Talk

Advanced search

To think if this man is such a danger to the public, that he shouldn't have been released?

(15 Posts)
coffeeisnectar Fri 12-Feb-16 18:08:40

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-dorset-35551702

It's all over the local news, huge man hunt underway saying he is a danger to children and the public in general.

So why was he released? Aibu in thinking that paedophiles just cannot be "cured" and should be locked up indefinitely?

shutupandshop Fri 12-Feb-16 18:14:32

Hanging is too good.

Quoteunquote Fri 12-Feb-16 18:17:27

The penalties for sexual assault on children in this country are none reflective of the crime and the damage it does, it has never been important enough to our society to force government to improve system or give a sentence that reflects the victims permeant life change.

In short no one cares unless it is their own child hurt.

caroldecker Fri 12-Feb-16 18:20:25

Quote I assume that you do not care then?

WhirlyTwos Fri 12-Feb-16 18:27:05

I'm wondering how his license conditions could possibly eliminate the risk to children. Even if he has to report in every day, there are still many free hours in a day. I don't get it.

Quoteunquote Fri 12-Feb-16 18:27:17

I do indeed care and have spent much time on the subject, it's very hard to explain to a child that even when the person who repeatedly raped them is found guilty that their sentence will be running co currently and as they have had a couple of weeks in prison and good behaviour they will be out a week next wednesday.

That child/adult will never be the same person again and will spend the rest of their lives mourning the person they would of been, no matter how they process it.

If every adult wrote to their MP and said the most important thing to me is how we deal with sexually abusers, it would be on every parties manifesto.

Want2bSupermum Fri 12-Feb-16 18:30:02

I don't know what the answer is for convicted pedophiles. I don't think there is a cure. The risk of reoffending is just too high to not at least control these people. It's also unacceptable to lock them up forever more.

AcrossthePond55 Fri 12-Feb-16 18:51:37

There is no cure. If the offender doesn't want to control him/herself OR isn't scared enough of going back to prison, then they'll just start offending again. There just isn't enough money or police officers to put 24/7 'eyes' on them and they know it!

We have the Megan's Law list here, which can be helpful as you can be aware of offenders released into your area. And where I live a sexual offender can be kept in prison indefinitely IF they are determined to be at high risk of reoffending. The problem is that offenders become very good at 'playing the game'. They know what to say and how to act in order to get released.

Personally, I think they should be put in the general prison population rather than being held separately 'for their own safety', as is normally done here. I'd say that will scare more than a few of them into not reoffending. Or in some cases, they won't survive their term. No loss there.

WhirlyTwos Fri 12-Feb-16 18:56:51

general prison population rather than being held separately 'for their own safety', as is normally done here. I'd say that will scare more than a few of them into not reoffending. Or in some cases, they won't survive their term. No loss there

I understand your strength of feeling, but this sort of thing worries me. I believe that if prison carries great risks for this type of offender, they may be motivated to ensure there can be no testimony against them, if you see what I mean. I was certainly told this by someone who worked in this area, Who was relating what he was told by a convicted paedophile.

Birdsgottafly Fri 12-Feb-16 19:08:16

He isn't a 'risk generally'.

Anyone who works in fields that are attached to Children, Safeguarding, Mental Health and Leraning Disabilities, will quite correctly tell you that there are hundreds of people who are 'a risk to children', travelling freely about each region.

The majority, like most serious ex offenders, don't cause any major issues.

There isn't a answer to this, that would please and appease people.

coffeeisnectar Fri 12-Feb-16 19:12:02

Surely locking them up for life is better than having more children at risk? I don't think it's unacceptable for people who are deemed to be a risk to the safety of the public are held until they are no longer a threat. Certainly it has to be a better option than a whole area on lockdown with countless police and search and rescue people scouring a vast area looking for this man.

I wonder how he was ever seemed fit for release. I don't think there's anyone who would give him work, not paid or voluntary. His life is worthless and he will never be able to integrate back into society.

The costs of keeping him out of prison must be on a par with keeping him in it. Yet now he has access to any number of websites and is able to get on a train and leave.

Birdsgottafly Fri 12-Feb-16 19:12:31

Also, as for the 'let them be killed in prison', argument.

What if the person who kills them is then released (un-rehabilitated), how does that make society safer?

It like the people that throw hot suffered water in the face of some inmates, what if, on release, your the next person who pisses them off?

Birdsgottafly Fri 12-Feb-16 19:12:48

Sugered, not suffered.

Birdsgottafly Fri 12-Feb-16 19:21:59

""Surely locking them up for life is better than having more children at risk?""

The EU wouldn't let us. But if we locked up everyone who was a possible risk to children and Women, we'd bankrupt the country.

A lot of child abusers, don't get a criminal conviction, even if there's been a child death.

There's been some terrible cases of kidnap and torture of young people, 16-20, but the sentences have been short.

That's not the sort of thing, you do as a one off, either.

There's a hunt going on for him, because he's broken his licence conditions. That would happen with anyone who had done the same.

The Torys are looking to extend licences, so there's even less time spent in Prison.

I can remember the 80's, the only two offences that you knew would get a Prison sentence, was non payment of Poll Tax and not having a Television licence.

iminshock Fri 12-Feb-16 19:34:15

Birds, your point about the 80s is untrue

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now