Is it legal or morally right to tell other people about someone else's criminal record?

[M08my]

I'll try to keep this vague because I don't want to be identified.

I've just found out that someone I know (not a close friend) is a convicted paedophile. Done very harmful and disturbing stuff. Found it reported in a local newspaper. I'm sickened because he's offered to babysit for me before (we refused). He's got a suspended sentence so isn't in prison.

We aren't close but we have some mutual friends who are closer, including his best friend. If we tell them, is that breaching his (the paedophile's) right to privacy? It is reported in a local newspaper for anyone to see, but isn't a famous case, chances are they'd never see it if we didn't tell. None of the other friends have kids.

My instinct is I want people to be told. I wouldn't tell his employer, just closest friends. But I'm not sure what's right.

I'm a bit emotional about it (mostly angry and scared).

I should have said, I'm really sorry that happened to you. You should have been applauded for trying to keep children safe, not told off.

Lock em up, that's how I'm beginning to feel about it. Just lock em up and throw away the key. (You can tell I'm still very angry!)

The police should know that he is actively seeking contact with a child. This may change their opinion of his offending.

I wouldn't even have thought about it before sharing the newspaper article. You owe him nothing. It could save even one parent from being concerned that he had since been left alone with their child.

Your friends can decide if they want to continue to see him but at least they have the facts. But to be honest I would judge anyone who continued to go out socialising with him.

Tell them tell them tell them. If it's in the public domain you're not doing anything wrong legally. They have a right to know in order to make an informed decision about the safety of their family.

This is exactly what I was going to say!

Forget telling your neighbours, tell the police!

I'd say, 'I know you are friendly with X. Are you aware of his convictions? I'm prepared to risk being called a gossip here, but we choose to have nothing to do with him because his particular crime is not something I can easily move on from. If I hadn't known I'd have wanted someone to tell me, and it's in that spirit that I'm telling you.'

I think your question is missleading because this isn't about someone "with a criminal record" and their possible reformation after doing time etc. You can be in prison for non payment of council tax.

This isn't about a criminal record, it's about someone trying to harm children.

By the way it's not defamation if it's true. And if it's public knowledge and in the paper then you can tell who you like because it's concerning and it's the truth.

If you are 100% he is a convicted paedophile, you can tell who you like. If he wasn't found guilty you could be in trouble as it is slander and you could be sued by him.

Inform the police if he offered to babysit, he may be breaking some conditions of his release/conviction, and my be recalled/called to prison.

Data protection and GDPR sometimes comes up at work. I know it well enough that if something is in the public domain you can share it with whoever you need to. And you should, for safeguarding.

I have now called the police and told them about the babysitting offer and the woman I spoke to was totally non plussed "so he didn't actually babysit then? You said no." And kept getting repeating the details wrong including repeating a date back to me "so you say this happened September 2022?" I was like, er no September 2022 hasn't happened yet (!) But hopefully it will get passed on in some form.

I think some PPs missed that the babysitting offer was over a year ago and the conviction (and our revelation) was very recent. So he hasn't broken any sentencing conditions at least not relating to us.

I wasn't worried about defamation because I wouldn't lie about anything. I was worried about his "right to a private life". I think for example legally you can't go telling employers not to employ someone because of their record (for an ordinary job with no access to vulnerable ppl, not teacher, nurse etc). But I could be wrong that's why I'm asking here

I wouldn't worry about right to a private life. These rights are between the state and the citizen, not citizen to citizen. You have every right to protect yourself.

Again, the rule of thumb is who knows. If he's in the newspaper then technically you are just bringing their attention to something they ought to know already. You're also quite entitled to tell an employer about something that is public knowledge.

Where you would get into hot water is if you worked for a public body and started phoning up employers and telling them about spent convictions. But you would be in hot water because your employer would be breaking the law because of your actions, if that makes sense.

This is chilling. I wouldn't feel a shred of guilt around this, you've done nothing wrong. Conversely if a child did get involved in future and you hadn't spoken up, you'd feel worse. That's why the convictions are reported in the papers, and online. A local paper used to be read cover to cover in most homes, it's a way of letting people know. This is not your fault. I'd say if you're not against it, you're with it, there is no grey area on the abuse of children.

