Right, OK, common sense prevails. Wife is now home, vigilante justice is wrong (although I never suggested it's right) but her professional opinion is that OP you 100% need to speak to the police. The fact that convicted paedo is interacting with young families is 100% not OK and is a direct result of a failure within the social care system that needs to be addressed.
Aren't the restrictions on those released and on the SOR also public? (Sorry can't be bothered to follow the link but I vaguely recall this from another discussion)
If breached I believe a return to prison will be on the cards.
Break in to his house at night and pilfer his mechanical leg and (if you have time) remove his staircase. That way you can rest easy knowing that he's trapped on the top floor of his house.
All joking aside, I'd want to know if somebody like that lived near me. Not so I could form a lynch mob, just so I could keep my kids away from him (and steal his mechanical leg).
I hadn't considered lamp post signs, I quite like the idea. I can picture the artwork now:
Headline type: MISSING!
Subheading: paedophile's leg
Please return to....
Great idea which I think would work with would be terrorists as well.
I hadn't considered lamp post signs, I quite like the idea. I can picture the artwork now:
Headline type: MISSING!
Subheading: [s]paedophile's leg[/s]terrorist head
Please return to....
I am still struggling with the OP's comment that he just doesn't want this person near his home and doesn't care if he bothers another neighbourhood. Surely if this person isn't fit to be allowed out in public, he should still be in prison, not just moved somewhere as to not upset the OP?
Trolling surely?
Expect nothing less from one of Shibboleth's threads...
From the information provided pedo man is on the sex offenders register and if there is any evidence he poses a risk a "sexual harm prevention order" both are automatic and routine parts of sentencing. Public naming and shaming a is counterproductive and creates offences by preventing rehabilitation driving offenders underground and stimulating vigilantes. If you have genuine concerns contact your police public protection team ,otherwise accept he has been punished and is monitored and ignore the fact he continues to live having done the custodial element of his punishment.
hestabiliser - Member
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/find-out-if-a-person-has-a-record-for-child-sexual-offences
So no right to consult the sex offenders register then?
Sarah's law entitles people with responsibility for child (usually the parents) to ask the police if a specific individual with access to the child would give cause for concern. The police may not tell the person who asks if they think there is a better person to make aware, or if it would be disproportionate to do so. If they do tell, you are legally required to keep that information confidential.
What you certainly can't do, is make a generic request for details of who lives within a certain distance and is a bit dodgy.
Confusing Sarah's law with giving you carte Blanche to publish information about someone is a recipe for disaster.
funkmasterp - , I'd want to know if somebody like that lived near me.
They do.
He was found murdered in his flat and investigation showed there had been no records of of being a paedopphile, still at least people's kids were safe.
One reason you shouldn't name and shame is because there are a lot of very stupid people out there.
Self-styled vigilantes attacked the home of a hospital paediatrician after apparently confusing her professional title with the word "paedophile", it emerged yesterday.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2000/aug/30/childprotection.society
Public naming and shaming a is counterproductive and creates offences by preventing rehabilitation driving offenders underground and stimulating vigilantes. If you have genuine concerns contact your police public protection team ,otherwise accept he has been punished and is monitored and ignore the fact he continues to live having done the custodial element of his punishment.
Sounds like the best piece of advice given on this thread.
Self-styled vigilantes attacked the home of a hospital paediatrician after apparently confusing her professional title with the word "paedophile", it emerged [s]yesterday[/s]17 years ago.
It's an old article, just the first one that came up on the search. Still highlights the danger of mob mentality.
oh, so that's OK then. Name away.
Where did I say that?
ok, stealth edit. too quick to react.
stealth edit.
What?????
All I did was point that "news" isn't new.
If he's attracted to children, it doesn't take a huge leap of imagination to figure that he might be getting some sort of gratification from this...
No more than you would talking to someone you were attracted too. Unless he's shuffling change in his pocket at the same time.
No more than you would talking to someone you were attracted too.
This is the point I was trying to make earlier... I find it very pleasurable chatting to attractive women - it's not necessarily sexual, but it's gratifying nonetheless. I'm sure there's a deep-rooted sexual element in why we as homo sapiens enjoy interactive with attractive people, but 1000s of years of education and culture mean than very few of us feel the need to "shuffle change in our pockets" at the same time!
However, the fact remains, that most people would admit - at some level at least - to preferring to interact with people they're attracted to.
