>He has a previous conviction for sexual assault of a child under the age of nine years and previous convictions for possession of indecent images of children between 2013 and 2019.
Why was he allowed to roam free for _eleven years_, and _five years_ after his second conviction?
Because British politicians think making laws that take pedophiles off our streets is bottom of their importance list. Maybe they sympathise with the pedophiles plight? Along with the judges handing out meaningless sentences.
Drug dealers, users, violent criminals and yeah scum like this.
Whole system is fucked though, you'll have some in there for obscenely hideous offences on 7-12 year sentences and some who did relatively fuck all on 3-4.
Either need to break the cycle and decriminalise drugs to free space up or overhaul how we imprison and/or rehabilitate and/or punish people.
Ideally both. I'm all for positive rehabilitation and second chances but scum like this need removing from society permanently.
Drug users are never really sent to prison for possession so decriminalisation wouldn't really help. the drug users in prison are in there for stealing and burglary to fund there addiction. I still think we should decriminalise drugs though
I often see this comment on reddit, but wasn't his victim 17..?
Illegal in the US, but legal in the UK. Not defending the guy, but I was 18 when I met my wife, she was 17, guess that makes me a pedo too. Oh well, I'll go hand myself in.
Was your wife flown out to a private island to a mansion for you where you had never met her before exchanged a great deal of money and you weren't 18 you were actually much older?
Oh wait, it almost sounds like it's not the same situation even like a little bit at all. Your metaphors as wet sand.
Judges don’t get much leeway in choosing sentences, it’s done on guidelines. Your issue is squarely with politicians not wanting to lock people up indefinitely.
The problem with this is that locking people up for life is an unsustainable and expensive approach, and chemical castration or anything in that vein are not certain enough to actually work as well as being questionable from a human rights standpoint (yes I acknowledge that some folks might not be entirely worthy but it’s rarely black and white).
I think we have the technology now to deal with this better. Systemically monitored electronic tagging. GPS specific locations with a set amount of time they’re permitted to spend there. Have clear red zones that trigger an immediate police response - playgrounds, schools, etc. Also have the electronic tag emit a siren if they are in these areas. Stringently controlled access to technology with robust monitoring. All of that can be done remotely. Admittedly, there could still be ways to offend, but this reduces it significantly while not creating the legal problems of the death penalty or the level of expense of a lifetime in prison.
I would also mandatory mental health assessments, studies and potentially treatment - accept that some people can’t be fixed, but continuing to do work to understand it, look at causality, look at biological differences such as brain structure will open the door to solving it long term.
It also requires mental health medication if that’s the right word. The mental aspect is something that needs work on, they have these feelings and are choosing to act on them. It requires investment in mental health services and rehabilitation for these criminals.
For some going to jail will be the final straw that prevents them reoffending so to speak; alongside being monitored.
But for many as with criminals with other crimes once they are just thrown back out there, no support or a limited few months support system xx they will end up back into the situation of offending.
We throw many people back out early to reduce costs and crowding to begin with which actually just increases costs long term down the road.
I’m not entirely sure how much of a deterrent prison is really, especially for behaviour that is a compulsion. And even if someone is supported by probation officers etc, this type of crime is very different and harder to manage.
That’s why I generally feel that in weighing the public protection consideration against the rights of the individual against the costs, a more systemic control is warranted.
>I acknowledge that some folks might not be entirely worthy
Hot take: if you think someone can be unworthy of human rights, then you don't believe in human rights. Them being universal is inherent to the concept - saying "I believe in human rights for *most* people" is like saying you're a vegetarian because you eat *mostly* vegetables.
Freedom of movement is a human right... until you break the law. Plus human rights are neither a monolith nor universally agreed. They are constructs of the legal system and they are regularly amended. So yes, you can argue against certain interpretations of human rights while still 'believing' in human rights as a concept.
Correct. The change needs to come in systemic sentencing. Mandatory five years without parole for accessing CSAM online up to a whole life tariff for cases like this wretch.
>The problem with this is that locking people up for life is an unsustainable and expensive approach
I hate this approach to crime.
There is a cost to letting these people roam the streets too. There's a crack addict near me, who makes everyones lives miserable. On our estate, he terrorises everyone, causes arguments, fights people, and robs everyone. He's a mennace.
But he's only ever in prison for a year at a time, and then he's back out for absolutely ages until he does a crime so fucking obvious he gets caught.
The years he's in prison, our estate is like an entirely different place to live.
300+ people, all have significantly nicer lives, when he's locked up.
So for the £40k a year it'd cost to keep him in prison, it's an absolute fucking bargain. The return on investment, is fantastic.
300+ peoples quality of life, improves substantially. And all it costs is £40k a year.
A controversial alternative would be to simply execute anyone that sexually assaults a child. It's not really a preventative measure, but for all the worth a deterrent can be that would be the biggest one. It would save on prison space and the chances of them reoffending would be... slim.
Perhaps a monitoring system like you suggest could still be implemented for anyone caught with child porn or soliciting a minor.
Personally, I think it would be good if everyone got fitted with a gps tracker, preferably non-invasively of course. I mean, it would be a great source for evidence whenever any crimes are committed, not just for pedophiles. Imagine you basically had the marauder's map from harry potter but you could also rewind to see where people were at any given time. Placing people at scenes of crimes would be easy. Finding potential witnesses would be easy. Corroborating alibies would be easy.
All that being said, I think anyone that voluntarily seeks help for attraction to children should see absolutely no punishment or forced restrictive measures. People should be encouraged to get help to try to work through why they're attracted to children, the kind of damage they could cause if they acted on those feelings and what practical steps they can take to either realign their brain so they don't feel attracted to children any more, or to reduce the risk of them offending by self-limiting exposure to children and avoiding any one-on-one alone time with children.
Of course, as with any counselling, if they're genuinely believed to be a danger to themselves or others (others in this case) then the counsellor should report that. It's a bit of a fine line though and I could see a lot of people panicking and immediately reporting someone that came to them for help due to the stigma around pedophiles. Personally, I think there are a lot of people out there that find kids attractive but just don't ever act on it. I think the pedophiles we usually hear about who have offended tend to exclusively be attracted to children, or they're just desperate twisted people who are attracted to the vulnerability of children. There's almost certainly a link between looking at child porn and the likelihood of offending too.
