Andrew Miller appeals their sentence

Yes, anyone raising concerns about this will be described by Nicola Sturgeon as 'homophobic and probably racist'.

If its not glaringly obvious what the past few years' campaign to enshrine the legal rights of crossdressing males in law and the erosion of safeguarding and the constant refrain of stunning/brave/marginalised has arrived at then I don't know what to say.

I've no doubt Miller is vulnerable and marginalised. That doesn't mean we abandon all boundaries and celebrate his paraphilia.

We are removing natural instincts for danger from vulnerable members of our society - women and children by minimising them and effectively punishing anyone who reacts with them.

Completely agree and I see that as one of the most toxic things about this ideology and politics.

Yes. Decades of offences. And Decades of (slow but sure) escalation. He enjoyed forcing his paraphilia on the community & did so ever more aggressively. It's how he got his kicks.

No real protective factors. No remorse (for the victim). A legal note made re his 'Narcissistic' traits. It doesn't matter whether he dressed up last year or not. He deliberately deceived an 11 y/o on her way home into believing he would take her there more quickly (safely?) when he had no such intentions. His presentation as a woman was a factor.

And she "thought he was a woman" not because she was stupid, and couldn't see that he was a man in a dress, but because EVERYONE AROUND HER HAD TREATED HIM AS A "WOMAN" AND ACCEPTED HIS PARAPHILIA AS "NORMAL" AND "HARMLESS"

We are removing natural instincts for danger from vulnerable members of our society - women and children by minimising them and effectively punishing anyone who reacts with them.

What matters is the effect on her, rather than his intent, which is very clear from the secret room built behind the wardrobe

Also-bliddy-lutely!

Exactly.

'is gender distress specifically an accepted mitigating factor'
'If the answer is yes, then there will need to be corresponding tightening up of safeguarding practice based on the same factor'

If the judge is suggesting that 'gender' issues compel someone to offend we should be talking about this loudly. Because that will have an impact on society.

Brilliant!

If only this could be done every single time.

Not that the news media would publicise it if they could possibly help it, though. My heart aches for women and girls growing up nowadays.

Yes. I think the judge is suggesting that his previous history was not violent so is suggesting that he's not been persistently violent? But surely the offences are on a continuum - they are all motivated by paraphilia which seems to have escalated. All of them depend on non-consensual participation.

Sorry, the exact wording is: 'he was not a persistent offender'. YES, HE IS ...

It's also infuriating. Despite his long history of offending (some of which he was fined for) & his long history of psychiatric input (some of which was inpatient from his early teens) & his long & public history of fetishistic behaviour, designed to make others, especially women, feel unsafe, he is described as not having a history of offending. What ???

I suppose the comparator is whether other male child sex offenders of this severity have received leniency due to a history of psychological difficulties and fetishes in their youth - and goodness knows most of them do - or whether this case is being argued as having been viewed more favourably specifically because those issues were gender related.

In which case yes, it needs to be got right out and unpacked, is gender distress specifically an accepted mitigating factor to someone assaulting and/or possibly murdering a child in the course of committing a sex offense upon them?

If the answer is yes, then there will need to be corresponding tightening up of safeguarding practice based on the same factor, surely? Because 'gender' has been identified as a separate, meaningful factor within sex offending, that should be treated differently to those without that characteristic.

The appeal judge seems to be pointing out that the perpetrator did not intentionally and as part of the offence go to dress as a woman with the purpose of increasing the likelihood of entrapping an offender.

That's what I'm gathering from it. As I said, it's a bit hard to read, not least because it repeatedly refers to 'the judge' without making clear if it means the first or second one!

He was dressed as, and appeared to the complainer to be, a woman.

So the victim saw him as a woman and therefore assumed he was safer.

The 2nd judge's comments are a bit odd in the context that this man is obviously troubled, had a history of 'psychological difficulties with gender and fetishes in his youth', but he seems to be arguing that this somehow mitigates the crime. That's coming worryingly close to saying that transwomen are to be given more lenient sentences because their gender issues have compelled them to offend.

This judge seems to be worryingly naïve. Does he think that cross dressing is always an entirely neutral act? And, as we cannot read Miller’s mind and nor can a girl, what really made a difference to the events that day were:

1. Miller’s appearance was misleading
2. the victim was misled.

Am I being thick or is this coming down to two slightly different perspectives?

The appeal judge seems to be pointing out that the perpetrator did not intentionally and as part of the offence go to dress as a woman with the purpose of increasing the likelihood of entrapping an offender.

I don't think anyone's suggested that or would argue with that: the perpetrator was a known transwoman in the area with a long transition history.

I took the original judge's meaning to be more that when a male presents as a woman - whether this is full time or part of a transition or not - there is increased trust. This is certainly an image/belief sold heavily as part of the TQ+ political movement, that male TQ+ people are women if they identify as such, should be regarded as such and different to males, that it is in fact wrong to view them as being male, and that they do not use their transition as a means of gaining trusted access to women and children in order to offend.

In that sense, yes, it is a part and it is an aggravating factor. It is an advantage to offending that a non transitioned or non transitioner presenting male would not share.

