That's possible, but I am arguing for maintaining the rule of the law and presumption of innocence and so. If the photos were born in the context of abuse, prove that Edathy was involved in that. He purchased the pictures, he did not make them. The prosecutor avoids unequivocally calling the photos illegal in his press conference (transcript). What does that tell you about the evidence he has? Paedophilia is no crime--it is a sexual orientation. Sexual acts with children or the possession of child porn are crimes. There is no evidence for them. No facts. The behaviour of the prosecution is really unbelievable (and that of the judge).