19 years for child rape

[thebody]

Aibu to think this is disgraceful??? Child rape,

Should be life.

If you were on a jury and new 'X' had already been convicted of child rape and was serving 19 years could you really be impartial?

if it's relevant the CPS will bring it up as bad character evidence anyway

Pavlov, I wondered if they were IPP sentences. I've just had one imposed in a very serious case of familial sexual abuse. If you don't understand sentencing you would think he had been sentenced to 7 years as this was was the minimum time to be served. Reading the article did make me think this was a fixed term sentence though.

I would have thought that IPP would be very appropriate in the circs

thebigjessie only one will be deported afaik there is only one illegal immigrant, hence the deportation back to afghanistan. All the other people are british citizens I believe? You can't deport a british citizen, where would you deport them to?

ohdearnigel it would be a better story to not say it was IPP though, even if they were, fixed sentences imply that is the maximum they will serve. And we all know papers are sensationalist. I did not think judges used fixed tarrifs for dangerous offenders any more but I may be wrong. If they are IPP they should be reported as such so that the public know that in the future vulnerable children will be protected from these men, rather than the papers creating and compounding the ever present fear that we do not protect our children.

But, it could be that the papers are not being misleading and they are fixed. which means, that the person with a 4yr prison sentence will be out in 2 years.

OhdearNigel when I served on a jury we weren't told of the accused's previous convictions until after we had given our verdict. It came as quite a relief.

"under shariah law the married ones would be stoned to death and the unmarried ones 100 lashes,"

That only happens to women who have sex outside marriage in many islamic countries. These men do not see they have committed a crime which is extremely scary. In some countries the men would be forced to marry the girls that they abused.

Also Britain does not have shariah law as frankly we we are more civilised.

so what would we do? give them drugs so that they cannot get aroused again, then release them?

its a horrific thing they have done, but as i wouldnt be comfortable killing them, i would be equally uncomfortable making someone else do that

Various forms of therapy and counselling have been shown to be very effective at preventing repeat sex offences.

Unfortunately we cling so hard to the idea that we need to punish sex offenders that we would rather see people suffer and then re-offend, than treat the problem and make the country a safer place for children in the future.

the problem with sex offenders such as these, they are not fullfiling deviant sexual urges that can be counselled away, or that they can take drugs for to stop them having those urges. They are men who have no respect for females, and more than that, have utter contempt for females, attitudes to women that are deep-rooted and entrenched in their very being, and target young girls who have no support networks to turn to, and cannot easily fight back, to assert power and control, use sex to assert that power, to show how they have the ability to make such powerful decisions over another human being, over women who for some reason deserve their contempt. It is about taking vulnerable females and 'showing them who is boss', an using sex is showing it in its ultimate most powerful form. It is their attitudes and senses of entitlement that need to be challenged, and at the age of 30s/40s/50s this is so so entrenched it is almost impossible to change. yes cognitive therapies can help some people change negative behaviours, but sometimes, its just to far gone. In which case, those people have to managed in another way. like locking them up and away for however long they have to be to stop them doing it again. which mostly means when they become physically weak old men and not physically capable of it any more.

People have want to change and see the need to change. In the meantime society needs to be protected from these men who refuse to see that they have done anything wrong. If you are England then you have to follow English law whatever your cultural background or views about women.

I am not sure how forced coucelling work and frankly there needs to be an element of punishment in sentencing for crime. There needs to be a deterent for men who are tempted to do similar things. I am glad that most of these men have been publically shamed by having their names in the news.

Prehaps we should be funding councelling and theraphy for the victims.

really are you under the impression that the victims will not get any counselling or therapy? I am pretty damn sure they will!

Yup so these guys don't get that they did anything wrong. That would be why education is a good solution.

Some of them are only going away for a few years....we have the option of either:
a) not trying to support them to change
b) support them to change.

One of these options has the possibility that they will emerge from jail as a useful safe member of society. The other one doesn't.

Why do people feel that the need to see that people are punished is more important than the safety of our children?

You know, we could all write to the Attorney General to protest at the very low sentences. If lots of us write to him and put pressure on our MPs the AG will have to reveiw the sentences and can increase them.

Its not an either/or. They have done something horrible which requires punishment (the deprivation of their liberty); they also require whatever it takes to change them so that they are no longer likely to reoffend before they are set free.

