Skip to main content
Skip to main navigation
Skip to talk navigation

Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Saved Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

Flip

1 2 3 4

AIBU?

To think paedophilia is not treated seriously enough by courts?

79 replies

SunshineBearHug · 20/08/2017 22:56

Just read a sickening news story where a child protection social worker has been found to be a paedophile including making indecent child abuse images as well as storing lots of others in a host of paedophile activity.

So why wasn't he sent to jail? For a long time? What deterrent is there for other paedophiles? Whenever I read these news stories I feel sick, where is the punishment? So what if he loses his job, children have been abused scarring them for life

www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/child-protection-officer-exposed-paedophile-11016767

OP posts:

Report

Redberets · 20/08/2017 22:59

I agree. In my opinion these are amongst the worst possible crimes yet the sentences don't seem to reflect this. I'm anti capital punishment but I confess that I waver on that when I read about people like this, especially as they're so likely to reoffend

GraciesMansion · 20/08/2017 23:06

I recently attended some training with a leading expert in the field and he said that when he lectures in America, the professionals there can't understand why we're so lenient here. In the US every single image of CSA carries a mandatory ten year federal sentence. However given the numbers involved we wouldn't have enough prisons to house everyone currently convicted.

Mollyandmee · 20/08/2017 23:08

Agree. Sentencing of sexual offences against children and adults in no way reflects what society would like to see. Surely overall they should mirror a general view?

AndNoneForGretchenWieners · 20/08/2017 23:10

A former colleague of mine just got convicted of possession of hundreds of indecent images of children (including babies) but because he is seriously overweight, lonely, socially inadequate and basically illiterate he got a 12 month suspended sentence. So he won't serve a single day inside. It sickens me - my child had contact with him, not unsupervised, but thinking about it makes my skin crawl.

Incitatis · 20/08/2017 23:12

Children can't make their voices heard so are unable to complain. They're economically inactive as well, so they're not valued by society. Much like animals really. Easily abused and exploited and dependant upon the good will of others.

AfunaMbatata · 20/08/2017 23:13

Cos women and children don't really matter a fuck.

SunshineBearHug · 20/08/2017 23:15

It's awful! I've read comments that there are still establishment paedophile rings offering protection. Who knows. But if there are not enough prisons build some more and don't worry if they are crammed ten to a cell, it's better than what they've done to those poor children.

OP posts:

SunshineBearHug · 20/08/2017 23:15

It's awful! I've read comments that there are still establishment paedophile rings offering protection. Who knows. But if there are not enough prisons build some more and don't worry if they are crammed ten to a cell, it's better than what they've done to those poor children.

OP posts:

RochelleGoyle · 20/08/2017 23:17

'he is seriously overweight, lonely, socially inadequate and basically illiterate' - factors which are likely to have contributed to his offending then. He will have got a Suspended Sentence rather than immediate custody due to the risk assessments made by the Court and other professionals. This is not arbitrary but based upon carefully evaluated information about the individual. Locking people up is not the only route to rehabilitation and punishment.

RochelleGoyle · 20/08/2017 23:18

And no, I'm not defending child sex offenders before anyone drags out that tired old response.

Incitatis · 20/08/2017 23:18

Who knows how many judges actually sympathise? Who knows how many are involved themselves?

TuiMitcham · 20/08/2017 23:19

YANBU.

Although ---

www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/uk-prisons-jail-paedophiles-not-big-enough-capacity-police-warning-a7178851.html

But is horrible to think of the damage they do and the lack of punishment they get.

RochelleGoyle · 20/08/2017 23:19

Some might Incitasis but it's very unlikely to be a majority.

Redberets · 20/08/2017 23:19

I didn't know that being fat and having no friends made you a paedophile

Hulder · 20/08/2017 23:19

Because we already have the highest prison population in Western Europe.

As in this case, he has downloaded images from the internet, not made new images involving his own contact with a child, sentencing guidelines don't recommend jail time except for the very worse images.

As sadly if they did, there would be no room in our jails for anyone else as the number of offenders is so high

So jail sentences are reserved for offenders who have physical contact abuse with children.

Incitatis · 20/08/2017 23:20

You can't rehabilitate a paedophile. Along with psychopaths they're the most untreatable types of personality out there.

Meanwhile, children need to be protected.

highinthesky · 20/08/2017 23:21

These networks seem to have invaded the very institutions that are supposed to protect. Our kids don't stand a chance.

Winebomb · 20/08/2017 23:21

YANBU.

I can't think of any excuse why the courts don't imprison them forever.

Its not like a crime, such as shoplifting, you can't promise to not do again, it's a serious sickening crime. any one who is convicted of looking at this sick stuff should be also charged with as if they have committed it themselves.

RochelleGoyle · 20/08/2017 23:21

Red, that's a simplistic response, deliberately missing the point.

Incitatis · 20/08/2017 23:22

So csa images are viewed as being merely porn then?

RochelleGoyle · 20/08/2017 23:23

Incitatis if it were true that child sex offenders cannot be rehabilitated, prison and justice services across the world would not try to. Yet they do. Some will never be rehabilitated, true, but some will.

Nicknacky · 20/08/2017 23:24

incitatis Who said they were merely porn images?

GraciesMansion · 20/08/2017 23:24

Risk assessments used by police and probation services only assess the risk of re-conviction, not the risk of reoffending. Hence many come out as low risk when they're really not. Especially those convicted of images of csa as it is often believed that the risk of contact offending is low - it isn't. That's like saying people who look at 'regular' pornograpic images don't have sex. The whole system needs looking at and a lot of money throwing at it. The research and the tools exist, it just needs embedding in practice.

AndNoneForGretchenWieners · 20/08/2017 23:26

I agree to a certain extent about risk factors, but in this case he denied responsibility and claimed he was set up by someone remotely accessing his computer and downloading the images. The police found the images in a folder which had been saved with his first name as the folder name and the remote access on his computer had not been activated. Surely someone who denies their culpability but is caught red handed is still a risk? Someone who accepts responsibility and is prepared to try to suppress their instincts and be rehabilitated is a different kettle of fish to someone who has not admitted their crimes?

AhveHeardIt · 20/08/2017 23:26

Bastards. I personally know of one who has been (to my mind unfairly, given that I know one of his victims very, very well) acquitted and housed close to a primary school in the area. The perpetrator I write of has form for bribing children in his local area with sweets to walk his dog and I cannot bear to think of what he was up to. I'm apoplectic that he is still allowed to walk the streets when the victim I know has to deal with the PTSD every fucking day.

Flip

1 2 3 4

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.