Not to mention that it yet again demonstrates that there isn't a 'rapist gender' as Sturgeon tried to argue to avoid facing up to this, and it is not the case that 'no true transitioned male' ever does this, and someone who does is not trans but 'at it'. This is a genuine transitioned male, a long term transitioner, who is also an appalling child abuser and sex offender and it is mostly likely only through luck and the victim's nerve and initiative that he is not also a murderer.

Which means that yes, some male transitioners are dangerous to women and children. And yes, that there is a problem in the trusted access this involves to women and children. We can't have it both ways.

Particularly considering his victim had probably been heavily instructed by school by the lobby mentioned above about how safe and very vulnerable transitioners are, and how important it to trust their presented image and be kind to them. In a way that would not be tacitly expected of a little girl with any other man.

I'm not I'm a total fucking wimp. But I want to know what's happening with this grotesque man, how the legal system treated it, and more importantly how the case may be used or misused to affect processes in Scotland.

ArabellaScott · Today 15:50

I really cannot stress enough that the judgement is very hard reading. Please avoid if you're not feeling robust.

You've got a stronger stomach than me, literally. What I read in the link DirtyDutchess posted made me feel physically sick.

I've copied and pasted below some parts from the judgement that seem relevant to 'gender'. (I've omitted things that might be upsetting).

I found it quite hard to follow, some of it is technical legal points.

'this appellant’s earliest conceivable date of release on parole and licence from the extended sentence will be in October 2033, when the appellant will be 64 years of age. The reality is that it is far more likely that he will be about 70'

'He was dressed as, and appeared to the complainer to be, a woman. The complainer accepted an offer of a lift home.'

'The appellant said initially that he would take her home in the morning. Later, he would sometimes say that he planned to keep her for a week and at others that he would never allow her to leave.'

Just as a note as we've been talking about how paraphilias tend to cluster:

'Other pornographic material involving adult women in tights, or carrying out sexual acts with their feet, was found. The appellant had visited many webpages whose titles indicated indecent child content.'

'At the sentencing diet, the judge read out what he describes as “lengthy sentencing remarks”. In the course of these he set out the circumstances at the point of abduction as a female”. He considered this to be a “significantly aggravating feature”, since otherwise the complainer would not have accepted a lift in his car.'

'The judge had thought that the appellant being dressed as a woman, when offering the complainer a lift, was important. His choice of dress had been
because of his personal life and not with a view to entrapping the complainer'

'There are thirdly, erroneous, or at least speculative, aspects to the sentencing
remarks, which have been founded upon in the appeal. First, the judge regarded, as a significantly aggravating factor, the appellant’s female apparel as indicative of a pre-conceived intention to abduct a girl. The court cannot agree. By the time of the incident, the appellant was already dressing as a woman as a matter of routine, rather than for any more sinister a reason.'

'When dealing with the content of the RAR, the judge hardly touches upon the
significant personal circumstances of the appellant, notably his psychological difficulties with gender and fetishes in his youth and his attempt to depress these in later life. As a generality, there is no need for a judge to delve deeply into an offender’s personal antecedents at the point of sentencing, but if he has elected to provide lengthy sentencing remarks, he would, as a matter of balance, be advised to do so.'

I really cannot stress enough that the judgement is very hard reading. Please avoid if you're not feeling robust.

Full judgement is downloadable here.

CONTENT WARNING - CSA

https://www.scotcourts.gov.uk/search-judgments/high-court

I too am very uneasy at this 2nd judges comments.
I've lived in the same place as Andrew Miller for the last 20 years.
He may not have dressed as a woman only to abduct the child but it is very likely to be a salient fact in why she got in the car. What matters is the effect on her, rather than his intent, which is very clear from the secret room built behind the wardrobe & the fact he planned to keep her for a week then 'go into business mode'. He has had a long history of antisocial behaviour & is entirely the type of person who will push any & every boundary until stopped by the law.

DirtyDuchess · 22/01/2024 19:37

Fucking Hell, I really wish I hadn't read that.

Some of the women up here in Scotland made a cardboard cutout of one of the those men, “ Katie” who is over 6ft and it has been at various protests. Hopefully it will seen again soon, as we have a prison protest coming up soon here.

The new judge's comments are interesting. It seems to be a point of contention whether Miller dressed as a woman to make it easier to abduct a child.

I wonder if this has anything to do with Shona Robison et al's assertion that there is no evidence anyone has ever pretended to be anything they're not to access victims?

Basically was the judge making a 'tru trans' argument, saying that Miller was not pretending to be a transwoman to make the abduction? That's probably true, Miller had been cross dressing for years.

Miller was definitely pretending to be a woman, though, which is of course the whole point of 'trans'.

Does anyone know if the new judgement has been published? I can't find it on the website/twitter, but the former is quite hard to use.

They should be compelled to use unfiltered images of all of these "women" - and stand them next to a mannequin the size of their victims to show just how big and MALE they are.

Let's see how much public sympathy there is for them then. He kidnapped a little girl and sexually assaulted her for 27 hours. If she hadn't has such courage and self-possession, she could well have ended up dead.
She and her family are serving a life sentence.

The worst thing about male violence is it makes men look bad. I forget which rule of misogyny that is.

I expect it's implicit in all of them.