Paedophile loses “human rights” appeal

[TalkingtoLangClegintheDark]

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-53416056

GOOD

Glad to see the courts putting safeguarding children ahead of this paedophile’s belief he should be free to contact minors with impunity.

If an adult does not have the right to privacy around their direct communication with an unrelated 13 year old (quite right), does that conversely mean that the 13 year old does not have the right to privacy from their parents on anything? Or only around issues where the 13 year old is at risk of harm?

@Cwenthryth i13 year olds have their own agency so are allowed privacy in certain circumstances e.g. Fraser guidelines. These circumstances wouldn't include commiting a crime against someone else.

One solution that occurred to me is for the police to recruit volunteers to form official anti grooming groups. They could then be trained to ensure that they don’t risk cases being thrown out due to the groups not following the law and to ensure that they don’t fall into vigilante type action. They can also then contact the police and have an officer available for the meetings etc.

Excellent idea. We wouldn’t have vigilantes if the police were doing the job. I don’t blame police for government funding cuts plus politicised priorities such as hounding GC commenters on Twitter. But they are not protecting children.

I was once part of an unofficial Neighbourhood Watch group. We refused to joint the city's 'official' NHW because it was run by a bossy, blabber-mouthing, martyr-ish Stanley Johnson wannabe.

The police knew all about our little group and the organiser discreetly gave them info that led to the conviction of three Class A county lines dealers (we're talking 7+ years sentences).

This kind of neighbourhood model can work. It involves trust, good communication, and good quality information flowing to the police and being properly acted on.

Not every neighbourhood has that, however. My current local neighbourhood policing team are woefully apathetic about drugs and domestic abuse. But ... personnel change over time - I have hopes a new sargent will come along and shake things up. Meanwhile, part of me understands where vigilantism comes from.

this is great news for safeguarding. Judge said very clearly that the child's rights come before the offenders right to privacy.
A clear cut judgement imo

Would someone be kind enough to put into words exactly what their "concerns about vigilante groups" are?

If paedophiles are in prison due to their activities we should be pleased yes?

@JamieLeeCurtains

The UK's highest court ruled on Wednesday that the interests of children have priority over any interest a paedophile could have in being allowed to engage in criminal conduct.

Very key ruling.

I bet the 'Minor Attracted Persons' groups don't like them apples.

Good.

Also the comments on a 13 year old not being expected to have to keep secrets from her parents - are you reading, Mermaids? Tell your lawyers to have a good look.

This.

If a vigilante group, like this one, simply set up a fake profile, get evidence and pass it to the police I don't see the issue.

It's like the Microsoft scam calls: I waste telephone scammers' time because the time I waste protects a vulnerable person from being scammed. For every paedophile caught by a vigilante group you save at least one child from being groomed or worse. Surely that's a win?

@BaronessSlighterThanThou

Would someone be kind enough to put into words exactly what their "concerns about vigilante groups" are?

If paedophiles are in prison due to their activities we should be pleased yes?

They get things wrong, and when they do there's no comeback for the victim (or their family if they were killed).

www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2013/oct/29/vigilante-murder-paedophile-bristol-bijan-ebrahimi

Serious question. If - after one murder - it's still OK to accept vigilantism, then what is the number at which it should stop ? Two. Three ? Four ?

Or is it OK to beat and burn someone innocent to death just to put the fear of god into real paedophiles ?

Or have we now reached the point where "The end justifies the means" and it's alls fair in love and war.

People need to control their bloodlust if they want justice.

Personally I have no time whatsoever for vigilantism. It's a corrosive activity, and I would always question the motives of those involved, since the self-selection involved seems to attract the sorts of people you really wouldn't trust around children anyway. Far too violent for a start.

In this vein, I honestly can't believe what I've just read.

twitter.com/ecarlssonbrowne/status/1283156432410615808?s=21

Apparently accurate recording of male/female sex crimes makes no difference.

If a vigilante group, like this one, simply set up a fake profile, get evidence and pass it to the police I don't see the issue.

but they didn't, did they ? They met in person to detain them. Leading to the possibility of a struggle, a knee in the neck and a dead suspect.

And whilst the hard of thinking might cheer a "dead paedo", quite aside from the fact of extra judicial murder is also the fact that a "dead paedo" can tell no tales, and they might have been a veritable treasure trove of information that might have saved many many children.

The fact the vigilante brigade wouldn't have thought of that suggests that they weren't thinking that much about the children.

There are two "I"s in vigilante. Which pretty much sums up what it's all about.

They met in person to detain them. Leading to the possibility of a struggle, a knee in the neck and a dead suspect.

But realistically that doesn't happen/likelihood of it happening is tiny. Therefore I still fully support vigilante groups when it comes to child abuse. The police don't have the time so we either risk the well-being and safety of children to protect paedos on the off chance the resist being detained and get injured through that process, or simply put the vulnerable category first.

