To think there should be more done about paedophiles awaiting trial?

[SaucyJackOLantern]

Just found out from listening to local news that our next door neighbour (literally right next door) has been convicted of possessing 1000s of images of child abuse at the most severe level. Which was nice.

Thing is..... he was initially arrested last December, so for eleven months the police have known that there was a paedophile living here. It's a large block of flats with shared entry ways and communal gardens where children play out. He could've done something at any time- particularly as he would've expected he was going to prison anyway.

AIBU to think in situations like this the police should be giving out warnings? Obviously not to name people that are yet to be convicted of a crime, but just a heads up not to let kids out in communal areas unsupervised. Our front door is literally ten inches from his- and both are inside the block that's kept closed by security doors. My 9&8 year old girls have played in the stairwell plenty of times with me thinking they're safe.

I don't know why I'm posting this, and I'm sure I am being U really. But for fucks sake. Why are these people allowed to walk the streets in anonymity?

FFS! He isn't awaiting trial now. He has just been convicted and imprisoned of all original charges and further offences that were committed when he was on bail.

You wanted the people living locally to him to be informed BEFORE he had his trial, hence your OP title

I never said he should've been named. Just that we should've been made aware there was an actual, increased risk to children using the communal space.

My misunderstanding over whether he had/hadn't already been to trial and been convicted. But my point still stands - YABU to think that police should have warned people living near him before his trial.

I don't know - imagine this was not a neighbor but a family member - SS would have warned you not to allow unsupervised contact wouldn't they? If it was someone living in the house they would have to leave.

Being in a flat with communal areas has some similarities, the people are familiar and you could be alone with a neighbor in a private area very easily.

I'm sorry OP, it must be a huge shock.

There is no justice in this country at all.

My son was raped and abused by my stepson. He also abused my daughter. He was found guilty of two counts of rape and four counts of engaging in sexual activity with a child under the age of thirteen.

His 'punishment' was a two year rehabilitation order, he has to go on the sex offenders register for five years, and he is not to be alone with a child under the age of fourteen from between 7pm to 7am. He's free to go back to his life. He can go to school, he's now in year 10, and can mingle with as many children and young people as he likes. He could be sitting next to your son or daughter in class.

And there's not a damn thing I can do about it.

But the point is that you have no idea who is using communal spaces. Just because the man at no. 10 is awaiting trial for child pornography, it doesn't make him any more dangerous than the man at no. 4 who just hasn't been caught yet.

He wasn't 'innocent' while awaiting trial. He was presumed innocent which is a very different thing. Some of the people who plead not guilty are actually convicted - they are entitled to the presumption of innocence i.e. nothing to be done that might prejudice proceedings. That does not mean they are actually innocent.

Agree re. the dangers of vigilantism, but same could be said for the police warning we just had about what sounds like a flasher on the footpath kids at ds's school have cross to get to school.

Prettypictures, I'm so so sorry about your dd, that's horrific. Also think it's outrageous you were given a caution for warning people about the perpetrator - it's so unethical to encourage someone to admit guilt to get it over with. Bet if you'd refused it would never have come to trial but of course it's a hell of a risk.

Sorry, my badly made point is that you simply don't know, even when they are convicted. You just don't know.

It should have been a matter of public record when he was charged, unless there was a court order in place to protect his identity. Name and address and nature of charge are basic facts that can be reported - unless an exception has been made, which may well be the case.

If the police had warned locals that there was a man in the area awaiting trial, then wouldnt that give the possibility that vigilantes would be out hunting this man, and then a massive probability that an innocent man could have ended up targeted and hurt?

Yanbu saucy. The likes of him should not be roaming the streets. Anyone with children within the vicinity of such a sick person should be made aware.

You would think that there were procedures in place for parents to be made aware in situations like this, but for the reasons stated this unfortunately wouldn't work.

My own DD found herself in a rather unfortunate position earlier this year.
I wont go into details but basically was groomed online and the crux of it was he wanted to meet her for sex. Fortunately we found out and stopped it before any further damage could be done.

Was reported to the police, he was subsequently arrested and his computers taken away but that's all I know. We know the general area where he lives and his approximate age but that's it.

We cannot be given his full details until he is charged (if he gets charged) It was first reported 5 months ago and as far as I know he is still being investigated. There are likely to be other children in the same situation as my daughter.
It is heart breaking thinking that nobody knows who he is and is probably walking around his home town under anonymity with the freedom to do as he pleases, he could in theory commit further offences but that's the way it works.

