JONATHAN BOWDEN OF PETERSFIELD ESCAPES JAIL IN INTERNET CHILD PORNOGRAPHY CASE

In a significant legal development in November 1999, the Court of Appeal addressed the issue of internet indecency and its criminal implications, specifically focusing on the case of Jonathan Bowden, a teacher residing in Petersfield, Hampshire.

Bowden, aged 30, was initially convicted at Cambridge Crown Court for downloading and printing indecent photographs of young boys. The court found that his actions constituted a breach of the 1978 Protection of Children Act, which explicitly prohibits the creation, possession, or distribution of indecent images of minors. The original sentence handed down was four months in jail, reflecting the seriousness with which the court viewed his conduct.

However, the case took a pivotal turn when the Court of Appeal reviewed the sentence and the conviction. Three judges, Lord Justice Otton, Mrs Justice Smith, and Mr Justice Collins, examined the details of Bowden’s case and the legal principles involved. They confirmed that Bowden’s conduct was indeed in violation of the 1978 Act, as downloading or printing indecent images of children is considered equivalent to creating such material, even if the images are for personal use.

During the appeal, Bowden’s legal representatives argued that the trial judge erred in ruling that Bowden was guilty of “making” photographs, asserting that merely downloading or printing images does not constitute creation. The Crown, however, maintained that the Act encompasses the entire process of acquiring and reproducing such images, including downloading from the internet and printing them out. The judges agreed with the Crown’s interpretation, emphasizing that the act of downloading or printing constitutes the making of indecent photographs or pseudo-photographs, regardless of the origin of the images.

It was also noted that the indecent material was discovered on Bowden’s computer after he took it for repair. The images had been downloaded from the internet, and Bowden admitted to printing some of them. He claimed that he was unaware that his actions were illegal and that he used the images solely for personal reasons. Despite this, the court upheld that his conduct was a breach of the law.

In their ruling, the judges acknowledged that Bowden had no prior convictions and that his involvement in the production of indecent material was minimal, as he was neither a distributor nor involved in the broader chain of production. They also recognized that there was no evidence suggesting any risk to the public or any breach of trust, nor any history of inappropriate behavior towards children.

Consequently, the court decided that the original four-month jail sentence was excessive and inappropriate given the circumstances. Instead, Bowden was sentenced to a 12-month conditional discharge, meaning he would not serve time in prison but would be subject to certain conditions for a year. The judges emphasized that while the law must be upheld, the penalty should reflect the specifics of the case and the absence of aggravating factors.