Anyone know the Law in the Uk regarding beastiliaty? (new to this)

it's illegal. I even knew a guy in person who was incarcerated for a video of him and a dog. The online videos and photos fall under the "extreme / obscene pornography" definition - they had found some on his laptop and it added to his sentence. Thanks to the absolute fantastic ancient UK law structure**, he also lost his job and will never be able to work in the UK again.
Also be aware of these UK network surveillance laws where your internet provider is basically enlisted to screen your online traffic for "extreme /obscene" etc. I am not sure where they stand today on this, but when I left the UK*, it was pretty clear that they will continue down the road towards more and more surveillance in the name of peace and quiet and catching all the bad guys.

*no, I am not talking about myself in the first part.
**someone else I knew went to a psychologist to see if ... Idk know what he expected. Anyway, he told her about his zoo-urges, and the psychologist obviously reported him to the police, because he later had a "friendly preventive visit" by the coppers sometimes later.
 
Last edited:
im probably totally wrong about this, but is there a legal/sentence difference between:

1) getting caught in bestiality
2) making bestiality films
3) watching bestiality films

I heard (probabyl wrong), that its illegal to watch or possess bestiality material, but not to make it.
 
[QUOTE="railipas, post: 82452, member: 23159"
I heard (probabyl wrong), that its illegal to watch or possess bestiality material, but not to make it.
[/QUOTE]
Don't know but it would seem possession would be as bad as making it. but IDK
 
railipas said:
im probably totally wrong about this, but is there a legal/sentence difference between:

1) getting caught in bestiality
2) making bestiality films
3) watching bestiality films

I heard (probabyl wrong), that its illegal to watch or possess bestiality material, but not to make it.
Click to expand...
done some further research, distribution and ownership is apprantely less severe, the act is maximum 2 years.
ofcourse if the act is you doing it, it will be used to prosecute you too!
but apprantely the law only states anal and vaginal penetration is illegal so is blowjob and mastubation in the grey area?
 
railipas said:
im probably totally wrong about this, but is there a legal/sentence difference between:

1) getting caught in bestiality
2) making bestiality films
3) watching bestiality films

I heard (probabyl wrong), that its illegal to watch or possess bestiality material, but not to make it.
Click to expand...

Yes in terms of the sentence length. ... if you make it, you posess it immediately, right?
 
MintDem said:
done some further research, distribution and ownership is apprantely less severe, the act is maximum 2 years.
ofcourse if the act is you doing it, it will be used to prosecute you too!
but apprantely the law only states anal and vaginal penetration is illegal so is blowjob and mastubation in the grey area?
Click to expand...

Sometimes they screw up bestiality laws. That's because they are trying to handle something of which they don't have a clear grasp, but only a vague idea. Try to exactly define what you mean with these means.
However - don't count on your grey area. IANAL (hehehe), but I can assure you that what is written in a law is not the all and end to it. There are several things which you also need to take into account (so, you read the law, that's good...):

1) It is possible that "law commentary" exists. These are volumnes upon volumnes of writing from professors, experts, judges, etc on "how a law is meant". When a court needs to deliberate a case where technicalities and "well, how is that word meant" are important, they start to go through these commentary things to try and find "what a peer-group of other law experts would think of this". Then they will judge accordingly. Unless you are a professional, there is no way you will even find all the necessary commentary and precedent cases to which a judge might relate in your case to come back with a finding which might surprise you from this.

2) Do you really think lawmakers had a discussion and expressively stated to one another: "Yeah, blowjobs for the horse would be ok, I guess"?
No way. They wanted to outlaw "anything sexual". That has some different problems, but let's not go there. Instead we realize that there are different ways to interprete laws. It is possible to interprete them "exactly as written, with the most common meaning of the used words applied". This mostly relates back to the idea that a law is a written rule. And that the written part is important. People can only follow laws as and which they understand them. HOWEVER, there is a school of thought, which says laws can also be interpreted "the way they were meant". So even if they made a mistake and didn't outlaw blowing your horse, it is pretty clear they would have done it, had they realized their language mistake at that point. This is - honestly - also a reasonable way to interprete, because first otherwise everyone will get off on technicalities all the time, and second the lawmakers also cannot know and / or foresee absolute everything. And it is pretty clear they wanted to catch all of it, just their imagination and / or real experience wasn't sufficient to end up where they wanted (David Cameron excluded).

3) Judges and law people are humans. Zoo is so extremely taboo, don't count on the law, not even in a "civilized" country. If they all agree that you are the worst bastard they ever saw and need to be "dealt with", they will find some and any law that will fit to bash it over your head. If need be, they will argue that the mare was only 8 at the time, so you had sex with a minor. Boom. This is all so toxic, do not count on any idiot to stick out their head for you now, if everyone but you agrees that you deserve it. The veneer of civilization is paper-thin, and so is everything everyone needs to cover the case (and you), if they all agree.

4) Even if you survive legally and get off on a technicality - the publicity and toxicity of this topic will blow your life to smitherens. If you are caught pretty much be prepared to leave the country and completely start over under a new name. Since this is indeed the case, discussing whether or not blowjobs on animals are technically legal or not is pretty much a moot point. The one nuclear pivot point which should really interest you is whether or not you are caught or not. Whether or not your status is un-outed (and un-outable) or SOCIALLYDEAD.
 
railipas said:
im probably totally wrong about this, but is there a legal/sentence difference between:

1) getting caught in bestiality
2) making bestiality films
3) watching bestiality films

I heard (probabyl wrong), that its illegal to watch or possess bestiality material, but not to make it.
Click to expand...

To publish and distribute in the UK can get tge offender a longer sentence than committing murder.
 
MintDem said:
done some further research, distribution and ownership is apprantely less severe, the act is maximum 2 years.
ofcourse if the act is you doing it, it will be used to prosecute you too!
but apprantely the law only states anal and vaginal penetration is illegal so is blowjob and mastubation in the grey area?
Click to expand...
always good to research :)

I feel like its a subtle but important difference if it determines prison stuff
 
MintDem said:
done some further research, distribution and ownership is apprantely less severe, the act is maximum 2 years.
ofcourse if the act is you doing it, it will be used to prosecute you too!
but apprantely the law only states anal and vaginal penetration is illegal so is blowjob and mastubation in the grey area?
Click to expand...

I took legal advice last year from a legal type who specialises in sex law.

I'll keep his advice over any internet research.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top