A Sussex Police officer faces court on charges of having and distributing child pornography.
George Voisey, 23, was arrested last October and resigned from the force just under a week ago.
Voisey was off duty when the three alleged offences were committed, police said.
Sussex Police said: “A former Sussex Police officer has been charged with three offences involving indecent images of a child.
“George Voisey, 23, was arrested on Thursday 24 October last year and following an investigation has now been charged with one count of distributing an indecent image of a child and two counts of making indecent images of a child between Saturday 22 June and Thursday 24 October 2024.
“He was not on duty at the time of the alleged offences and was suspended from duty. He has since resigned from the force on Saturday 1 March.
“He will appear before Brighton Magistrates’ Court on Thursday 27 March.
“The matter was referred to the Independent Office for Police Conduct who directed that a local investigation by the Professional Standards Department should be conducted.
“The force will consider misconduct proceedings once the criminal proceedings have concluded.”
Please stop using this term (I won’t repeat what you have in the headline). They are child sexual abuse images.
I totally agree ! Think about how the child in this situation would feel if they went back to look it up. Not very trauma informed. The child did not consent to the images and is potentially traumatised by the situation. Not forgetting the fact he was a serving police officer at the time of the offence. Maybe not on duty but still had the uniform.
Child porn, or child pornography, involves by its very nature the sexual abuse of children. Your objection to the plain English description is not just ignorant and illogical but a complete distraction from the nature and essence and gravity of the charges faced by this police officer. One of the public benefits of newspapers like this is the way they present events and information, often complex, in a way any of us can understand. If you muddy the waters by making things harder to grasp, you’re not helping victims.
Totally agree with Gemma. It’s child porn and it’s vile. The language police are a distraction from the real task of rooting out this horrid crime.