Q: What Is A Paedophile?

A: Not Chris Langham.

Back in August of this year a jury found Langham guilty of 15 counts of having downloaded what the trial judge described as "the most horrific" videos of sexual abuse of young children, and Det Chief Inspector Paul Fotheringham of Kent Police said:

"The worst video was 15 minutes long and it showed in quite graphic detail the sadistic brutalisation of an eight-year-old girl in the UK, with some serious sexual offences against her."

Nevertheless, Langham's barrister managed to convince two Appeal Court judges today that his client was not a paedophile, since their lordships (actually one of them was a woman) arrived at the conclusion that "...there was no element of sexual gratification involved [in Langham paying for, downloading and storing this horrific filth on his computers]..." and cut his 10 month sentence, allowing him to be released this afternoon.

On his release this afternoon, Langham declaimed:

"My conscience is clear."

And indeed it should be, for the 'Diagnostic & Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders' defines the symptoms of paedophilia as:

"This disorder is characterized by either intense sexually arousing fantasies, urges, or behaviors(sic) involving sexual activity with a prepubescent child (typically age 13 or younger). To be considered for this diagnosis, the individual must be at least 16 years old and at least 5 years older than the child."

After all, at his trial, no evidence was presented to suggest that Langham was in any way indulging his own sexual gratification in paying for, downloading and saving these obscene and obnoxious videos on his computers, so everyone who still considers that he is a paedophile is quite wrong.

Which begs the question: What is he?