The judge will have had to sentence within a banding system according to the crime and aggravating/mitigating factors - I would imagine that 19 yrs for this crime (as compared with other sentences we see) is probably at or near the top of the maximum sentence allowed.

I also think it was very short sighted/ridiculous and also inappropriate to have an all white jury in a multi racial country where all the defendants were non whites and all the victims white.

Of course the convicted now have a basis on which to argue that the trial was unfair (and perhaps it was, we cannot say) - regardless of their guilt or innocence.

The fact of the matter is that the british legal system has to be exemplary and as transparent as possible - so even if we, the public (who are not in possession of all the facts), believe the men to be guilty, they must have a genuinely fair trial. Not just because they are entitled to one, but because otherwise where are we left as a nation? We would become no different to any other corrupt regime.

I dont know, i studied psyhotherapy and there isnt an awful amount of success in changing offenders.

Sometimes it can be as hard for me to tell you that from now onwards you like women, for a padophile to be told to stop liking children.
There are so many avenues, many offenders dont chose to like children they just do, then theres those who suffer from intrusive thoughts coupled with other mh issues.

Many lie. Its when your "clients" start threatening your own children or saying horrific things to repel you it gets hard.

I couldnt kill them for it though

I say bring back the death sentence with proven peadophiles, child killers and all rapists. The world would be a better place and all our taxes would'nt be going on there nice food and equipment in prison

It may not be possible to stop a paedophile from being sexually attracted to children (the euphemism 'like' really isn't appropriate. ). I would have thought that the issue is to help them to stop acting on those urges.

Conference - you must have done it quite a while ago then. I think bad character has been usable for quite a while. I am regularly asked to prepare bad character evidence for use during trials by the CPS. I have a current DV rape where his rape charges from his previous marriage will be used as evidence.

NB - it must be relevant to the current case. It is not previous convictions - it is previous offences where the offending is very similar and relevant to the case in hand.

Pavlov - I work with a retired detective who has worked on several very high profile murders including Sara Payne. We were discussing IPPs in the wake of the one I had the other week, they are very unusual and not used unless absolutely necessary. He thinks there are about 200 of them.

ohdearnigel see how little i know about it all! I know there should be more of them, for those offenders where it is clear that they pose a long term risk that wont just end at sentence expiry date. Many offences are circumstantial, even violent ones, so sure that many would not need an IPP but were the offences are of a nature that indicates intrenched views and beleives that mean they beleive their behaviour is ok/or they dont give a shit if it is or isn't, then those offenders are likely to repeat their behaviours on release (I suspect you work in a similar field to me)

"really are you under the impression that the victims will not get any counselling or therapy? I am pretty damn sure they will!"

I was much older than these girls, better educated and I have been given f*ck all help to get over a serious sexual assualt inspite of asking. These girls are young, in care and generally vilified by many. Many of them do not have the communicaton skills or confidence to get help of the NHS.

In the past, I have asked for help and been refused. The NHS provides anti depressants and you are advised to use self help books and websites. Its laughable to think that is help.

The vicitims are are lucky to be even believed. It is not unusual for rape victims to be made out be liars and treated as the criminal rather than the victim. Look at various threads on mumsnet.

Getting proper councelling or pychotheraphy is pretty damm difficult get on the nhs at the best of times.

I think its OK

jesus, did noone see that fucker that got 5 years?

whats 1950s said

these criminals are not paedophiles. these victims were not pre-pubescent children, they are adolescent children

really that's shocking! My own experience of getting help off the NHS was to do with pnd which they seemed to be falling over themselves to 'help' me with. In fact getting them to butt out has been more of an issue.

I saw an interview with one of the victims where she said she had received a lot of support though...so maybe it is not always useless.

Whether these individuals are paedophiles or not, same sort of argument applies. They may want to have sex with underage girls; they need to be made to see that its wrong, that they need to exercise self-control and obey the law.

I'm sorry but the victims of these men will suffer for a lifetime, they need long term therapy to cope with the despicable and heinous offence committed to them and that is NOT available at present.

When victims are sentenced to life, perpertrators should be sentenced to life.

Terrorists are locked up, why aren't rapists? just because they commit terror against children.