Children's charities have criticised new court sentencing guidelines that could see child-porn offenders walk free.

The Sentencing Advisory Panel, which guides top judges, suggests more lenient punishments for people caught with pseudo-pornography, photographic images altered on computers.

But the advice paper puts judges on a collision course with the Home Office, as it runs contrary to the Government's planned shake-up of the law which could lead to tougher sentences for all sex offenders.

In pseudo-pornography adults, for instance, could be made to appear to be children or innocent photos could be joined together to make an indecent one. The sentencing advisers say people caught in possession of or creating pseudo-pornography should be fined or discharged instead of being sent to prison, because no children will have been abused in the making of these images.

But police say that, even though that is the case, they fear people involved could go on to abuse youngsters. And being more lenient could be seen to belittle the crime.

Children's charity the NSPCC says the move could send out mixed messages.
A spokesman said: "The Government has significantly increased sentences recently. It seems the judiciary has not taken on board the serious nature of these offences and is not following the Government line.
"We believe that the advice of the panel on pseudo-pornography is fundamentally misguided. In future, those possessing child-pornography will face lower sentences if they state that their material has been artificially created - a claim that may be difficult to argue against."

Head of the Notts vice squad Inspector Ian Winton said he was disappointed by the approach of the panel."We have evidence that someone making a pseudo-image is actually taking their offending one stage further than a person who is observing images.
"In some cases offenders have personalised an image by superimposing the head of a child they have a fantasy about, onto a naked body.
"Pseudo image or real image, the person possessing, viewing and making those images has an unhealthy sexual interest in children.
"I'm saddened that the laws seeking to protect children from abuse are being eroded by those minimising the seriousness of the offences committed by such people."

Members of the panel include legal academics, judges, former police officers, magistrates and social workers. Its chairman, Professor Martin Wasik, said: "We are an independent body and don't necessarily say what the Government is saying.
"The Court of Appeal can adopt, or not, our proposals."

The advice paper does not advocate leniency, said the professor, but reflected the lower end of a series of serious crimes.
"We all know prisons are very overcrowded at the moment.We decided that the real harm in these offences is in organised abuse of children.
"We recognise that anybody who has an involvement in the abuse of children either by making films or viewing them is at the most serious end of the scale. Artificial images, by our logic, must be a less serious offence.
"There could be a case in which it would be difficult to prove if an image contained real children or not, but we have tried to produce consistent advice. If no children have been abused, it is not as serious as if there had been."

Continue story by clicking here