Would you attend a peaceful protest if a convicted paedophile moved into your street?

[thefourgp]

I’ve never attended anything similar before and I’m in two minds about going. He was convicted (I’ve read the newspaper articles which show his photo) and has been released after serving half his sentence. I don’t know if he owns the property but he’s moved in with his wife who stood by him. There’s a peaceful protest being arranged. Would you go?

No. Through my old work and also knowledge of Circles, paedophiles are everywhere. Everywhere and they are the ones we know about. There is no island we can just put them all on away from the rest of society.
If you drive this one away, he will have the chance to groom children whose parents don't know him from Adam should be choose to. At least where he is now, you and your neighbours can all shun him and of course not let children near him.

And I’m afraid they are never going to be given a sentence of life without parole, no matter how much you wish it could be so
I agree but feel the solution would be to ramp up pressure to try increase the sentences, make it well known they are at big risk of harm in the community so it would be their interests/safer for them not to be in the community anyway and residents should be making it crystal clear to paedophiles they are not welcome anywhere.

The idea that care should be taken to ‘minimise alienation’ for them and ‘develop their social skills’, get them into hobbies etc is repulsive.
They are not the victims here.

I don’t believe for a second it’ll protect children either.
They’ll find a way, they’ll just be more careful this time not to get caught.

No. People have to live somewhere - they can't be hounded from street to street for the rest of their lives. If you have concerns about the way time-served criminals are rehabilitated back into society, take it up with your MP.

The emphasis should be on stopping paedophiles from re-offending - vigilante action will have no positive effect on that at all.

'They can't be changed or helped'

You could say that of any offender though.

You want to keep them in prison for life? Fine. Then start campaigning for legal reform rather than whinging on here. And maybe also research how much that will cost, how many extra prisons will need to be built. Perhaps also consider what effect that might have on the crimes committed - if you're going to prison for life regardless, what do you have to lose?

@MrsJunglelow

It’s not about thinking paedophiles can be rehabilitated. It’s about enabling them to live their lives with the support they need to manage their behaviour A bit like how some mental health conditions can’t be cured, but people can be supported to live with them

I am reading through everything but quite honestly, we are never going to agree here because the organisation believes rehabilitation is possible and i don’t.

As far as I’m concerned they should be imprisoned indefinitely and the idea that they should be rehoused and ‘re integrated’ into society makes me feel sick and I think very many people will feel the same.

I suspect "rehabilitation" is described differently.

The community charity I work/volunteer for has links with Circles, or a similar organisation and getting your head round what they do can be hard.

They don't mean 'fixed' or even 'safe' when they say rehabilitated. They mean "See's themselves as part of a community; sees other people as real individuals; can understand and even empathise with others; may come to some understanding of their crime" - all of which makes them less scary, more prone to agreeing to all sorts of restrictions, observations etc. I doubt anyone working with them actually trusts that they will never re-offend!

As for being imprisoned indefinitely, well they are not! We are a civilised country, believe in human rights and don't have a death penalty. Petition those very many people and get that changed!

As it is we have to accommodate them somehow. And organisations like Circles do a lot of very hard work trying to reduce reoffending.

I don't like it. I have a natural revulsion of such people, as most people do. But I don't see how we can lock them up and trow away they key... so we have to do something else and anything that reduces reoffending has to be supported, no matter how unpalatable.

I don’t believe for a second it’ll protect children either.

As I said, if you choose not to believe that the work of Circles has an effect on keeping children safe, that’s your prerogative.

It does leave you in the position of not having an answer to how to manage sex offenders in the community though.

MrsJungle the idea of those things is to protect the community, children, from these men. It is not repulsive at all. The men are not treated as victims. Volunteers with Circles are trying to help children in an indirect way.

Its nice to think anyone can be rehabilitated, even better to think that that our own involvement is contributing something to prevent reoffending or help protect potential victims. good for the soul.

Its not unenlightened to believe that these characters groom adults long before they are anywhere near a DC and they are clever and infinitely patient. tolerating people who volunteer to help them was a part of that grooming, in my experience.

how to deal with them - a highly visible tattoo. tagging for life, greater monitoring of their movements and any clubs they join even if its for adults.

Or do you, like some of the other equally unenlightened posters on the thread
Unenlightened?
You cannot be serious.
And to think I got flack for using the term fiddle.
Oh my days.

It’s not ‘unenlightened’ to not want to welcome child abusers into society with open arms, to not want to consider their needs and share hobbies with them.

How are you protecting these children by doing that exactly?

Because unless you are watching them and all their devices 24/7 you don’t actually know whether they are abusing again or not.
The fact they aren’t any new recorded incidents doesn’t necessarily mean they aren’t re offending, just that they’ve worked out how to avoid giving it away.

They don't mean 'fixed' or even 'safe' when they say rehabilitated. They mean "Sees themselves as part of a community; sees other people as real individuals; can understand and even empathise with others; may come to some understanding of their crime" - all of which makes them less scary, more prone to agreeing to all sorts of restrictions, observations etc. I doubt anyone working with them actually trusts that they will never re-offend!