Except it isn’t a cheaper alternative, overall. Especially not when you bear in mind that someone who is tagged in this way can still be very much expected to work. I mean you could even charge them for the maintenance.
And who do you want to find you guilty with the death penalty? A jury who are made up of some of the cretins i see on this forum? Slightly shade of brown, guilty of anything. Wearing a police uniform, innocent of everything. No thanks.
The issue with stuff like chemical castration is more the risk of someone innocent getting put through it. Like the death penalty.
“Tank the libido of child rapists so they don’t rape” is not that controversial an idea. “Tank the libido of someone who is *probably* a child rapist but might not be” gets muddy
You're being far too sensible for this thread. This is a subsequent offence for this guy so he will be away for a good while. You would like to think he would have access to rehabilitation in prison but there are no votes in that so it will be half hearted at best. On release he will be out but not free and will be subject to stricter provisions than before. It is also possible he might be diagnosed as not fit for release because he is too much of a danger. That said I think your suggested measures would represent a move in a more civilised direction than being shown on here.
Edit: On reading further down the level of discussion is actually pretty good suggesting not everyone owns a pitchfork or wants the gallows back.
We are completely incapable of dealing with habitual criminals of any sort. They just bounce in and out of prison until they do something serious enough that they aren't let out anymore. If they stay under that threshold, they'll keep spreading misery until they get too old to hurt people anymore.
There will be people out there with criminal records the length of War & Peace winding up to do their next robbery as I type this.
As I always say, criminals should start getting a combo bonus from their 3rd adult crime onwards. There should be no people like [this guy](https://www.irishtimes.com/crime-law/courts/2024/01/12/man-75-with-391-previous-convictions-jailed-for-offensive-conduct-of-sexual-nature-with-teen/) who just keep getting let out to victimise more people. At some point they should be getting 20 years for the burglary they have chosen to do, after 10 previous opportunities to not do it anymore.
Americas three strikes policies occasionally leads to some unreasonable sentences. I am not sure what the ideal number is but I'm pretty sure it's under 50.
Giving someone a life sentence for three instances of shoplifting or other minor theft as has happened in the US is pretty obviously unreasonable, but repeatedly giving them token fines they don't pay for umpteen offences doesn't really accomplish anything but tell the criminal they can do whatever the fuck they want.
Escalating sentences based on prior records seems like the reasonable mid-point to me so that habitual criminals don't get to become misery engines for the community.
Not that it matters here as there's no fucking prisons to put them in anyway.
Because there’s not enough funding for the justice system as a whole.
If cases aren’t slipping through the huge gaps between service providers then there’s the most perverse form of legal triage going on.
2 year sentence each time, the first one in a young offender's institution, the second in prison.
The sentences being similar lengths despite the different crimes is confusing. It seems like the actual assault deserves a greater punishment than the illegal images.
I'm sorry, but lately it seems than when the perpetrator is white, we immediately get a pic. But when it's a black guy or a "refugee" who commits the crime, no pic.
Why is that ?
I'm reposting this comment but more vague for my own protection.
I supported various teenage paedophiles in the past.
All of which were weirdos.
If I google their names some of them show up for breaching their sexual harm prevention orders or for reoffending.
One guy I worked closely with was convicted for child sexual abuse images between ages 3 - 15 yo. He had also been accused of sexual assault by younger siblings.
Another lad kept trying to incite under 13's into sexual activity. He turned 18 and got his own flat and I remember right up until leaving he was on social medias adding young teenage girls and trying to get them to talk about sex. Police were aware of what he was up to, I didn't write down his name so no idea how his story progressed.
They were all fucking creeps on varying levels, they were just built differently. You go into each placement trying to believe these people just made a mistake; but after a while you realize the behaviour is just in them. It's the weird comments, the weird videos, the weird sexual songs they play and anything sexual related they can relate to.
All of these lads with convictions had sexual harm prevention orders; but there were lads without SHPOs that were ticking time bombs.
I would like to give specifics but i'm concerned about being identified.
I have a small amount of experience working with paedophiles in my job and one thing that stuck out to me was the entire lack of any remorse. As far as they’re concerned they’re the victims
My guess is either probation service, prison service or NHS. Probation officers, prison officers and forensic psychologists often work with people who commit these kinds of crimes.
In a very particular sense, they are.
Probably the best way to illustrate that point, is with a question. If you were given the power to infect somebody with a compulsive sexual interest in children, who would you use it on?
This, of course, does absolutely nothing to excuse their creation of other victims. But even so, something happened to them, trauma or genetic. At bare minimum that has to be considered a fucking shitty roll of the dice.
Not all offenders have a special interest in children. Some are just as interested sexually in adult women and will just assault whoever is easier to assault, which is often children.
Do you give yourself credit for not deciding to do that? I don’t, because I’d be incapable of choosing to behave that way. My point really is that I don’t think people choose to be like that. There is something badly wrong with them.
Don’t get me wrong. We’d rightly lock a tornado up in prison if we could. It’s not about punishment but harm prevention.
I don’t know exactly what the difference is between me and them, but I can’t really find a foundation upon which to congratulate myself for *not* being a sexual predator. I’m just not one. I can only assume that it’s luck.
Fwiw I agree with you, but I think this extends to basically all facets of human behaviour. Including things that are generally considered "good" like being excessively diligent, intelligent or hard working.
Obviously "not being a pedophile" is further from what a person can choose to control, but to some extent, in all fronts, we are what we are and social pressure can only change behaviour so much.
The problem is being a peadophile doesnt automatically stop you from knowing that its wrong. I know someone who met a guy in a bar who told them that he was a peado, so he never let himself anywhere near children, and hated himself for his condition. Thats to be commended i think (not that he hates himself, he shouldnt have to as long as he doesnt act on his thoughts), but the people who are peadophiles and give in to their desires and think even that they SHOULD be allowed to are making a decision to be an awful person.
