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?

I do put paragraphs in, I swear!

PheasantPosters1 I didn’t say that, that was another poster.

The difference is that the police, crown office etc don’t broadcast what they do on the internet. You don’t have a clue how much work does into investigations and gathering evidence because you don’t see it.

Just because you can tell your child about the dangers of strangers and can control the situation with your own family in your own street so the person is in the open. It doesn't mean that person isn't doing dodgy things elsewhere just not on his own doorstep. So the argument better out in the open and not the person we don't know about doesn't cut it. They may well been doing things in an area that aren't known.

Plenty of people live on the outskirts of society, they leave for a different life. I have seen numerous programs about it.

Of course vigilante justice causes more harm that it contributes in a meaningful way to actual court cases!
The police warn against it for a reason. Look at your local police force's FB page and take note how often comments have to be moderated and warnings put out, because people jeopardise cases before they've even begun, as they want to look the 'big I am' in front of everyone.
There's the Yaxley-Lennon case I mentioned earlier. You're just ignoring what you don't want to read.

That was to pheasant- again.

Release on licence when the relevant part of the sentence is served is automatic ...

I know, BananaPop, but my own position is that it shouldn't be - at least not for such offences

Somehow we've got to get a system in place where proper retribution is seen to be delivered, and right now that really doesn't seem to be the case

@Nicknacky

PheasantPosters1 I didn’t say that, that was another poster.

The difference is that the police, crown office etc don’t broadcast what they do on the internet. You don’t have a clue how much work does into investigations and gathering evidence because you don’t see it.

That's probably me you're referring to but I didn't say it harms more prosecutions than it helps. I said that it can, and does, harm prosecutions.

My local police take to Facebook and Twitter sometimes warning people against broadcasting their suspicions on social media and to report concerns to them instead and the reason they give is that it can harm a prosecution. And not just with sexual offences but with everything. It's the same when they show CCTV of an armed robbery, they beg people not to name the person online as it will destroy their chance of securing a prosecution. I'm willing to believe that they know from experience why they're talking about.

People jeopardise cases before they've even begun, as they want to look the 'big I am' in front of everyone

Yes, and that's yet another reason why I don't support these public protests
All too often they attract troublemakers who are just there for the ruck, and before you know it there's another problem for the police to deal with at the expense of everything else

lilac Im not ignoring it, its just one case. One. Nor am I condoning it, as I have said repeatedly.

I can just understand why people do it. We had a case locally where police spent two years failing to find a man in his own house, he wasnt arrested until vigilantes escorted him to the station. But again, thats just one case.

Theres also a distinction between those getting involved in convictions, and those targetting already convicted men.

Beats me why women stay with men like this.

What's the point in targeting already convicted men? They're already convicted. Which frankly is almost a miracle considering how hard it actually is to secure a conviction for sexual offences.

Somehow weve got to get a system in place where proper retribution is seen to be delivered

This sums up my feelings entirely.

PheasantPlucker1 You do realise that the police will have known where he is? I “fail” to find people in their homes as I know they are there but I have no power to enter and I can’t sit all day and wait for them to leave.

Wellthatsunusual theyre targetted by protesters to move them on when they live in their neighbourhood.

But pheasant you asked for a case so I named one off the top of my head. That one was well known because 'Tommy Robinson' is almost a public figure so it made the news. Others don't.

NickNacky so whats the answer?
He was actively abusing children, the police knew, everyone knew, for two years the community waited for him to be arrested.

And waited.

How many years should he have been allowed to continue? How many years should we wait for police to take action?

PheasantPlucker1 I’m correcting you as you don’t know how enquiries and procedures work and are posting emotively. Like I said earlier, as you don’t see it, you don’t realise the work that is undertaken.

And I can’t speak for that investigation (as you can’t either) as I’m not involved in it.

Either leave the police work to the police or join up.

@PheasantPlucker1

Wellthatsunusual theyre targetted by protesters to move them on when they live in their neighbourhood.

But that's what I've been trying to find out through this whole thread. What does that achieve? How does it make children safer?

I believe I can speak for that case as I was involved throughout, gave evidence in court and heard the Judges summary in which she destroyed the police for their failings.

I dont want to join the police, I have no respect or trust in them in the slightest after the involvements I have had. The police fail victims of sex offenders time and time again.

Thats what needs to change, and until it does people will, rightly or wrongly, take the law into their own hands.

PheasantPlucker1 And that’s your opinion to have. And I can see why you are so pro-vigilante and that all makes sense now.

Oh and you never did reply when I pulled you up on your criticism to my answer about what I would do if I lived near one. I’m guessing you don’t like measured answers,

How on earth can the wife stay with him if he was convicted of raping a five year old
The i think he should be in prison for life

NickNacky i did respond to that.

You made it clear peadophiles coukd live in your area as your children dont play out and are already escorted to school.

My response was to put all peadophiles in areas like that so they dont live in areas where children do play in the street and walk to school.

But Im sure you dont like that response, do you?

PheasantPlucker1 I’m referring to my reply to that post which you ignored.

I do live near a primary school and children walk by my house all the time so by your reasoning, they can’t come live in my street either🤷🏻‍♀️.

I would like your responses more if they were sensible.

The police fail victims of sex offenders time and time again
Thats what needs to change, and until it does people will, rightly or wrongly, take the law into their own hands

I take your point, but I've always believed it's not the police as a body so much as the system they're working under - and the sytem's very clearly failing

I'm in no way qualified to comment on recidivism in general, but among the red tops' irresponsible reporting I found a link to something more reputable via the NSPCC: www.lccsa.org.uk/hundreds-of-paedophiles-reoffend-while-being-monitored/

In light of the platitudes we're fed about supervision and all the rest, it's more than a bit worrying to read that a massive 941 child sex offenders have reoffended, no matter what timescale this may be over

@studychick81

It could work the other way though, the protest doesn't need to be full of violence but enough to make a fuss, enough to say we re not happy. Enough to attract attention to the cause. Then if everyone does this in every street they try to move to, a direct message that they aren't wanted in our society, it's not ok to try and live back in their local community or anywhere in society. The force against this becomes stronger- people start to listen, change starts to happen. It becomes to big a problem to try and integrate them back into society, so they do stay in prison longer or they do become outcasts of society and have to live away from civil society.

Surely over history this is how big changes have happened? Not by accepting things as just the way they are, not by giving the message it's ok. But by demanding that it's not ok and they won't be accepted. If everyone does that then maybe a change will happen?

And so they live where? Or do we string em up, lick the. Away and throw away the key, exile them to remote islands in the Atlantic etc etc?