If you seek out crime then the risks are for you. And if you can't do the time...

Thank you for the answers to my question.

So, the reservations that people have with these groups is when they break the law, I agree with that.

However,

What if, as someone said, they collect information and then pass it on to the police?

Would anyone here have a prob with that?

@Loveinatimeofcovid

Since when do peadophiles qualify as human?

The mistake people make is trying to convince themselves paedophiles the something other than humans. They are humans. They’re in our streets, in our schools, churches, hospitals, doctors surgeries, friend homes, they’re our grandparents, siblings, cousins. They use human behaviour and relationships to get access to their victims. They’re every bit as human as the rest of us and to pretend otherwise is to hide from the reality of that and leaves children more vulnerable. Recognise what paedohiles are.

But realistically that doesn't happen/likelihood of it happening is tiny. Therefore I still fully support vigilante groups when it comes to child abuse.

So you are still happy for innocent people to be beaten and burned to death ? Think about where that puts you in the order of horrible people ....

What if, as someone said, they collect information and then pass it on to the police? Would anyone here have a prob with that?

If that's all they do, then yes. But it won't be. They'll feel the need to share it (with goodness knows who). And they'll feel the need to "check it out" and so on.

I know it's clearly against the grain here, but I have a soft spot for innocent people. And I have an even softer spot for the families on innocent people who find themselves dead at the hands of a bunch of thugs who think that calling themselves "paedo hunters" will fool people into thinking them somehow noble when a generation or two ago they'd as likely as not be -bashing. And a generation before that, in 1966, *-bashing.

"So you are still happy for innocent people to be beaten and burned to death?"

I never said that and you know it.

Don't put words in people's mouths.

Otherwise I could say that you'd rather see children suffer years of MH issues as a result of grooming, because gotta prevent a paedo from fighting back and getting injured in that scenario.

When it comes to grooming and vigilantes there will be a losing party. My support will always go to the vulnerable party. Hint: it isn't the paedo.

There does seem to be a clear difference between groups/individuals that quietly hand information over to the police and those who live stream their actions. I can't think of a benefit for the latter in terms of deterrence, it seems to be more a case of vanity on the part of the streamers.

When it comes to grooming and vigilantes there will be a losing party

Yes. Justice. And thus we all lose.

@Loveinatimeofcovid

Since when do peadophiles qualify as human?

Of course they are human. They are just like other people. May be charming to those around them, pillars of society. Respectable. Happy to volunteer to run children’s groups. Maybe join campaigns to educate children on rights and oppression. Get involved with children’s charities. Befriend vulnerable individuals. Write PHSE for school.....

Would someone be kind enough to put into words exactly what their "concerns about vigilante groups" are?

If they were simply handing info to the police that would be one thing but some groups live stream their ‘stings’ on Facebook and they have been known to get the wrong person. What if the police are already investigating the person and trying to trace their contacts, the vigilantes could be preventing them from getting further information about other predators.

So you are still happy for innocent people to be beaten and burned to death ? Think about where that puts you in the order of horrible people

So the incredibly unlikely possibility of this happening should be prioritised over the insidious and prolific child abuse our society suffers from?

Without vigilantes our school and children would still be in danger from a horrific individual. Those girls would probably have been groomed in to sending more pictures, his 11 year old daughter would still be being raped in her own bedroom. His wife would still be taking him along to help with her brownie groups.

They recorded the entire thing live on Facebook.

And these pedo cowards aren’t the type to actually try to stand up to or resist groups of men. He was shaking in his boots and stayed still until the police arrived.

A mother had already tried to report to the police, without hard evidence they were not interested. He would have just gone through life free to abuse as he chose.

I don’t care whether it was vanity or safeguarding that they steamed it, all I care about is that a young girl isn’t being raped in her own home, 7 year olds aren’t being groomed in to sending nudes and he is now somewhere he can’t hurt any more children.

Streaming live on social media has always seemed questionable especially if they get the wrong person, but make no mistake about the unanimous ruling you should be exposed for talking sexually to underagers.

I was listening to this yesterday (been a bit busy, sorry I am late) and was reminded about the attitude MAPs seem to have. That they are not pedophiles, they don't like young children, kids, they like young teens. Apparently that is different, quite alright and is only illegal because, erm, well, society and all that!

Working from that perspective he was saying "I am MAP, this was a minor I was talking to. My business, piss off"

Which tells you just how deeply entrenched the MAP view of what they do is!

Then there are the vigilantes who are, in person, face to face, usually quite deeply unlikeable. Aggressive, determined and take no prisoners kind of people. I have the misfortune to share a small town with 2 of them, they are the same as those you see on television, Misfits with A Cause! Not the brightest of sparks and often spouting quite vile insinuations based on their own weird interpretations of normal life.

In short, they are dangerous when given a platform!

I am grimly interested in how this plays out. Vigilante groups reactions will be 'interesting' to see! But good, the law wasn't such A Ass yesterday!