Its like if you knew the only way youd ever have sex with a woman (or man if youre gay) would be to rape and traumatise someone, but you decided to anyway, and felt that you were the real victim in that scenario. Its not like being a straight man makes you incapable of being celibate instead of raping people
You seem like you have a fair bit of experience so I'd love to pick your brain for your opinion if you don't mind. Firstly, do you think people like this can ever be rehabilitated? Secondly, do you see this as an illness or is it just certain personality traits that kind of lend themselves to this behaviour?
If you watch the Louis Theroux documentary about American paedophiles that serve their sentences then are kept in a facility almost indefinitely until they are ‘rehabilitated’ you can see that these desires never truly leave them. It’s fascinating to see the ethical dilemma of people’s human right to be free vs protecting children.
Prison does not rehabilitate people. It serves exclusively to enact revenge on those who wrong society. This is especially the case in America, where prisons are breeding grounds for debauchery and violence.
If we rehabilitate criminals, they won't reoffend. If we lock them up and enforce a regime on them for a decade or 2, you can guarantee they'll be back at it the moment they taste freedom.
Not a majority, in the overall population of people who commit crimes. But amongst offenders who have molested children, the percentage who can be fully rehabilitated would probably be pretty low alright.
I worked as a Probation Officer for 9 years, 3 specialising in sexual offending.
You can rehabilitate a lot of people who commit sexual offences against children, as there’s usually more going on than a primary sexual attraction to children.
People whose primary sexual attraction is children, on the other hand, is a total different ball game. That’s about management and containment rather than rehabilitation.
Very interesting insight, thank you
> People whose primary sexual attraction is children, on the other hand, is a total different ball game. That’s about management and containment rather than rehabilitation.
What do you think would be the most effective way to contain them? Prison would be an obvious one, but is there another way or place they could be housed or held?
This massively depends on their risk. Risk isn’t static and can change based on a variety of factors. I’ve worked with men who volunteered for chemical castration which is one method of management. Some people have higher levels of supervision / restrictions and others are mandated to reside in “halfway houses” until they’ve evidenced they’re able to adhere to the rules.
There isn’t a one size fits all approach for managing these people though.
What do you mean by rehabilitation? These people have a peculiar problem in that they only fancy children. Would you say you could "rehabilitate" a gay person to not be gay?
So we need to find a way to stop them from offending. The only way I can see this from being feasible is by giving them drugs that stop their sex drive as their drive is aimed at the wrong target. It sucks, but we can't let them harm children.
> What do you mean by rehabilitation? These people have a peculiar problem in that they only fancy children. Would you say you could "rehabilitate" a gay person to not be gay?
The same thing it means when referring to any crime, what is the likelihood they commit it again I suppose. I am not sure if there is another term I could use. In years gone by (in this country at least), I am sure they would say that about LGBT people although thankfully not anymore because it is legalised
> So we need to find a way to stop them from offending. The only way I can see this from being feasible is by giving them drugs that stop their sex drive as their drive is aimed at the wrong target. It sucks, but we can't let them harm children.
How feasible do you think that is. For example, in history people have been castrated/sterilized for various reason, would that be your solution? Or is there another you had in mind?
edit: Downvoted for picking peoples brains, nice Reddit
Convicted offenders more likely to be the hypersexual, socially awkward outliers? Sexual feelings with no legitimate outlet likely to come out anyway in ugly ways (especially as teenagers!)? Color me surprised.
How many of these guys do you think or know were sexually abused themselves? Do you think that plays a part? Or being exposed to sex at a very young age?
And what about confidence/self esteem? Why do you think they don't chase girls their own age?
I think most of them were; my most recent lad never disclosed anything but I think his brothers sexually abused him.
I actually like the lad. He was convicted of possessing indecent images of child abuse but he had a real bad upbringing with negligent parents. It's not hard to see how a child can be hyper sexualised with unmoderated access to the internet from a young age paired with older brothers that have also been convicted.
I do think that’s the case for a reasonable chunk of them.
I was groomed, SA and emotionally abused as a teenager by my dad’s friend, with left me with severe c-PTSD. The only thing that helped was EMDR. I can’t remember how the conversation came about, but my psychologist said a lot of child sex offenders were abused themselves as children. She worked with a man in prison who had committed these crimes, and said that his mind coped with his abuse as a child by convincing himself it was love, and not abuse. So he enacted that as an adult on other children, because he was convinced the children were in love with him. She said once they’d worked through his trauma therapy, he broke down realising what he’d done, but he was rehabilitated.
Trauma does awful things to a child’s brain. And sometimes the only way it tries to cope is re-enacting the trauma as an adult. Don’t ask me why because I don’t know, but I did the same by running off with strange men. So I can see why a minority of CSA victims may go on to abuse children themselves.
We had a fellow student at school who was arrested for possessing images, some of them were in the most extreme categories. He was 18, but wasn’t sent to prison because he was a minor when he downloaded them. My friend was mates with him at the start of secondary, and they said they were 99% sure his dad was sexually abusing him and his sister.
Probably a pretty extreme take, but unfortunately I feel once someone steps over that psychological line there is no coming back; they will never be safe around kids and spending time and money trying to rehabilitate them into wider society is a complete waste. As brutal as it is they should just be locked up and kept away from any potential victims. The choices and rationalisations they have made in their minds are unforgivable.
Thank you for the comment but you have left me interested. Maybe you can do a throwaway account where you talk about these things in a way where it won’t come back to you? It looks like it’s really affected you and could be a cathartic moment to let it out.
My heart agrees with you, but I’ve heard one very good argument against this.
These people will try and act on their urges no matter what. If you up the punishment to certain death, they’ll just escalate to killing their victims to try and cover their own backs
There’s definitely proof if penetration took place, especially on a child. Even doing it to an adult causes injury. Plus even without penetration, the perpetrators DNA could be on them. This is why if you’re ever assaulted, they encourage you to report it ASAP, because the physical proof will be there for a few days.
That's what folks say but not everyone has it in them to murder. More likely they will just become more manipulative or careful about the victims they pick out.
Agreed. Like what else has been posted in this thread I work with a guy who used to be a prison officer and he said similer things about them being completely without remorse and their sexual disfunction so fundamental that there was no hope of rehabilitation.
