Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

Original poster

To think this person should be in jail?

408 replies

FerdinandsMassiveBollocks · 03/08/2016 06:25

www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/female-transsexual-walks-free-court-8546941

Anyone else not comfortable with this being counted as a crime committed by a woman? And really not comfortable with this person not going to jail? I don't care if there are no female specific classes, (there is a reason for that btw, because women don't do this shit) this person was male enough to commit the crime they are male enough to go to men's prison.

OP posts:
bakeoffcake · 03/08/2016 08:34

"She's a woman"

Well that's up to debate isn't it. Just because they say they are doesn't mean it's a fact.

Ditsy4 · 03/08/2016 08:35

Abuse is abuse. S/ he should have gone to prison

Pearlman · 03/08/2016 08:35

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

m0therofdragons · 03/08/2016 08:38

Saying someone has a penis is now sexist? Oh my life, I give up!

UnexpectedBaggage · 03/08/2016 08:38

As I thought you are trying close down debate.

MephistoMarley · 03/08/2016 08:40

Report away. Thankfully mumsnet is still a place where we can discuss things with a respect for facts and truth

Pearlman · 03/08/2016 08:41

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

MephistoMarley · 03/08/2016 08:42

Give me an example of 'bashing transgender women' on this thread. Please.

GrimmauldPlace · 03/08/2016 08:43

It's so difficult to have a conversation about this kind of thing. It will inevitably turn in to a bunfight over whether trans women are actually women etc and that makes me really uncomfortable. The problem is, there does need to be discussion over this kind of situation and proper plans put in place to stop criminals basically getting away with a crime because they have transisitioned. Transitioning should not mean anything you've done whilst the opposite gender should be wiped out. It doesn't work like that.

The debate over which prison she should go to is a difficult one also. A trans wing/prison has been suggested but would that be seen as discriminating?

JudyCoolibar · 03/08/2016 08:45

If this were any other report of any other type of offence by a non-transsexual person, people around here would be exercising due caution and, rightly, pointing out that the papers only ever tell half the story at best. I am sure there are numerous reasons for the sentence imposed which we know nothing about: the judge will have had access to reports which none of us have seen. Let's not be so eager to jump to the tabloid dog-whistle and follow their agenda.

ArcheryAnnie · 03/08/2016 08:46

YANBU. I don't care what kind of "sad place" a grown adult is in when they commit child abuse, they should go to jail.

The discussion on this thread seems to have devolved into "what prison should this creep be sent to". Well, apart from the disgusting fact that this creep doesn't appear to be going to any prison (and is crowing about it - "I am free and I have walked out of court - what does that tell you?"), then a basic principle should be that if you commit a crime as a man, then you should go to a male prison. The reason I say this is that a key plank of the defence case was "She was literally a different person when she committed these offences.", ie that this is not the same person who committed those terrible crimes, so this person should not be punished for that person's crimes. Other official bodies - who in general are supportive of transitioning individuals - have previously noted that male offenders, including sex offenders and other violent offenders, are using transition to distance themselves from their crimes. This seems to be another instance of this. We cannot let this become standard practice, as it is in very real danger of doing so.

logosthecat · 03/08/2016 08:48

I am not sure I understand this:

  • The only thing the judge said was that he couldn't send her on the reform/rehabilitation course, because it was 'for men'. I am assuming this course is SEPARATE from a jail sentence? How does this work?
  • So why wasn't she sent to jail? There is no reason she couldn't be sent to a female prison to serve a term. Perhaps there are other circumstances in the sentencing that we're not hearing about?
  • She hasn't gone unpunished. I agree that the punishment seems very lenient, though.
  • Transphobic remarks and hate are never justified, no matter how awful a particular individual transsexual's behaviour might be. Generalising from one individual to an entire group is hateful.
ArcheryAnnie · 03/08/2016 08:49

MrsFizzy I have seen a trans man argue for a "third space" prison for trans and genderfluid and nonbinary prisoners - which makes sense. Nobody who is not a woman should be in a woman's prison.