The only thing that I can do is be extra vigilant over my daughter. she was not allowed out of my sight for 3 months She now understands of the dangerous situation she put herself in, she knows what to do if danger ever presents itself. She does not use the computer if she is not in the same room as me.
I need to know who all her friends are, where they live, who she chats to who she texts. I need to know where she is 24/7 and that I can contact her at anytime. Basically she is on a very tight leash.

I admit that I was a bit lax in parenting and she did have a fair bit of freedom. But I now realise I wasn't doing my job properly so I have to take 90% of the blame.
It is our job as parents to supervise more closely, explain to our children of the dangers and teach them to know what to do in every situation.
This has been a huge learning curve for me also and I will absolutely do everything in my power to ensure my DD is never put in this position ever again.

These people are sick and it doesn't matter what lengths the police go to for every arrest that is made another 10 are discovered. Paedophiles will never be eradicated.

So what if someone accused you or a family member of being a pedophile OP, would you be happy for everyone to forever think they were?

YANBU, but I don't know what the answer is. As others have said the rock of vigilantism is great. Perhaps a special case should be made in the case of shared front door. I don't know.
But really NeedsAsockamnesty
YABU if your children are old enough to not require constant supervision then make sure you have made them aware of the skills needed to stay safe. I'll be charitable and assume you have toddlers or younger because there's a whole range of experiences have to learn how to navigate. It's not about skills to stay safe

This www.theguardian.com/uk/2000/aug/30/childprotection.society is why the Police do not shout about every person awaiting sentencing
and this
news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/865633.stm
is why they do not shout about all those who have been convicted

Sorry I have no idea where rock of vigilantism came from. RISK

The thing is there is no accounting for stupidity. We might be reasonable people but even a warning that "a paedophiles is using the communal area" can lead to things going horribly wrong for an innocent person. What if your husband was targeted because some idiot started a rumour? Or someone who looked similar or had a similar name? Chinese whispers abound and stupidity of the general public knows no bounds when things become inflammatory.

Personally if they could just be shot after conviction it would clear the matter up once and for all but that's another story.

I'm the last person to shout about peados around every corner (honestly i've laughed at enough people on MN about it)

However in the last year, our lovely osteopath (who treated myself and all 3DC after birth) was convicted of downloading child pornography. Then a friend from school was bathing her DD and found injuries to her vagina. Turns out the stepdad was raping her at every possibility. She is 5. And just yesterday I saw a man that I know (and actually do know is a convicted peadophile through old work) walking down the street with a family and holding hands with their little boy (I have contacted old work to tell them, as he knows full well he is to stay away from children, they were aware he had been 'taken in' by a family, but thought the family had no children.

Opiesoldlady, I have read your thread and my heart goes out to you. From your thread and what I know from the last year, there really is no justice at all.

We have Megan's Law here; all sex offenders have to be registered. I'm sure vigilantism happens, but I don't think it's as widespread as people seem to think.

I'm actually a bit torn about Megan's Law myself. I think if people have done their prison time, they've paid their debt to society and shouldn't have to continue to be punished. However, I don't want a rapist or pedophile living next door to me. It's a tricky situation.

People are innocent until proven guilty, so I would not agree that someone awaiting trial should be subject to some sort of registration or notification process.

Steff
The USA stops ex offenders from getting jobs and voting, Megan's law is the least of their problems.
Then again its a lot easier to move away in a big country like the US - the UK is smaller than New York State after all

Steff, i suppose it comes down to if you believe that child sex offenders can be rehabilitated.

Personally I don't think they can. Their sexual preference is for children. My sexual preference is for adult men. Another womans preference might be for adult women. Peadophiles are sexually attracted to boys or girls or both. I wouldn't presume to think that I could change my sexual preference, or turn a gay person straight and I don't think peadophiles will stop being attracted to kids.

I'm sure they can be taught that is is wrong and why its is wrong to act on their feelings. But I think that spending your life denying your sexual feelings would be very difficult. I certainly wouldn't trust one with my children and would like the right to know who and where they are.

Remember the vigilante mob who thought a paediatrician was a paedophile and acted accordingly?

that is what the two links I posted were ....

pantone, I think there's a dispute amongst professionals about whether paedophilia is an innate sexual preference like heterosexuality. To say it is could be seen to excuse it. Perhaps it is a disordered expression of sexuality caused by a variety of factors, there's a lot of debate.

A Catholic priest I know reckons abusers in his church were created by the practice of putting teenagers into theological colleges, so they never had a chance to express their sexuality. His argument is that they are repressed at a crucial stage of their development. I don't know how true that is.