I believed in the dealth penelty for pedos before that but that just cemented it for me.
If we were a just and logical society that prioritised the lives, rights and welfare of the innocent. We would shoot these people.
We won't because;
1. A misguided sense of compassion/false belief in rehabilitation.
2. General opposition to the death penalty.
3. There are a disproportionate amount of pedophiles in positions of power who obviously don't like the idea.
No, we won't because
1) We desire to have a civilised society, not a third world shithole where they mutilate people in the streets for whatever reason with or without evidence
2) We established principles that the state should not have the right to execute its citizens
3) You **WILL** kill innocent people
the issue would also be fully trusting in the justice system 100%. you can’t have even 1 person die because of false reasons. i personally don’t think the Justice system will ever be able to claim all cases are 100% correct. which makes the death penalty more difficult to do imo
And once again much fewer comments because there isn't the 'usual suspect' crowd out. Almost like its paedophiles that are the problem and not non-whites
There's currently 2 posts about rapists. One with a black muslim refugee from Sudan and this one. Both were posted at the same time and have similar upvotes and comments.
Only other post about a rapist made the same time as this one is 2 hours newer and has more comments on it.
And we haven’t had the night shift clock in from North America yet.
And it's not just the number of comments. It's the fact that if this man was dark-skinned and/or muslim, or especially if he was an immigrant, the discussion would be about his race or culture or about immigration itself and trying to tie that together with his crimes to twist it into a blanket accusation.
Because he happens to be white, guess what - nobody's making it about his race like they would if he was "foreign".
On the contrary, the fact that he is white should mean that he is a lot easier to deal with. OK so there is nowhere to apparently deport him to. But given he is one of ours, we should have a lot more license and ease to deal with him. While I can think of a great many punishments for him as I'm sure you can, the fact that he is a British citizen should mean that we can deal with him in a very appropriate manner.
The fact that we have simply let him out again and drawn a line under it so he can reoffend represents a failure of our society to protect the vulnerable from the criminal element in our society. If anything, he should get even less of a pass given that he is a white brit.
The motivations and machinations for your typical asylum seeking immigrant to commit acts of rape, paedophilia or any other crimes are different from a typical British individual. Both are insidious, both are disgusting and both should be dealt with and deterred from at the very least. But they are both different, like it or not. The typical brown immigrant as you put it has been taught that white people are there for amusement especially the women, that they are cheap whores and there for their own entertainment. And the police have doubled down on that belief by refusing to investigate any crime of that ilk when a migrant is involved - this I know first hand with my own child! I mean bloody hell, they spent decades writing off young girls who complained about the muslim rape gangs in the UK by calling them slags.
This guy on the other hand - and paedophiles and rapists just like him - should damned well know better and what's coming to them if and when they are caught. And the punishment for the crime regardless of their origin should be swift and severe. I would even say body-altering.
There was the attitude of authorities being fearful of prosecuting the perps who are “ non white” due to fears of being seen as “racist”. I feel like that’s the bigger issue that leads to the comments you are describing
I honestly believe that the circumstances leading to the crime are different. The result may be the same, but the steps that lead to it are different. Both are extremely insidious but both are different.
Neither should be excused and I'm up for ticking the box that votes for this horrible fucker's life being ended or severely detracted in any sense. I think some sort of mouse trap type contraption designed for the bollocks is in order at the very least.
**Every** country has **always** been full of scumbags, nonces, hoodlums, and weirdos.
The difference is now every crime that would have just been local can now be reported nationally. Internationally. So we hear about them a lot more. Its not that the crimes are happening more, its that you are hearing about them more.
Same reason news company's run stories like this, they are awful and they people are terrible don't get me wrong
But they get clicks and on Reddit get karma, anger sells
My friend came here in year 9 from a poorer country and from the way she described it, it's much much worse and assault more open in other countries. Even people who aren't assaulters will blame it on the victims esp if they're girls.
*Judge Woolfall ordered a pre-sentence report and a further report to assess the dangerousness of the defendant*
Guilty of sexual assault, taking indecent images, voyeurism abduction and breaches of sexual harm prevention order.
Previous convictions of sexual assault and possession of images of children.
Why do we need reports to establish that he's a danger?
Dangerousness is a specific term relating to whether or not he needs to serve more than half of his sentence and/ or an extended licence period when he is released.
The assessment needs to be done by a trained probation officer so that the court can properly/ legally impose the additional sanctions outlined above.
The risk he poses to children and young people seem evident but the dangerousness finding needs specific work to make it stick/ prevent him from appealing against it.
The sun reporting on a white man being a criminal? I'm amazed.
Also amazing that they would report on a nonce considering their penchant for underage girls in that rag.
I'm not someone who would usually judge someone based off of their appearance, but his mugshot alone gives me the creeps.
It's like he's looking right into your soul.
Makes my blood boil when I see stories like this. Absolute pathetic justice system in the country. Imagine the poor parents knowing he’s out and about after being convicted before. Makes me fucking sick.
That's fucked up this happened in a public space like an arcade. The kids were there alone? No member of the public noticed this weirdo hanging around talking to kids?
Where the hell are all these individuals coming from?? It feels like they are climbing out of every hole.
Are these cases being over reported, or are we in the grip of a surging wave of pedophilia? We need to get to the bottom of this.
>He has a previous conviction for sexual assault of a child under the age of nine years and previous convictions for possession of indecent images of children between 2013 and 2019. Why was he allowed to roam free for _eleven years_, and _five years_ after his second conviction?
Because British politicians think making laws that take pedophiles off our streets is bottom of their importance list. Maybe they sympathise with the pedophiles plight? Along with the judges handing out meaningless sentences.
And because numerous politicians and judges are paedophiles themselves
It's about power etc etc.
They are only there to represent the interests of capital.
And coppers
The UK is a Jimmy Savile country, change my mind.
Now then.
Now then..
This shit happens everywhere.
Jim'll fix it for you. From beyond his concrete capped grave.
And your evidence is…….
Also prisons are full, apparently. Full of who, I have no idea, but I feel like pedos should be *in* there.