I read somewhere that one of the biggest causes of recidivism was for those who came out of a custodial sentence with nothing - no familiar place to live, no family/ social support, no job or skills to find work.

Whilst the nature of this type of crime is clearly abhorrent, surely supporting and working with someone which means they are part of a community, realise the impact of their actions and even though they may consider reoffending, actively decide not to do so, is better than the alternative of leaving them to fend for themselves on the fringes of society when reoffending becomes almost an inevitability.

Thinking mob justice/execution, or just running the offender out of town is the solution is unenlightened - what other word for it? It's advocating the sort of behaviour you might have expected hundreds of years ago before we had an established legal system.

I have no desire to be part of a society where vigilantism is considered acceptable.

We have two convicted sex offenders living down our quite small cul-de-sac. It is very uncomfortable.

Most of the neighbours in our cul-de-sac are quite friendly, and would love to do street events (in non-covid times), but we won’t, because of the sex offenders.

Unfortunately we cannot brand people with tattoos, nor can we lock them up for life with other like minded individuals.
It's bizarre to think that of the things we can, some think negatively of it. So should we not bother with anything, then? It's been a few years but last I knew of Circles, the men would be monitored. If they were found to be breaking their conditions, then they would of course be charged and recalled to prison. Is that a bad thing? Every one of Circles aims is for the benefit of society.

It’s not ‘unenlightened’ to not want to welcome child abusers into society with open arms, to not want to consider their needs and share hobbies with them.

If you make stuff up about what people who don’t agree with you are actually saying on this thread, it’s no wonder you’re called “unenlightened”.

Of the death penalty was a deterrent, Texas wouldn’t have death row.

Death penalty is a lengthy and costly thing because of the appeal process.

I do think they should be housed in general population. Why should they be protected? They didn’t think about the impact on the victim(S) and the community they operated in.

But I don't see how we can lock them up and trow away they key why?

*Or do you, like some of the other equally unenlightened posters on the thread,

Fuck off calling a survivor of csa basically dumb.*

Youd think common sense would kick in on a thread like this, that people would have strong opinions because of their history. (Of course that's not to say anyone who has been abused will agree with the OP) Yet the insults of being thick, dumb, uneducated continue. Awful.

Because even nasty thugs like to feel virtuous, and what better way to do that than beat up another inmate who's ostensibly more evil than themselves.

I know you're being snarky, but yes they are more evil then them and they deserve it. I rejoice whenever I hear about sex offenders getting a taste of their own medicine in prison.

I'm in Belfast, and It's common practice in parts here, if there's a conviction, for them to be "put out" by the community. The psni stand by and watch these days, to make sure there's no violence, but the offender is told told to go and never come back, or there will be violence.

I think once they cross the line from inappropriate thoughts, into actual offending, they're a danger to all children, and shouldn't be near them. Put them on and island somewhere, with no internet, and let them abuse each other?

As far as I’m concerned they should be imprisoned indefinitely and the idea that they should be rehoused and ‘re integrated’ into society makes me feel sick and I think very many people will feel the same.

I agree and my heart really doesn't bleed for the kind of predator who rapes children.

I can't believe all of the bleeding hearts on here wringing their hands for a rapist "well he has to live somewhere", yes in a prison where he can't offend. All of the other people in that street have now lost their freedom, a known predator is living down the road so know they can't let their kids just go outside to play in the street or their gardens. Can't ask their child to just pop to the shop for a loaf of bread, they'll have to think twice before inviting friends and relatives with children to visit, but its okay because a man who took destroyed another person for his own pleasure deserves a comfortable life.

Fuck that shit. They wanna fuck with other people's lives then they have to pay for it.

@ImFree2doasiwant

It's far safer for for everyone if people like this are kept track of. OP days he was convicted of raping a 5 yr old, and has served half his sentence (which is standard) he will be strigently monutored, be on the sex offenders register for a very long time, he will have been risk assessed, be required to present the police station /probation. He will have a list of conditions - no contact with anyone under 26 for example. Not to be housed near to school/park etc. I'm.not sure if you can find out these conditions, but that's what I would be putting my efforts into. Knowing the conditions and reporting him for any deviation from them.

Precisely,he will not have had his sentence discharged, he will be out on licence and so liable to recall at any time if he contravenes the terms of his licence. Finding out the terms of his licence and being observant that he is sticking to the terms would be a far more effective way of dealing with him than a vigilante mob pushing him into hiding.

The alternative to him living back in his house is living in a bail hostel , possibly with other paedophiles who will spend their days fantasising about their crimes.

Far better he is where he is known, has restricted access to other perverts and the internet and where his activities can be tracked and monitored.

Someone being a survivor of CSA does not equate to everything they believe about child sex offenders, including the language used to describe them, is correct, any more than it is acceptable for women to use words like bitch and slag and whore.

grenlei is correct.

Incidentally it is paedophile. Note the position of the A and the E.

Fuck that shit. They wanna fuck with other people's lives then they have to pay for it.

So what does that mean in practice? What does your proposal look like in terms of how sexual offenders are managed on their release?

I’m not talking about “they should all be hanged” or “they should stay in prison all their lives”. Neither of those are actual solutions for how to deal with the problem and protect children.