A "swinger" and mum-of-three is behind bars after admitting sex offences against children.
Tracy Bennett, who works as a domestic carer, was sentenced at Bournemouth Crown Court after pleading guilty to two charges of causing a child to look at an image of sexual activity.
There’s a nice pic of the ‘lady’ in question. Click at your own risk.
Sentencing her to six months' imprisonment, Judge John Harrow said: "You exposed them to things they should not have seen."
Things
no-one should have seen, actually.
Defending, James Newton-Price said: "This happened on a single occasion and she is of previous good character.
"She had a very tough start in life and works hard as a carer. it is a one-off irresponsible act."
What on earth makes him think that’s an excuse?
17 comments:
[article pic]
The court heard that Bennett, a member of Fab Swingers, showed an image of herself [...] engaged in sexual activity to two children, aged 14.
Ewww...
I can only imagine copious amounts of flour were used to find the damp patch.
Why is she described as a swinger? Is it because they don't make a bra big enough to fit baby whales?
Aaaaaaaagh. I clicked.
Things no one should have seen hits the nail on the head. I did not click.
What self respecting swinger would.... Oh never mind
'...Bennett, a member of Fab Swingers...'
I have to admit I'm baffled by the unnecessary namecheck in the article - unless, of course, it's meant as some kind of warning to anyone who watched 'Eyes Wide Shut' and fancied giving the local swingers' club a go.
So you finally pluck up the courage to go to a swingers party for a bit of fun...
...and you pick her keys out of the hat.
No paper bag is going to be big enough........................
Bunny
Definitely a triple bagger, or is that triple tarpaulin?
There are those who appreciate the 'larger lady' in a sexual way. There are also those who believe Elvis Presley is alive and well and stacking trolleys for Tesco in Darlington! I have it on good faith that none of these are members of the current Government.
Penseivat
On a not unrelated topic, I think only you could do this one justice...
http://www.clactonandfrintongazette.co.uk/news/13526617.Amorous_couple_put_the__blue__into_Clacton_s_Blue_Flag_beach/?ref=mr&lp=4
I clicked ... I shouldn't have done. How can I unsee that picture?
Mind bleach. I need mind bleach!
From the link
“I have a still photo of a group chatting with them.”
He had been waiting for aeons for someone to come along to chat to the bonking couple so he had an excuse for a group photo, of course he did !
And this is illegal why, exactly? Ignoring the attractiveness of the woman in question, what is actually wrong with doing this? And why on Earth are the police wasting time with it?
"And this is illegal why, exactly?"
A woman showing children photos of her having sex shouldn't be illegal?
"I can only imagine copious amounts of flour were used to find the damp patch."
There isn't a windmill big enough...
"Aaaaaaaagh. I clicked."
The image has now burnt itself into your monitor.
"I have to admit I'm baffled by the unnecessary namecheck in the article - unless, of course, it's meant as some kind of warning to anyone who watched 'Eyes Wide Shut' and fancied giving the local swingers' club a go."
*chuckles* A public service..?
"There are those who appreciate the 'larger lady' in a sexual way. "
It makes the world go round, they do say...
"He had been waiting for aeons for someone to come along to chat to the bonking couple so he had an excuse for a group photo, of course he did !"
It's not a very convincing excuse, is it? You'd expect someone like this to have a far more well developed sense of imagination...
I know her. She was a regular at a club I work for and she was notorious at another one. I knew she had kids. But not in this way. I only heard about this when I mentioned her tk another couple out of the blue as she hadn't been to our club for ages. Now I know why. And how Fab Swingers got name-checked is disappointing because it's completely irrelevant. Though I doubt she would be welcome at any clubs after this. To the person asking why is it illegal and why are police wasting time with this, it's because the kids were under 16 and defined as a child by laws that are needed to protect children. You might argue that kids likely get to see stuff they shouldn't off their own backs but adults showing them porn is unnacceptable frankly. And I read something on Twitter zbout this which was ssying that, while this is wrong, how come there's not more age-restrictions or things put in place that could prevent kids accessing porn? The governnent could fo a lot lot more.
Post a Comment