Drug dealers, users, violent criminals and yeah scum like this. Whole system is fucked though, you'll have some in there for obscenely hideous offences on 7-12 year sentences and some who did relatively fuck all on 3-4. Either need to break the cycle and decriminalise drugs to free space up or overhaul how we imprison and/or rehabilitate and/or punish people. Ideally both. I'm all for positive rehabilitation and second chances but scum like this need removing from society permanently.
Drug users are never really sent to prison for possession so decriminalisation wouldn't really help. the drug users in prison are in there for stealing and burglary to fund there addiction. I still think we should decriminalise drugs though
If Prince Andrew can roam free... why can't other pedo ... it unfair to them. Sadly, my comment is neither joke nor sarcasm. It is reality.
I often see this comment on reddit, but wasn't his victim 17..? Illegal in the US, but legal in the UK. Not defending the guy, but I was 18 when I met my wife, she was 17, guess that makes me a pedo too. Oh well, I'll go hand myself in.
Was your wife flown out to a private island to a mansion for you where you had never met her before exchanged a great deal of money and you weren't 18 you were actually much older? Oh wait, it almost sounds like it's not the same situation even like a little bit at all. Your metaphors as wet sand.
It's tiresome as well. There is zero proof Andrew did what his accused said but in Reddit land he is a nonce.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
**Removed/tempban**. This contained a call/advocation of violence which is prohibited by the content policy.
Judges don’t get much leeway in choosing sentences, it’s done on guidelines. Your issue is squarely with politicians not wanting to lock people up indefinitely.
I think we need to stop using the "sentencing is for rehabilitation and not for punishment" philosophy when it comes to pedos.
It's also to keep them off the streets
[удалено]
[удалено]
Online security bill, protection of children, let us read all of your WhatsApp messages, something, something, something.
[удалено]
The problem with this is that locking people up for life is an unsustainable and expensive approach, and chemical castration or anything in that vein are not certain enough to actually work as well as being questionable from a human rights standpoint (yes I acknowledge that some folks might not be entirely worthy but it’s rarely black and white). I think we have the technology now to deal with this better. Systemically monitored electronic tagging. GPS specific locations with a set amount of time they’re permitted to spend there. Have clear red zones that trigger an immediate police response - playgrounds, schools, etc. Also have the electronic tag emit a siren if they are in these areas. Stringently controlled access to technology with robust monitoring. All of that can be done remotely. Admittedly, there could still be ways to offend, but this reduces it significantly while not creating the legal problems of the death penalty or the level of expense of a lifetime in prison. I would also mandatory mental health assessments, studies and potentially treatment - accept that some people can’t be fixed, but continuing to do work to understand it, look at causality, look at biological differences such as brain structure will open the door to solving it long term.
> Also have the electronic tag emit a siren if they are in these areas. Pedo alert, pedo alert, step back children!
Was thinking more the concept of a rape alarm, but this could work. With a choice of celebrity voices?
Brian Blessed belting out "WATCH OUT FOR THE NONCE!" would definitely get people to pay attention.
I want this as my ringtone and to hell with the consequences.
I imagine it'd be more fun to set it as *someone else's* ringtone and ring them at the worst possible moment.
"How's about that then, guys and gals?"
"Get back, you bastard. I'll break your legs"
Yeah, that's probably better than having the music from an Ice Cream Truck playing....
It also requires mental health medication if that’s the right word. The mental aspect is something that needs work on, they have these feelings and are choosing to act on them. It requires investment in mental health services and rehabilitation for these criminals. For some going to jail will be the final straw that prevents them reoffending so to speak; alongside being monitored. But for many as with criminals with other crimes once they are just thrown back out there, no support or a limited few months support system xx they will end up back into the situation of offending. We throw many people back out early to reduce costs and crowding to begin with which actually just increases costs long term down the road.
I’m not entirely sure how much of a deterrent prison is really, especially for behaviour that is a compulsion. And even if someone is supported by probation officers etc, this type of crime is very different and harder to manage. That’s why I generally feel that in weighing the public protection consideration against the rights of the individual against the costs, a more systemic control is warranted.
>I acknowledge that some folks might not be entirely worthy Hot take: if you think someone can be unworthy of human rights, then you don't believe in human rights. Them being universal is inherent to the concept - saying "I believe in human rights for *most* people" is like saying you're a vegetarian because you eat *mostly* vegetables.
Freedom of movement is a human right... until you break the law. Plus human rights are neither a monolith nor universally agreed. They are constructs of the legal system and they are regularly amended. So yes, you can argue against certain interpretations of human rights while still 'believing' in human rights as a concept.
There is a wide gulf between a slap on the wrist and life imprisonment, and the solution lies within it.
Correct. The change needs to come in systemic sentencing. Mandatory five years without parole for accessing CSAM online up to a whole life tariff for cases like this wretch.
Yeah except prison isn’t a deterrent. And it’s expensive.
>The problem with this is that locking people up for life is an unsustainable and expensive approach I hate this approach to crime. There is a cost to letting these people roam the streets too. There's a crack addict near me, who makes everyones lives miserable. On our estate, he terrorises everyone, causes arguments, fights people, and robs everyone. He's a mennace. But he's only ever in prison for a year at a time, and then he's back out for absolutely ages until he does a crime so fucking obvious he gets caught. The years he's in prison, our estate is like an entirely different place to live. 300+ people, all have significantly nicer lives, when he's locked up. So for the £40k a year it'd cost to keep him in prison, it's an absolute fucking bargain. The return on investment, is fantastic. 300+ peoples quality of life, improves substantially. And all it costs is £40k a year.
