9 years for "peadophilia" - too harsh?

[SenoraPostrophe]

here ...am I the only person to think this is a bit harsh? he's only 21. I know a couple of girls who had 20 yr old boyfriends when 13 or 14. and I'm pretty sure there wouldn't have been a prison sentence at all then (remember Bill Wyman and Mandy thing?). have we gone over the top?

I'm not sure what zipiptitoes means by it's not practical to keep them locked up. We do keep many people locked away for very long periods already. I merely propose increasing that number.

I accept 100% that this is not the way the judiciary et al work. But that whole secton of the government is in the words of the minister "dysfunctional" and "not fit for purpose", so I'd hardly take their established practice as strong evidence that it's the right thing to do.

Chemical castration is not exactly a silver bullet. Firstly, the motives that drive many rapists are far from purely sexual, and are part of issues with their class of target. There are known instances of physically castrated rapists using implements.
Also presumably you're going to let them out. Seems to me that some % of them will have a severe grudge, and that strikes me as bad.

A good side effect of the high cost to the government of longer sentences is the possibility that they will start spending real money on prevention and rehabilitation.

Prevention is of course amazingly hard, and I'd be the last to suggest it will have a high success rate, but I see any increase in prevention as seriously good.
Certainly offering mre treatment than is currently available, with an absence of waiting lists, and maybe with higher staffing levels to help people when they feel drawn to bad things.

At present there is no comeback when a paedo or any other serious criminal is let out, and hurts someone. As far as I am aware they don't even get sent a strongly worded memo.

If the governemnt were strictly liable for the actions of the people it deems "safe" to release, they'd release fewer anbd spend more money on trying to fix them.
At present we get the old sad line "lessons have been learned" which no one outside the readership of the Guardian believes any more, and not even all of them.

The other behaviour is classed as aggravating factors.

Sexual abuse of any kind with a minor is sexual abuse with a minor, no matter what their age.

All do irreparable damage.

And I think paedophiles should get longer sentences, rather than the other way round.

This man is about 21. The odds are he will be out in 5/6 years. The odds are he will do similar again. The longer he is locked away for, the longer children are protected from him for.

...or conversly, the better treatment he (and others get) both inside and out, the safer children are per se. sentences that are too long can interfere with that, especially with offenders who are young I think.

I think the reason I posted this thread was because I was thinking about the thread that zippi poseted the other day. It is just not practical or sensible to simply increase sentences all over the place. crime rates do not rise and fall inversely with average sentence length like people seem to think they do.

"At present there is no comeback when a paedo or any other serious criminal is let out, and hurts someone. As far as I am aware they don't even get sent a strongly worded memo"

Several offenders (irrelevant of category of offence) get written warnings, and are often recalled to prison BEFORE they re-offend, due to monitoring of their behaviour.

The law as it stands means that most paedophiles will be released, usually on licence, on the sex offender register and often to approved premises.

The criminal justice system is flawed in virtually every area of practice, but professionals have to work within its constraints.

I have seen paedophiles with shorter sentences come out, offend, go back inside, come out again and re-offend.

At least with a longer sentence the children are protected in the interim.

dc means that the professionals involved don't get a strongly worded memo, so. I doubt that's true myself.

now serial re-offenders would be a different type of case, so. but that some do that doesn't mean all will do it.

It's not true. Professionals have been suspended over such cases and inquiry after inquiry take place.

Vast majority of paedophiles ARE serial offenders.

sowoffended, you obviously have spotted something that I've looked for, and failed to find.
Have you any link for any case where a member of a parole board has had any sanction for letting out a dangerous criminal ?

Yes, of course probation people screw up and get hassled, but to be fair, thgey are goal keepers, and it's so easy to screw up when you're dealing with highly motivitated criminals.
The secret of course is not to rely upon the probation service for anything more dangerous than shoplifting.

Senorapostrophe is right that not all reoffend.
But how can you tell with adequate reliabiltiy which is which ?
Adequate being defined in this context as it happening to your chld and you still thinking it was a sensible risk to take.