ArcheryAnnie · 03/08/2016 08:52

^She hasn't gone unpunished*

logosthecat

I'm not sure this convicted child abuser sees it quite like that, painting themselves both as a victim and someone set free by the judge: "I am not going to say anymore as me and my family have been through enough. I am free and I have walked out of court - what does that tell you? The judge set me free. That's the end of it and I will now move on."

logosthecat · 03/08/2016 08:55

Archery - well, there are the facts and then there are delusional people. I suspect that she will find that being all over the press as a sex offender, and being on the register, actually has some pretty damaging real-life consequences for the way she is seen in the fairly small community where she lives.

I am absolutely NOT saying the sentence seems adequate to me, if the press stories are true (which is a big 'if', I wouldn't trust most journalist's in this country to understand a donut if presented with one). It does seem on the face of it that the sentence is far too lenient, but not knowing the specifics of the case I don't feel I can comment more than tentatively.

logosthecat · 03/08/2016 08:56

*journalists. Where did that rogue apostrophe come from?

APlaceOnTheCouch · 03/08/2016 09:00

There are 3 issues tied up in this case.

  1. is the incredibly lenient sentencing and lack of remorse by the perpetrator. All on public record and hence with no need for 'due caution'

  2. the fact that the defence solicitor used an argument that the child abuser should not be held responsible since they now lived as a woman. This sets a dangerous precedent It's significance is wider than this case because it seems to imply individuals shouldn't be held responsible for past crimes if undertake selective surgery/counselling in the time it takes for the case to come to court

  3. if a rehabilitation course is meant primarily for one sex (because statistics show they are most likely to commit this crime) then that should not provide legal justification for not offering any rehabilitation courses at all

FloraFox · 03/08/2016 09:01

The judge should have sent this person to the male rehabilitation course. MTTs commit offences at the same rate as men, so what's the problem with treating them as men in the rehabilitation courses? Oh yes, it's because we have to pretend they are actually women now. We can expect to see a doubling or more of "women" committing sex offences in the next few years. The number s if "women" committing sex offences might double or triple. At what point do we stop with the pretence that male sex offenders are women?

RufusTheReindeer · 03/08/2016 09:02

Should just point out (although i am sure many of us know this ) that the use of the phrase

"end of " or the word "fact" does not mean you have won the arguement

Pearlman · 03/08/2016 09:04

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

ArcheryAnnie · 03/08/2016 09:07

Pearlman the defence for this creep's very serious crime rested on "She was literally a different person when she committed these offences." Is that what you believe?

logosthecat · 03/08/2016 09:09

There are obvious reasons why she shouldn't be sent to a male prison. She is a woman. There are no reasons, as far as I can see, that she shouldn't receive the same course in that prison.

Even though percentage wise it is far lower than the proportion of male paedophiles, there ARE a significant number of other women who have committed offences against children. What is done in these cases? Are they not getting the rehab programme either? If so, something needs to be done!

I think that the experience of gender dysphoria is a mitigating context for the crime. It is by no means an excuse for it, however, any more than any other kind of human misery and loss. At the end of the day, this woman made a series of terrible choices with very real ramifications for a victim, and if the facts of the case are as they have been presented in the red tops (big if), this looks too lenient.

Pearlman · 03/08/2016 09:09

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

splendide · 03/08/2016 09:09

he fact that the defence solicitor used an argument that the child abuser should not be held responsible since they now lived as a woman. This sets a dangerous precedent It's significance is wider than this case because it seems to imply individuals shouldn't be held responsible for past crimes if undertake selective surgery/counselling in the time it takes for the case to come to court

But the defence can say what they like - defences don't set precedents!

logosthecat · 03/08/2016 09:09

Apologies, I meant to say "There are no reasons, as far as I can see, that she shouldn't receive the same course in A WOMAN'S prison'.