My neighbour is a convicted paedophile

So he moves out and another nasty pervert moves in. Then what? You going to hound that one out as well. And the other perverts that on the next street and the local shop and so on. They are everywhere teach your children to be safe and not to trust strangers.

Sentences are too light I agree. But they are not lighter than most other countries in Europe. British people have a tendency to believe that our justice system is liberal generally, and it's not at all. I don't know where this idea comes from. Our prison population is very high in comparison to similar countries.

At no point did I or anyone else say OP shouldn't avoid the man like the plague.

The arguments coming in were from people saying he was a risk to her DC which he is not unless OP is letting him have access to her 2 and 4 year old.

Which she is not nor was she likely to be.

The OPs DC and your DC won't be abused by the random neighbour down the street who don't have contact with them.

They'll be abused by people who you trust to have unsupervised contact with them.

It's very simple.

Fair enough if research supports what you’re saying.

I personally couldn’t accept a known paedophiles presence like this, whether research showed that it helped reduce reoffending or not. I do have very quite strong opinions on what should happen to them, and it’s certainly not letting them back into society with the expectation that a community tolerates their presence.

As I mentioned on the first page of this thread, I do accept that plenty of people don’t agree with me. 🙂

I take what you say... BUT the research supports this...

Yes there were always be levels of recidivism... BUT we need to make it as low as possible!

Right...

So again this is a problem with your comprehension isn't it?

You said originally that the OP was posting about wanting to protect her DC.

And I said OP wasn't posting about that at all since she never said she was worried about her DC as neighbour was never with them she said she just didn't want him to be near her or her DC now she knew of his crimes.

So I said, as OP had said, her DC weren't at risk from this neighbour since he was never in any situation where he could abuse them unless OP was just worried about him having thoughts about them which are impossible to prevent or Police.

Then you either can't read or just are terrible at comprehension and said that I'd said this man posed 'no risk to children'. At all

I think it's your comprehension hun since you posted exactly what I said but seemed to think you'd caught me out in something I hadn't said and you just posted my words to prove it.

Appreciate what you’re saying. These bastards are walking, breathing problems for society and as long as they’re living, they’ll cause issue for someone, somewhere.

However, other communities aren’t the OPs problem. Her responsibility lies to her children.

This type of offender’s life deserves to be miserable. They’ll never get an ounce of grace or goodwill from me.

I also don’t think it’s fair to say that their life being miserable makes them more likely to offend. So we need to be tolerant of them, or they’ll do bad things? They’ll do it anyway because they’re deviants.

Because there's a difference between a contact offence and non-contact, this guy is "no risk to them"? The fact is that while some who view CSAM do not commit in-person crimes, almost invariably those who commit contact crimes have a habit of viewing CSAM. So this man is entirely plausibly a contact offender or keen to be one. There is no clear distinction, so no reason why OP shouldn't avoid this guy like the plague and tell him to stay away from her kids.

It is not correct to say that a man who has CSAM poses no risk to children; it's reckless and very strange.

The Catholic priest who took my son for confirmation classes is currently in prison on child abuse convictions.. I was horrified. My DS said he was never interested in him, he preferred to lavish attention on the very young children. Disgusting beast. If Id known!!!!!

If your back fence isn’t 6ft maybe raise it?
You won’t see him & he won’t be able to see into your garden, it will make you feel better.

What he needs is chemical castration not a suspended fucking sentence.

Yes, you are saying it how it is. And exposure to the paedo neighbour like OP had originally, means the neighbour gets a chance to become enamoured / drawn to the particular child. The child gets under their skin just like you or I might get a crush on Dan from accounts. Then the tempations creep in and the stuff us hysterical women are scared of (photos, watching, grooming) starts happening.
I bet you all 5k that there are paedos interacting on this thread right now.

Child modelling is a different thing to innocent pictures in my garden or on holiday in the nineties/noughties.

There are pictures, albeit not on the internet, of mine in the bath with their cousins.

Would I take pictures of my grandchildren in the bath?

No, becuase the world has moved on.

OK, if some scumbag can get off on seeing my fully clothed 5 year old daughter bending down, or even doing headstands in a frock and showing her knickers, so be it.

As long as it goes no further.

I'm of the generation that was a child during the Moors murders and got blood curdling warnings at school about what was later called stranger danger.

Life's too short to worry about some stuff.