If there's the slightest suggestion that he might be gaining any sort of gratification from these interactions, even if it's simply a subtle 2-fingers-up at the authorities who seek to prevent him from doing so, I'm really uncomfortable with it.
People get arrested for having a favourite vegetable?
All joking aside, I'd want to know if somebody like that lived near me. Not so I could form a lynch mob, just so I could keep my kids away from him
I would have assumed that the internet with its global reach and general lack of oversight is a bigger threat to children then your local guy in a park these days. Is not having a conversation with your children about this the best measure to stop it happening?
For the OP, I am torn, I agree with the NIMBY approach and the want to protect others by informing them. But I also read from your post this occured 5 years ago, he did some jail time an then due to illness was relatively housebound for several years and is now mobile again due to surgery. Might he not be simply enjoying a new lease of life his operation has granted him after years of being housebound with I expect little interaction from the outside world due to his previous crimes and jailtime and is actually rehabilitated?
As posted earlier, I think talking with the local police about your concerns would be a good start.
*EDIT: no idea how I have double quoted - fixed
If there's the slightest suggestion that he might be gaining any sort of gratification from these interactions, even if it's simply a subtle 2-fingers-up at the authorities who seek to prevent him from doing so, I'm really uncomfortable with it.
And your preferred outcome is to simply push the problem onto another community...
And your preferred outcome is to simply push the problem onto another community...
No. My preferred outcome, as per my original question, would be for all those young parents who've recently moved to the village to know exactly who they're chatting with whilst walking the kids to school.
and is actually rehabilitated?
If someone is sexually attracted to children can that be "fixed"? Or is it just the way they are wired?
He may be able to curtail acting on his desires but I doubt he can stop the feelings.
Have you talked to your local Bobby/PCSO or whatever they're called now?
It is definitely a moral maze.
If someone is sexually attracted to children can that be "fixed"? Or is it just the way they are wired?
I'm firmly of the believe that a person's sexual preference can't be "rewired". And in the same way that lecherous old men like ogling or pestering young women, long after their physical ability to perform has left them, I suspect this guy gets his kicks trying to engage young families in conversation...
No. My preferred outcome, as per my original question, would be for all those young parents who've recently moved to the village to know exactly who they're chatting with whilst walking the kids to school.
But then you said...
Personally, yes, I'd like him to move. I know that's selfish,[b] but somebody else's problem isn't my problem.[/b]
I know exactly what I said Johndoh. At no point did I say it was my "preferred outcome".
🙄
Having thought about this, the guy's defence (if true of course) I find more troubling than the more expected explanation - on the grounds that there are two sorts of people:
Most of us: not sexually aroused by young children
A few (unfortunate) individuals: aroused by it, some with a "compulsion" that they can't help acting on, some who genuinely, I guess, don't agree that it's a wrong thing.
For the people in the latter group, it's to some extent understandable (not justifiable) that they might possess or distribute the images.
But if you're in the former group, how could you? You could tell me that I'd make a million pounds per image distributed and I wouldn't be able to do it. I just couldn't. I don't know how the coppers who deal with this kind of stuff cope. I've never seen such images, but the thought of it makes me kinda nauseous, I wouldn't be surprised if seeing a baby rape picture would make me vomit.
If this guy didn't have a sexual interest but was trading baby rape pictures or similar for money, then that's twisted in a way that I honestly think in some ways is actually worse than for those for whom it's their "thing"
Not sure if that helps the issue at hand, but it's just a thought I had.
At no point did I say it was my "preferred outcome
Fair point. But you are happy for him to be a potential danger to other children, just not the ones in your community? Or do you see another way he could somehow have his freedom (given that he has served his prison sentence and he is now a free man) without being exposed to children?
If this guy didn't have a sexual interest but was trading baby rape pictures or similar for money, then that's twisted in a way that I honestly think in some ways is actually worse than for those for whom it's their "thing"
I couldn't agree more, and one of the main reasons that I refuse to show any compassion or forgiveness is that:
a) he thought that was a reasonable justification for his crimes
b) he expected people to believe that he wasn't aroused by those images
and c) that he was part of an actual industry that encouraged the abuse so that images could be distributed for financial gain!
A few (unfortunate) individuals: aroused by it, some with a "compulsion" that they can't help acting on, some who genuinely, I guess, don't agree that it's a wrong thing.
A lot of them don't believe they are doing any wrong.