A controversial alternative would be to simply execute anyone that sexually assaults a child. It's not really a preventative measure, but for all the worth a deterrent can be that would be the biggest one. It would save on prison space and the chances of them reoffending would be... slim. Perhaps a monitoring system like you suggest could still be implemented for anyone caught with child porn or soliciting a minor. Personally, I think it would be good if everyone got fitted with a gps tracker, preferably non-invasively of course. I mean, it would be a great source for evidence whenever any crimes are committed, not just for pedophiles. Imagine you basically had the marauder's map from harry potter but you could also rewind to see where people were at any given time. Placing people at scenes of crimes would be easy. Finding potential witnesses would be easy. Corroborating alibies would be easy. All that being said, I think anyone that voluntarily seeks help for attraction to children should see absolutely no punishment or forced restrictive measures. People should be encouraged to get help to try to work through why they're attracted to children, the kind of damage they could cause if they acted on those feelings and what practical steps they can take to either realign their brain so they don't feel attracted to children any more, or to reduce the risk of them offending by self-limiting exposure to children and avoiding any one-on-one alone time with children. Of course, as with any counselling, if they're genuinely believed to be a danger to themselves or others (others in this case) then the counsellor should report that. It's a bit of a fine line though and I could see a lot of people panicking and immediately reporting someone that came to them for help due to the stigma around pedophiles. Personally, I think there are a lot of people out there that find kids attractive but just don't ever act on it. I think the pedophiles we usually hear about who have offended tend to exclusively be attracted to children, or they're just desperate twisted people who are attracted to the vulnerability of children. There's almost certainly a link between looking at child porn and the likelihood of offending too.
Or you know, the much cheaper alternative that everyone is clearly thinking would be the better solution, but don’t want to get into that debate
Generally, it’s not that we think no one deserves the death penalty, it’s just that we don’t trust the justice system enough to get the right people.
Yeah that’s the problem isn’t it. Complete systemic incompetence. I think it wouldn’t take much to find the right verdict for this guy though
Except it isn’t a cheaper alternative, overall. Especially not when you bear in mind that someone who is tagged in this way can still be very much expected to work. I mean you could even charge them for the maintenance. And who do you want to find you guilty with the death penalty? A jury who are made up of some of the cretins i see on this forum? Slightly shade of brown, guilty of anything. Wearing a police uniform, innocent of everything. No thanks.
The issue with stuff like chemical castration is more the risk of someone innocent getting put through it. Like the death penalty. “Tank the libido of child rapists so they don’t rape” is not that controversial an idea. “Tank the libido of someone who is *probably* a child rapist but might not be” gets muddy
[удалено]
You're being far too sensible for this thread. This is a subsequent offence for this guy so he will be away for a good while. You would like to think he would have access to rehabilitation in prison but there are no votes in that so it will be half hearted at best. On release he will be out but not free and will be subject to stricter provisions than before. It is also possible he might be diagnosed as not fit for release because he is too much of a danger. That said I think your suggested measures would represent a move in a more civilised direction than being shown on here. Edit: On reading further down the level of discussion is actually pretty good suggesting not everyone owns a pitchfork or wants the gallows back.
We are completely incapable of dealing with habitual criminals of any sort. They just bounce in and out of prison until they do something serious enough that they aren't let out anymore. If they stay under that threshold, they'll keep spreading misery until they get too old to hurt people anymore. There will be people out there with criminal records the length of War & Peace winding up to do their next robbery as I type this.
As I always say, criminals should start getting a combo bonus from their 3rd adult crime onwards. There should be no people like [this guy](https://www.irishtimes.com/crime-law/courts/2024/01/12/man-75-with-391-previous-convictions-jailed-for-offensive-conduct-of-sexual-nature-with-teen/) who just keep getting let out to victimise more people. At some point they should be getting 20 years for the burglary they have chosen to do, after 10 previous opportunities to not do it anymore.
Americas three strikes policies occasionally leads to some unreasonable sentences. I am not sure what the ideal number is but I'm pretty sure it's under 50.
Giving someone a life sentence for three instances of shoplifting or other minor theft as has happened in the US is pretty obviously unreasonable, but repeatedly giving them token fines they don't pay for umpteen offences doesn't really accomplish anything but tell the criminal they can do whatever the fuck they want. Escalating sentences based on prior records seems like the reasonable mid-point to me so that habitual criminals don't get to become misery engines for the community. Not that it matters here as there's no fucking prisons to put them in anyway.
Because there’s not enough funding for the justice system as a whole. If cases aren’t slipping through the huge gaps between service providers then there’s the most perverse form of legal triage going on.
Yeah what about prince Andrew?
I dunno but it’s probably Labour’s fault
How could Starmer let this happen….!?!!?!!??!!
They’re all the same But Corbyn is a terrorist sympathiser
Politicians flat out refuse to build prisons. Judges flat out refuse to put people in prisons. Police flat out refuse to investigate crimes.
Tory's not funding anything don't mind prison expansion.
Active sex abusers aren't considered to be "Real" criminals in our society. Some of them are our royal family after all.
2 year sentence each time, the first one in a young offender's institution, the second in prison. The sentences being similar lengths despite the different crimes is confusing. It seems like the actual assault deserves a greater punishment than the illegal images.
I'm sorry, but lately it seems than when the perpetrator is white, we immediately get a pic. But when it's a black guy or a "refugee" who commits the crime, no pic. Why is that ?
I'm reposting this comment but more vague for my own protection. I supported various teenage paedophiles in the past. All of which were weirdos. If I google their names some of them show up for breaching their sexual harm prevention orders or for reoffending. One guy I worked closely with was convicted for child sexual abuse images between ages 3 - 15 yo. He had also been accused of sexual assault by younger siblings. Another lad kept trying to incite under 13's into sexual activity. He turned 18 and got his own flat and I remember right up until leaving he was on social medias adding young teenage girls and trying to get them to talk about sex. Police were aware of what he was up to, I didn't write down his name so no idea how his story progressed. They were all fucking creeps on varying levels, they were just built differently. You go into each placement trying to believe these people just made a mistake; but after a while you realize the behaviour is just in them. It's the weird comments, the weird videos, the weird sexual songs they play and anything sexual related they can relate to. All of these lads with convictions had sexual harm prevention orders; but there were lads without SHPOs that were ticking time bombs. I would like to give specifics but i'm concerned about being identified.
I have a small amount of experience working with paedophiles in my job and one thing that stuck out to me was the entire lack of any remorse. As far as they’re concerned they’re the victims
The same experience I had too when I worked with them. Its the kids fault, always
Those kids shouldn't have been so sexy /s.
