Whilst the writer of this article : http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/aug/18/ukcrime.childprotection?gusrc=rss&feed=uknews (David Wilson) - does raise some very valid points - the one thing he seems to be missing here is that Raymond Horne - whom he concentrates on in his article - gets checked on appropriately because of the headlines - because everyone knew that if they screwed this one up after all the publicity about him being returned to Britain there would be hell to pay.
The same can be said with the return of Paul Gadd (Gary Glitter) this week.
We do have some excellent measures in place in this country - but as David Wilson states - no system is ever perfect . Yes - what worked for Horne will work for Gadd simply because of the publicity.
I do however believe naming and shaming before a conviction is fruitless at best. If someone chooses to do this and names and shames someone before a conviction and manages to receive enough publicity - it can actually result in the pedophile walking free (unable to gain a fair trial because of publicity.)
"We also know what makes sex offenders generally, and paedophiles specifically, re-offend when they return to the community after a prison sentence. In short, they are more likely to re-offend when they are "named and shamed", hounded from pillar to post, demonised, scapegoated and pilloried because when that happens they calculate that they may as well commit more crimes because, well, they have nothing left to lose."
Yes - stress can be a factor into re-offending - but to be fair if the sentences handed down in court were long enough in the first place - well let's see:
Jehovah's Witness pedophile Michael Porter - abused a baby and 12 boys.
Walked free from court.
He is still visiting peoples homes - he was simply banned from working with under 18's.
His sentence - a 3 yr community rehabilitation order.
http://www.silentlambs.org/BroPorter.htm
There are obviously many others - enough to fill several pages.
Sentencing laws need to be looked at desperately in such cases. It is not very often we see a sentence above 5 yrs being given - even in the most extreme cases - Michael Porter is far from being the only paedophile to be walking free with no imprisonment sentence at all being handed down.
However as usual - it takes something like Gadd being returned to the country to bring into focus again something that is still seen as a hush hush topic - though thankfully not as much as it was - to overtake such crap of the government allowing obese children to be taken away from their parents and placed in care. How they think this will help the child's mental well being - especially later in life -is beyond me! Take the kids from the parents and spend 100 times more the cost of health bills and treatment from within the home as a family - on a life time of mental health counselling for the child and treatment for weight and healthy eating. (OK - rant finished on this one - for now!)
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1045749/Obese-children-taken-care-parents-warned.html
Children need protection from all sorts of dangers. As parents we teach the basics - traffic - the green cross code - hot and cold - honey it is not a good idea to poke that electric socket with a screwdriver and many other such things.
We also teach stranger danger as do many of the schools at primary level.
We can only protect our children if we have all of the information to hand. I therefore do believe that people living in a vicinity close to a paedophile should be alerted in order to protect our kids.
It is the few that would begin a vigilante crusade - which has affected the rights of the majority in being given such information to enable the safety of their kids.
An estate close to me has 3 paedophiles living on it - I do not know their names or their addresses. I do know that it is not really too safe for my kids to be on that estate alone.
The main source of protection for kids that have been abused/raped is in the courts. Paedophiles will re-offend - yet even though this is known - the most dangerous are released after pitiful sentences being handed down. They did the correct thing with Ian Brady in making sure he could never harm another child again - they thought it was too much of a risk to allow him back on the streets.
This inane culture we have of 'rewarding a bad person' has to stop - especially when it means others can have their lives ruined simply because the sick man that raped your kids is walking free because he started to undergo treatment after he was caught!
I know how people can lie in order to try and obtain something they want - extra medication - saying the right things to fool people into thinking they are okay/not okay. All of us are capable of saying 'pretty words' to cover the truth - especially if we are trying to protect someone's feelings. Paedophiles do it to enable release from prison or to receive no imprisonment at all.
So whilst headlines can cause scaremongering - then when it comes to the case of paedophiles and it means just one more (Gadd in this case) will be watched more closely because of these headlines - I say keep up the good work boys! Maybe one child will be saved from being groomed, abused, raped and maybe worse!
Posts