Did you ever hear of this organisation from the 70's and 80's? [url= https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paedophile_Information_Exchange ]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paedophile_Information_Exchange[/url]
A lot of them don't believe they are doing any wrong.
I got this impression when I aired my views upon his release from prison. His attitude was dismissive to the point of arrogance. I asked him what sort of man could return back to a wife and daughter, effectively making pariahs of them in their neighbourhood, and continue to sleep at night... He claimed they were glad to have him back and supported him no matter what.
I think that speaks volumes for his wife (his daughter has now moved on) and I don't ever want any interaction with her either.
He may be able to curtail acting on his desires but I doubt he can stop the feelings.
Assuming that to be the case, is that not successfully rehabilitated? You can't get fat by thinking about pies.
I have plenty of thoughts on a daily basis that would net me a very long jail sentence. I was at a concert a while back and some fat **** standing behind my seat decided to use my head as a gutrest and then got up in the grill of me and my disabled wife when I shoved him off. I had several very clear thoughts about booting the bastard over the balcony that night.
It's a tricky and emotive situation for sure, but I'm uncomfortable with the notion of the thought police.
People get arrested for having a favourite vegetable?
Of course not, only for sexually interfering with them - creamed peas anyone?
councilof10 - I seriously think you need to accept it is what it is and stop fantasising about what his motives are. You are basing your hate on an assumption that he has not been in any way rehabilitated and is going to offend again but that doesn't have to be the case (although I can accept it would be very difficult for an individual to curb base desires). At the end of the day you are not the judge or jury of this man - he has been through that process and is now on the other side and he is not known to be offending in any way - you are just finding it impossible to think that he isn't. All you can do is accept that and trust that the authorities are keeping a check on him and he won't offend again.
Johndoh, you seem to be very tolerant of the "otherly aroused"... Just an observation.
Johndoh, you seem to be very tolerant of the "otherly aroused"... Just an observation.
Oh good, we've reached the inevitable point in any pedophile discussion where one party gets accused of being a pedophile themselves in only 4 pages!
Johndoh, you seem to be very tolerant of the "otherly aroused"... Just an observation.
You have got to be kidding me.
Can this thread be closed now, please?
As I said, just an observation... I openly admit that I can't find the slightest modicum of empathy, forgiveness or compassion for paedophiles. I also have an unswerving sense of certainty that he hasn't and cannot be "rehabilitated".
What is wrong with observing that another poster's views seem to go beyond "Devil's Advocate" and demonstrate a remarkable level of tolerance and empathy for these people?
I would have assumed that the internet with its global reach and general lack of oversight is a bigger threat to children then your local guy in a park these days. Is not having a conversation with your children about this the best measure to stop it happening?
What?
Last time I checked the internet wasn't hurting my son. He's never even used it. I also don't think talking to a three year old about stranger danger is going to work. If every second word isn't dinosaur or dragon he tends not to listen.
You honestly think I won't talk to him when he's older and capable of absorbing the information? This place is really ****ing odd at times. In the meantime I'd definitely be nicking his leg to restrict his movements.
Edit - the creepy old chaps leg, not my son's
assuming that this isn't just going on inside shibboleth's head, and it's actually a real scenario.
Contact the cops, and let them know that some-one who is on the sexual offender register is interacting with children. It would be better if you could provide times and locations. You could also contact the safeguarding team of your local council, their number will be on the council website.
assuming that this isn't just going on inside shibboleth's head, and it's actually a real scenario.
What a curious thing to say! Would you like a link to a news report about his conviction?
Statistically, family members are still the biggest threat to kids.
Move along, nothing to see here.
This is a shocking thread on all counts. The guys done his time, he's paid his dues to society and you councilof10 are not his judge, social worker or psychologist. The legal system isn't perfect and whilst he's clearly had a horrid past the law of the land has caught him and dealt with him in the way that it has been fairly decided it can.
Plenty of sensible "suggestions" have been made to you saying the sane thing, which are the correct responses. Stop looking for positive reassurance that some sorry sort of vigilante retribution is the way forward because it is not. You cannot take things into your own hands.
So, if you are concerned, and from what you say I might be too, then contact the local police, safeguarding team etc...
Other than that it's not your concern.
This is coming from a father of two young girls and while I share your fears, and respect them, you cannot play God.
Wise up.
This thread should have been closed three pages ago.
What a curious thing to say! Would you like a link to a news report about his conviction?
He's referring to some trolls never rehabilitate.