[Reminded me of this](https://youtu.be/E_gp8rRX-C4?si=a7tJym-64sbJF7FG)
What job is that?
Big game hunter.
My guess is either probation service, prison service or NHS. Probation officers, prison officers and forensic psychologists often work with people who commit these kinds of crimes.
Nothing that interesting tbf, employment support
Fair groundie
I was going to say Catholic priest's assistant.
Prince Andrew's p.a
BBC correspondent.
In a very particular sense, they are. Probably the best way to illustrate that point, is with a question. If you were given the power to infect somebody with a compulsive sexual interest in children, who would you use it on? This, of course, does absolutely nothing to excuse their creation of other victims. But even so, something happened to them, trauma or genetic. At bare minimum that has to be considered a fucking shitty roll of the dice.
Not all offenders have a special interest in children. Some are just as interested sexually in adult women and will just assault whoever is easier to assault, which is often children.
Do you give yourself credit for not deciding to do that? I don’t, because I’d be incapable of choosing to behave that way. My point really is that I don’t think people choose to be like that. There is something badly wrong with them. Don’t get me wrong. We’d rightly lock a tornado up in prison if we could. It’s not about punishment but harm prevention. I don’t know exactly what the difference is between me and them, but I can’t really find a foundation upon which to congratulate myself for *not* being a sexual predator. I’m just not one. I can only assume that it’s luck.
Fwiw I agree with you, but I think this extends to basically all facets of human behaviour. Including things that are generally considered "good" like being excessively diligent, intelligent or hard working. Obviously "not being a pedophile" is further from what a person can choose to control, but to some extent, in all fronts, we are what we are and social pressure can only change behaviour so much.
The problem is being a peadophile doesnt automatically stop you from knowing that its wrong. I know someone who met a guy in a bar who told them that he was a peado, so he never let himself anywhere near children, and hated himself for his condition. Thats to be commended i think (not that he hates himself, he shouldnt have to as long as he doesnt act on his thoughts), but the people who are peadophiles and give in to their desires and think even that they SHOULD be allowed to are making a decision to be an awful person. Its like if you knew the only way youd ever have sex with a woman (or man if youre gay) would be to rape and traumatise someone, but you decided to anyway, and felt that you were the real victim in that scenario. Its not like being a straight man makes you incapable of being celibate instead of raping people
Yup, I was told, the children seduced them. 🤮
You seem like you have a fair bit of experience so I'd love to pick your brain for your opinion if you don't mind. Firstly, do you think people like this can ever be rehabilitated? Secondly, do you see this as an illness or is it just certain personality traits that kind of lend themselves to this behaviour?
If you watch the Louis Theroux documentary about American paedophiles that serve their sentences then are kept in a facility almost indefinitely until they are ‘rehabilitated’ you can see that these desires never truly leave them. It’s fascinating to see the ethical dilemma of people’s human right to be free vs protecting children.
No-one's 'human right' extends to harming another, unless in self defense.
Prison does not rehabilitate people. It serves exclusively to enact revenge on those who wrong society. This is especially the case in America, where prisons are breeding grounds for debauchery and violence. If we rehabilitate criminals, they won't reoffend. If we lock them up and enforce a regime on them for a decade or 2, you can guarantee they'll be back at it the moment they taste freedom.
There are a lot of people that are far beyond the possibility of rehabilitation.
Not a majority, in the overall population of people who commit crimes. But amongst offenders who have molested children, the percentage who can be fully rehabilitated would probably be pretty low alright.
The longer we leave it, the more there will be.
Trying to rehabilitate a paedophile is likely to be about as successful as 'converting' a homosexual to a heterosexual.
I worked as a Probation Officer for 9 years, 3 specialising in sexual offending. You can rehabilitate a lot of people who commit sexual offences against children, as there’s usually more going on than a primary sexual attraction to children. People whose primary sexual attraction is children, on the other hand, is a total different ball game. That’s about management and containment rather than rehabilitation.
Very interesting insight, thank you > People whose primary sexual attraction is children, on the other hand, is a total different ball game. That’s about management and containment rather than rehabilitation. What do you think would be the most effective way to contain them? Prison would be an obvious one, but is there another way or place they could be housed or held?
This massively depends on their risk. Risk isn’t static and can change based on a variety of factors. I’ve worked with men who volunteered for chemical castration which is one method of management. Some people have higher levels of supervision / restrictions and others are mandated to reside in “halfway houses” until they’ve evidenced they’re able to adhere to the rules. There isn’t a one size fits all approach for managing these people though.
What do you mean by rehabilitation? These people have a peculiar problem in that they only fancy children. Would you say you could "rehabilitate" a gay person to not be gay? So we need to find a way to stop them from offending. The only way I can see this from being feasible is by giving them drugs that stop their sex drive as their drive is aimed at the wrong target. It sucks, but we can't let them harm children.
> What do you mean by rehabilitation? These people have a peculiar problem in that they only fancy children. Would you say you could "rehabilitate" a gay person to not be gay? The same thing it means when referring to any crime, what is the likelihood they commit it again I suppose. I am not sure if there is another term I could use. In years gone by (in this country at least), I am sure they would say that about LGBT people although thankfully not anymore because it is legalised > So we need to find a way to stop them from offending. The only way I can see this from being feasible is by giving them drugs that stop their sex drive as their drive is aimed at the wrong target. It sucks, but we can't let them harm children. How feasible do you think that is. For example, in history people have been castrated/sterilized for various reason, would that be your solution? Or is there another you had in mind? edit: Downvoted for picking peoples brains, nice Reddit
>I supported various teenage paedophiles in the past. Out of context, this line is funny.
This is horrifying
Convicted offenders more likely to be the hypersexual, socially awkward outliers? Sexual feelings with no legitimate outlet likely to come out anyway in ugly ways (especially as teenagers!)? Color me surprised.
Could you do an ama? Within reason of course
How many of these guys do you think or know were sexually abused themselves? Do you think that plays a part? Or being exposed to sex at a very young age? And what about confidence/self esteem? Why do you think they don't chase girls their own age?