Also, he or his wife see this post and know what? They have absolutely zero high ground from which to judge you.

If it's in the press then I can't imagine you telling someone is breaking his right to privacy.

It would be like saying 'oh have you seen (insert someone famous) in the news today.

I would report to the police that he offered to babysit - I would Imagine that goes against court orders

How many times does OP have to point out the offer to babysit was way before he was ever convicted and is totally inconsequential?

Wish people would at least make a cursory effort to read the thread before pitching in.

Regardless of when the offer to babysit was made, he was actively trying to get unsupervised access to a young child. This could demonstrate that his online abuse was also possible offline.

It's sensible to notify the police.

What?! How could they possibly charge you for that? am I the only one shocked by this??

In your position I would create a burner email address and email the news article to your mutual friends if you don't want to deal with any fallout.. Paedophiles should not be allowed to hide in plain sight. I don't think it is morally or legally wrong to share a news article already in the public domain.

You know, I'm very tempted to do this. It feels cowardly but I don't want to anger the Paedo guy if he finds out I've been telling people (he knows where me and my daughter live, etc etc).

His best friend (call him B, and I'll call Paedo P) strikes me as someone who might stay friends with P out of feeling sorry for him and his "mental health". I feel like I want B to be told, but it could easily get back to Paedo that it was me who told. For extra detail, B works with children. So maybe his employer could find out he is best friends with a paedo and that could affect his job...? But it wouldn't be B's fault because he never knew...unless I tell him.

Sorry I'm not making much sense, my head is swirling around. I keep losing sleep imagining how much I would swear and shout at P and his wife if I see them again.

From a legal perspective, there is no blanket law against talking about criminal convictions. There are laws against libel and GDPR laws and on occasion the official secrets act or an injunction might make it unlawful, and there are restrictions if you find out through some of the right-to-knows schemes, but a conviction you hear about through normal public discourse (like reading the paper) is fair game. Talking about a friend or neighbour’s conviction is no different from talking about a celebrity’s and talking about a conviction for pedophilia is no different from talking about a conviction for drink driving.

From a moral perspective it’s a bit trickier, especially since none of your friends have children at the moment. It’s gossip - it being news doesn’t stop it also being gossip. But despite its bad rep, gossip plays an important social function in helping people guard themselves against potential harm. It’s particularly useful for those in less powerful situations who rarely have the same access to sources of information as more powerful or well resourced people.

However, with pedophilia, there is an issue that pedophiles who are socially isolated are more likely to reoffend. So the gossip, while making it easier for those individuals you tell to guard against harm, make it more likely that some other child will harmed. If you, as a social group can be open about his conviction without shaming him for it, you would be in a stronger position to morally justify talking about it.

As to the matter of whether it is in fact the same man , do they not show a photo of him ? Every time there is a case like this in the online papers which I read there is usually a lovely big mug shot .

Thanks fit asking. There are two types of punishable crimes that are relevant here.

They are are:

1. Defamation: Communicating something about someone that you know isn't whole true.


2. Malicious communication: Communicating something about someone that will cause distress or harm.

Example. Jon moves to your neighbourhood. You are aware that he has served a jail sentence for shoplifting.

You handout a leaflet to every shop on high street with his face and conviction on it.

This is not defamation but as a result of your communication, John gets banned from shops on the high streer causing him grave distress.

Congrats, John can now report you to the police for malicious communication.

From the title I assumed you were going to be talking about something that happened ages ago (e.g. someone getting nicked for shoplifting as a teen).

But this isn't just a past record, it's current news. I'd probably send the link to my friends without thinking twice. If you're worried about saying something wrong/libelous, just send the article without adding your own commentary.

Thank you all for your advice. His two closest friends now know about it and we're not likely to tell many (or any) other people.

I'm afraid this is outing but we definitely know it's him because one of us confronted him, and he admitted it and tried to minimise it/make excuses.

I haven't stopped being angry. I feel like everything around me keeps reminding me of it - there was a question on yougov the other day about paedophile sentencing - Kellie Jay Keen posted about her run in with Wiltshire police about her views on paedophiles - and other things sometimes remind me of P's specific fetish. It makes me sick and I can't stop worrying and being angry.

Thank you all for your advice and sympathy.

Yes I would absolutely tell them/give them the newspaper article anonymously