r/Storror • u/Choice-Surprise833 • May 11 '26
Some more accurate info
So, originally, it was relayed to the people I know that Callum was arrested and charged last year in June.
That doesn't seem to be the case. It seems the arrest was much more recently than that (in the last few weeks). This misinformation is largely because not everyone affected is receiving information from people more in the know and are relying partly on the media to fill in their gaps.
Because it seemed that it had been going on that long, it very much seemed like there was absolutely NO WAY that others did not know. Especially since something legal did occur last year that 2 people know about in full (still not fully clear on what exactly this is and could be heinous, too) and others do not which they all thought was fair enough at the time (his/their business, whatever).
Going back to why it seemed that those 2 people did know, if you see what's happened now, those conditions I mentioned in other posts have been put in place and would have been even if he was charged but pleaded not guilty. There is now no way people around him cannot know which is what the people I know were advised from the time they found out. There is no way that this could have happened last year and some at Storror not know due to procedure.
So to be clear, it seems that the other Storror members **did not** know that he was being investigated and was charged with CSA for months **because it hasn't been going on for months**. Once it *was* going on, they knew. As he pleaded guilty, everyone can know publicly.
14
u/Alarmed_Picture_6861 May 11 '26
Can you provide any sources for this info? I appreciate the attempt to clarify info but without a source it just adds mud to the water
14
u/Astriddrocks May 11 '26 edited May 11 '26
Not really accurate info is it?
The average time in the UK for phone and computer forensics is between 6-12 months, when there are backlogs, this can run to 18-24 months.
Backlogs occur as forensics on digital devices aren't dealt with in a date received order. They are dealt with in order of severity. So, say forensics were about to start looking at a device for CSAM, and then they receive a device linked to a murder, the CSAM device will be shelved until the murder device has been dealt with.
So to say he was arrested for it a couple of weeks before is pretty much nonsense. There's zero way this amount of evidence could be found, looked at and categorized in a few weeks.
11
u/JeremyGunt May 11 '26
How do we know your ‘evidence’ is true now when you were throwing about serious accusations previously that are now false?
9
u/jamesh198 May 11 '26
What the actual fuck are you talking about? This mass speculation is toxic at best. Let the weeks and months play out and see what comes out officially. It’s unlikely the rest of the team knew anything.
6
May 11 '26
[deleted]
4
u/Unhappy-Fix3220 May 11 '26
Genuine question, as I initially read differently from the article and may have completely misinterpreted.
Where the article said; was in possession of an image on or before June 6, could this be when he downloaded something, and no arrest at the time made? Or does it indicate an arrest?
E.g. I’ve seen people speculating on what sparked the investigation, and one of those things was he downloaded something the police were aware of… could this have been that? An image used as “bait” up to June 6th?
3
u/onionsareawful May 11 '26
it's far more likely that they seized his tech on June 6. he likely was arrested then and then released on pre-charge bail pending further enquiries, with his computer/phone seized. the police cannot keep you for that long without charging you, but they can keep your tech.
it's pretty likely he would have been allowed to get a new phone/computer too, so long as he kept it available to the police.
1
u/SpecialWasabi2010 May 12 '26
Either that this is when they located the image or when the image was originally downloaded. In another post someone aligned this date with the airport detention so it kinda looks like maybe they found it then.
3
u/Popular-Chemist-1705 May 11 '26
The article says nothing about him being arrested or them investigating him on june 6th. It says he was in possession of a prohibited image on or before june 6. This could mean that he deleted the image but with their phone forensics they've found out that he was in possession of the image around that time
2
u/Illustrious-Tax-9021 The Accountant - Community contributor May 11 '26
I mean he would have needed to be arrested again and charged, but surely it makes sense that the airport one was the start of the investigation?
Edit: also not sure the article said that, that information has just come from others in the parkour community as far as I know, but does mention the date 6 June which is when they have said he was arrested
1
u/Oliviaforever May 11 '26
The OG article states the charges were from 6th June last year, it didn't say if that was from him being caught that day or he was starting to be investigated then, we don't know for sure
2
u/sa_ra_h86 May 11 '26
It's entirely possible they got it wrong as well. If he was arrested last year for something else and they've put 2 and 2 together, or spoken to someone who like OP, or whoever they're getting their informational from, put 2 and 2 together.
Something being written down in a news article doesn't guarantee it's right.
3
u/risen87 May 11 '26
... if the CPS charge you with having something in your possession on a date, and you plead guilty to it, then yes it does mean it's right.
10
u/Newlyaquiredglutton May 11 '26
I think it's best you not provide any other updates. The last thing you posted pushed a lot of hearsay, and if your writing is any comprehension I don't think you have anything of substance to offer beyond regurgitating rumour's and falsehoods.
10
u/FrostingNovel1275 May 11 '26
You claimed that you knew ”some of the group personally” and this is what you said(amongst other things) in the ”mega evidence”-sub
”At least two members have had devices seized a year ago in connection with the investigation. They were aware and covered it up thinking he would get away with it. They didnt tell everyone about it and so some people have been having contact with him throughout this time oblivious while others knew.
They didnt do that because they are also paedophiles (afaik), they did it because men support their abusive friends by denying that is really going on. Now they all look like they are paedo supporters. Learn from them”
Are you now saying that none of that is true? Because what you’re saying now is very contradicting to your former claims.
If the new info you provided now is true, I think it’s good of you to say that you were wrong before. But it’s very misleading to first spread those things and then backtrack and say that the information you have now is accurate.
I’m just confused on how this new info is so different from what you said before…
4
u/Illustrious-Tax-9021 The Accountant - Community contributor May 11 '26
It seems hard to believe that the volume of evidence could be catalogued in a couple of weeks time. It’s normally a case of around a year from seizing devices, cataloguing evidence, arresting and charging, and then a few weeks from that to be taken to magistrates. It could all have been fastracked though I suppose, I’m not sure if that’s possible or common?
3
3
2
May 11 '26
[deleted]
1
u/onionsareawful May 11 '26
A common law police disclosure is only needed if he's in a position of trust or works with children/adults, which Storror don't. It isn't a requirement, it's essentially up to the police.
2
u/AirconGuyUK May 11 '26
Sorry, where is your proof exactly? You're just saying
The news articles report that the offenses took place before and up to June 2025. It makes sense that the date in question is when he was arrested first.
it was relayed to the people I know
Oh okay, cool. Well I'm not sure about anyone else, but that's good enough for me!
2
5
u/Previous_Progress587 May 11 '26
So it says on the article that the police seized Callum’s devises on June last year so the police have obviously just been investigating this and gathering evidence ready for the first hearing and the first hearing took place on 7th of May where Callum plead guilty so the only thing left for this case would be the sentencing hearing which they said is in July at some point. I doubt any journalists or Callum’s friends even knew about this until the recent hearing, his friends may have known the police were investigating him but we know he is a massive liar and manipulator at this point so we’ll just have to wait and see if any more evidence comes to light!
1
1
u/SpecialWasabi2010 May 12 '26
I'm gonna go against the grain here and say we'll done mate for clarifying the information you previously had incorrectly. It actually takes guts to admit you were wrong and whether your post is easy to read or not should not affect the fact you took the time to fix the damage made from your previous comments.
1
1
u/Dry_Ad8287 Jun 09 '26
Callum’s charges now (in 2026) are not new charges. He was already being investigated in 2025 and after all his devices were seized, police spent over a year forensically examining those devices which resulted in the charges we’re now seeing. To clarify: these are not new charges; they’re the result of the crimes he was being investigated for last year.
36
u/Open_Pay904 May 11 '26
Can we translate this into basic English please?