This is in regards to my post Can Photos Of Naked Children Be Classified As Art? It seems that the Law Society Of NSW president Hugh Macken feels that the Police were in error when they closed down the gallery and confiscated Henson’s attempt at art. He says that,
What is relevant to the commission of a crime is the intention. If the intention is to produce a work of art, and solely to produce a work of art, then I can’t see how a crime has been committed.
What a wanker! So all a pedophile has to do is prove that all the naked photos of kids on his computer are works of art or will be used to to produce a work of art and all is ok? Come off it mate. I have nothing against the naked human body and love many of the classic artwork that depicts them. However, we are not talking about someones painting of a naked women and men, we are talking about a man photographing naked children and then promoting it as art. If anyone else was to do it they would be charged for pornography before you could blink, so why should Henson get away with it.
I just cannot believe that he has supporters. That is so much bloody crap. What is your opinion?