposed the measures while only 90 were in favour: “Virtually all of those opposed to the proposals were worried that the inclusion of material featuring ‘sexual violence’ and ‘violence in a sexual context’ would criminalise possession of images of consensual sexual acts.”

The Home Office minister Vernon Coaker said: “Such material has no place in our society, but the advent of the internet has meant that this material is more easily available and means existing controls are being bypassed. We must move to tackle this. By banning the possession of such material the government is sending out a strong message – that it is totally unacceptable and those who access it will be held to account. This is a complex issue on which we have consulted widely.

“Our intention to legislate has the support of various organisations, including women’s and children’s groups and police forces. In addition, a petition signed by around 50,000 people objecting to extreme internet sites promoting violence against women in the name of sexual gratification was presented to parliament.”

But the plans for the law were described as flawed by a group representing sado-masochists who have consensual violent sex. The Spanner Trust – named after the infamous 1990 “spanner” trial of a number of gay men who engaged in consensual violent sex – said the move risked criminalising innocent people.