Guest 645- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 4,463
#1
A father who warned another parent about a convicted paedophile has been fined £1,000 and found guilty of harassing the sex offender.
He was horrified to find his ex-wife's new husband - stepfather to his daughter, 11 - had served three jail terms for sex crimes.
A reporting restriction imposed to protect the stepfather's identity means that none of the family members can be named.
One of the stepfather's sentences was for molesting two 12-year-old girls as they slept at his house.
The father identified the paedophile to another parent after discovering his criminal record - which included molesting two 12-year-old girls as they slept at his house
A court heard the father raised the alarm after discovering four of his daughter's friends had been invited to the family home for a sleepover to celebrate her birthday.
When he showed the mother of one girl a newspaper clipping revealing the stepfather's convictions, all the parents stopped their children going to the sleepover.
Reported in todays Mail.
I wonder how the court would have felt if the chap hadn't warned the parents and it resulted in their kids being abused.
Marek
I think therefore I am (not a Tory supporter)
#2
That chap should have been given the £1000 for bringing it to every ones Att,
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
#3
The world has gone stark raving bonkers.
Guest 675- Registered: 30 Jun 2008
- Posts: 1,610
#4
Yet another case to prove that the law has swung so far now that the only ones it seeks to protect are the perpetrators while punishing the victims.
With all the claims to working towards the prevention of crime the man has both prevented a possible crime and done the sex offender a favour by removing temptation. Doesn't Sarah's Law give parents the right to know if there is a sex offender in the area?
Politics, it seems to me, for years, or all too long, has been concerned with right or left instead of right or wrong.
Richard Armour
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#5
there was another case i read about over the weekend where a social worker placed a young lad with a history of sexual abuse of other children with a foster family without telling them.
Jan Higgins
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 5 Jul 2010
- Posts: 13,931
#6
Has the law system gone completely bonkers when some young innocent children can no longer be protected from sexual abuse but the paedophile can.
Yet again the rights of a law breaker are more important than those that have not.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I try to be neutral and polite but it is hard and getting even more difficult at times.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Guest 715- Registered: 9 Jun 2011
- Posts: 2,438
#7
They should have it tattooed on their forehead in a fluorescent colour, the protection of children should be paramount.
Audere est facere.
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
#8
Children must be protected from out-of-the-norm sexual relationships which could see children being abused.
In this case, the father was acting in the interests of children, so he should appeal against the fine.
Keith Sansum1
- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,948
#9
There are some issues within all of this.
We are in a position of wanting to release all kinds of people from jail, because of all the overcrowded prisons.
having decided to release all types of people, is it realy helpoful to let everyone know, and we end up with groups attacking them or whatever.
to highlight a problem here,
one such guy was living in a community locally, locals became aware and sent letters such as "we are going to burn your house down" which went on for some weeks/.months.
What the letter writers were unaware of was the guy was in prison for 2 years and just his 16 year old son was living there, so he probably could have ended up being an innocent viictim had the threats been carried out
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 645- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 4,463
#10
Keith
We all have stories of ''there was this chap or that man'' that have been failed by society,wrongly accused or victimised.
What we are talking about here is a father stopping his kids to visit his exwifes partner who had convictions for paedophilia.Surely the birth father has a right to warn and a duty of care to his children.
Discussing early release,reintergration within society and medical treatment are totally separate issues.
Marek
I think therefore I am (not a Tory supporter)
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,948
#11
MAREK;
Well i have made my point
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#12
i thought the whole point of the thread was that the whistleblower got into trouble.
if i got info like that about someone i would be letting the world and his wife know very quickly.
Guest 645- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 4,463
#13
I think I know what I would do in those circumstances and I'm sure you would exercise the same amount of care Keith.
Marek
I think therefore I am (not a Tory supporter)
#14
Bloody madness. I am confident we would all have the same idea and to Hell with the law. But the vigilante effect is undesirable for the very reason Keith flags - the potential for error. But FFS, which of us wouldn't tell the family?
Jan Higgins- Location: Dover
- Registered: 5 Jul 2010
- Posts: 13,931
#15
Keith, I will pose the hypothetical. What would you have done if you were in the position that the father in Marek's post was in, I am sure you would not be happy and would do something.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I try to be neutral and polite but it is hard and getting even more difficult at times.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,948
#16
JAN;
I probably would do the same
but that said there are dangers as i point out
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 698- Registered: 28 May 2010
- Posts: 8,664
#17
Keith, that fence must be getting mighty uncomfortable!
I'm an optimist. But I'm an optimist who takes my raincoat - Harold Wilson