Just keep your kids away. I used to work in Child protection. That's all you should do.

Years ago there was a poster on MN who ran a child modelling website. Back then there was a child modelling section of the forum, not sure if it’s still there, haven’t looked for years.) but she basically befriended parents there and encouraged them to put pictures up of their kids both on there as well as on her child modelling website. Turns out these images were being used by a paedophile ring of some sort.

@ThisNeatRedMember for the 2nd time in case you are indeed not trolling me. Also for @Ketzele

Here also in bold for you:

OP isn't worried about this man posing a risk to her DC because he's never with her DC.
She's posting about how sickened she is that she used to talk to him and she doesn't want him near her or her DC
Because of the nature of his crimes, not because she thinks he's a risk to her DC other than looking at them.
So he's no risk to them. Other than possibly having thoughts. And there's no way to protect anyone from anyone else having thoughts about them.

Where did I say this man posed no risk to DC?

I didn't say it so you can't

I saw something like that in the moray council news if that’s what you’re talking about and someone’s gone and vandalised his car and made a Facebook petition to drive him out

I'd plant something that grows tall and quick between our gardens if nothing else.

I worked in this sector once and it opened my eyes to the numbers of convicted child abusers who are on licence and supported in the community. It included two people I regularly met with through church and school. So basically - they are everywhere, and these are just the ones that have been caught. I'd do nothing at all, because this is the tip of the iceberg.

I did? it's not hard to see?

Actually you don’t know that he has access to anything of the sort.

“Making” child abuse images doesn’t mean someone is sitting at their computer putting pictures of children into whatever software exists for the purpose,

Receiving a child abuse image constitutes “making child abuse images.”

Hugh Edward’s was convicted of making child abuse images because he was sent them by someone else.

There was a case of a police officer who was sent an image by a friend who had been sent it, and she was charged with making child abuse images.

That doesn’t make the crime any less despicable, and doesn’t make the viewer of said images any less of an awful human being.

But it’s simply not true to say that if there is a paedophile who has been convicted of making child abuse images he is actually instrumental in producing them. He may simply be downloading them from whatever sector of the dark web these people use, and that means the same.

So in that regard he may not actually be a danger to the children he is living in close proximity to.

And if we’re going to take the view that someone can take a picture of a child and upload it into generative software, then we need to take the view that children should not be allowed out in public ever, because to do so puts them in danger every time they’re captured on camera, on CCTV, on someone’s insta pictures as they walk by, etc. And that’s simply not the case.

The problem is that saying all that makes it sound like downplaying this man’s crimes which I’m not, but it’s also important to be rational.

Nobody said he is no risk - how can we know? The advice is, essentially, to keep the kids away from him but not to move or try to force him out. Secondly, to think about how we educate our kids about the dangers of predatory men.

Look, this isn't academic for me any more than it is for you or the OP. I've already mentioned how a loved family member got done for this crime and how shocking it was for me, as I completely trusted him and used to go with him for days out with my kids.

But also, I'm a child of the 70s and was very much raised on the idea that you could spot a predator because they all wore dirty raincoats, said "come here, little girl", and had pockets full of sweeties and kittens. That education really failed me. I was 4 the first time a man stuck his hand up my skirt and into my pants. I was holding my mum's hand on the escalator FGS, and she didn't notice. I whipped my hand round and he smiled at me. Bad men don't smile, do they? So I just stared ahead and pretended it wasn't happening.

A few years later, a friend of my mum's engaged me in a conversation about what kind of Page 3 images turned me on? I was making a cup of tea while my mum finished her phone call upstairs. I just froze, so ingrained it was in me to think that (a) family friends couldn't be bad people and (b) I had to be polite to grown-ups.

Anyway, the point is that with my own teenage daughters I've tried to educate them to spot predatory behaviours rather than predatory people, that it isn't rude to protect themselves from anything that makes them feel uncomfortable, and that they dont owe it to people to justify their 'no'.

So, that's me trying to be helpful. Nobody wants a predatory man next door, and nobody on this thread has said it's a non-issue. It's ridiculous to imply some of us are covert pedos because you don't like or don't understand what we are saying.

I don't want to get too graphic. Your child may play out in the garden fully clothed but spead their legs or bend over. That is enough for any PDF to feel aroused. I don't want to scaremonger. It's just what happens unfortunately. Let's not even talk about summer season and swimsuits etc.