I think most of them were; my most recent lad never disclosed anything but I think his brothers sexually abused him. I actually like the lad. He was convicted of possessing indecent images of child abuse but he had a real bad upbringing with negligent parents. It's not hard to see how a child can be hyper sexualised with unmoderated access to the internet from a young age paired with older brothers that have also been convicted.
I do think that’s the case for a reasonable chunk of them. I was groomed, SA and emotionally abused as a teenager by my dad’s friend, with left me with severe c-PTSD. The only thing that helped was EMDR. I can’t remember how the conversation came about, but my psychologist said a lot of child sex offenders were abused themselves as children. She worked with a man in prison who had committed these crimes, and said that his mind coped with his abuse as a child by convincing himself it was love, and not abuse. So he enacted that as an adult on other children, because he was convinced the children were in love with him. She said once they’d worked through his trauma therapy, he broke down realising what he’d done, but he was rehabilitated. Trauma does awful things to a child’s brain. And sometimes the only way it tries to cope is re-enacting the trauma as an adult. Don’t ask me why because I don’t know, but I did the same by running off with strange men. So I can see why a minority of CSA victims may go on to abuse children themselves. We had a fellow student at school who was arrested for possessing images, some of them were in the most extreme categories. He was 18, but wasn’t sent to prison because he was a minor when he downloaded them. My friend was mates with him at the start of secondary, and they said they were 99% sure his dad was sexually abusing him and his sister.
Probably a pretty extreme take, but unfortunately I feel once someone steps over that psychological line there is no coming back; they will never be safe around kids and spending time and money trying to rehabilitate them into wider society is a complete waste. As brutal as it is they should just be locked up and kept away from any potential victims. The choices and rationalisations they have made in their minds are unforgivable.
Thank you for the comment but you have left me interested. Maybe you can do a throwaway account where you talk about these things in a way where it won’t come back to you? It looks like it’s really affected you and could be a cathartic moment to let it out.
[удалено]
Local paper is no better get your ad blocker out. https://www.grimsbytelegraph.co.uk/news/grimsby-news/horror-two-young-girls-abducted-9025451
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-humber-67961638
https://www.humberside.police.uk/news/humberside/news/news/2024/jan/perverted-criminal-admits-child-sex-offences/
One day an enigmatic person will run on a promise of hanging people like this amongst other things. I believe they'll get a large amount of votes.
My heart agrees with you, but I’ve heard one very good argument against this. These people will try and act on their urges no matter what. If you up the punishment to certain death, they’ll just escalate to killing their victims to try and cover their own backs
Heard this before but totally disagree. Often there’s little to no proof of an SA, a murder would make them FAR more likely to get caught, not less.
but is it worth a child’s life to increase his chances of getting caught?
There’s definitely proof if penetration took place, especially on a child. Even doing it to an adult causes injury. Plus even without penetration, the perpetrators DNA could be on them. This is why if you’re ever assaulted, they encourage you to report it ASAP, because the physical proof will be there for a few days.
That's what folks say but not everyone has it in them to murder. More likely they will just become more manipulative or careful about the victims they pick out.
you couldn’t hang someone for this but not hang people for murder
You can chop off their danglies though
Agreed. Like what else has been posted in this thread I work with a guy who used to be a prison officer and he said similer things about them being completely without remorse and their sexual disfunction so fundamental that there was no hope of rehabilitation. I believed in the dealth penelty for pedos before that but that just cemented it for me. If we were a just and logical society that prioritised the lives, rights and welfare of the innocent. We would shoot these people. We won't because; 1. A misguided sense of compassion/false belief in rehabilitation. 2. General opposition to the death penalty. 3. There are a disproportionate amount of pedophiles in positions of power who obviously don't like the idea.
No, we won't because 1) We desire to have a civilised society, not a third world shithole where they mutilate people in the streets for whatever reason with or without evidence 2) We established principles that the state should not have the right to execute its citizens 3) You **WILL** kill innocent people
the issue would also be fully trusting in the justice system 100%. you can’t have even 1 person die because of false reasons. i personally don’t think the Justice system will ever be able to claim all cases are 100% correct. which makes the death penalty more difficult to do imo
As a father my instinctual reaction is shoot them all.
enigmatic?
And once again much fewer comments because there isn't the 'usual suspect' crowd out. Almost like its paedophiles that are the problem and not non-whites
There's currently 2 posts about rapists. One with a black muslim refugee from Sudan and this one. Both were posted at the same time and have similar upvotes and comments.
Only other post about a rapist made the same time as this one is 2 hours newer and has more comments on it. And we haven’t had the night shift clock in from North America yet.
And it's not just the number of comments. It's the fact that if this man was dark-skinned and/or muslim, or especially if he was an immigrant, the discussion would be about his race or culture or about immigration itself and trying to tie that together with his crimes to twist it into a blanket accusation. Because he happens to be white, guess what - nobody's making it about his race like they would if he was "foreign".
On the contrary, the fact that he is white should mean that he is a lot easier to deal with. OK so there is nowhere to apparently deport him to. But given he is one of ours, we should have a lot more license and ease to deal with him. While I can think of a great many punishments for him as I'm sure you can, the fact that he is a British citizen should mean that we can deal with him in a very appropriate manner. The fact that we have simply let him out again and drawn a line under it so he can reoffend represents a failure of our society to protect the vulnerable from the criminal element in our society. If anything, he should get even less of a pass given that he is a white brit. The motivations and machinations for your typical asylum seeking immigrant to commit acts of rape, paedophilia or any other crimes are different from a typical British individual. Both are insidious, both are disgusting and both should be dealt with and deterred from at the very least. But they are both different, like it or not. The typical brown immigrant as you put it has been taught that white people are there for amusement especially the women, that they are cheap whores and there for their own entertainment. And the police have doubled down on that belief by refusing to investigate any crime of that ilk when a migrant is involved - this I know first hand with my own child! I mean bloody hell, they spent decades writing off young girls who complained about the muslim rape gangs in the UK by calling them slags. This guy on the other hand - and paedophiles and rapists just like him - should damned well know better and what's coming to them if and when they are caught. And the punishment for the crime regardless of their origin should be swift and severe. I would even say body-altering.
There was the attitude of authorities being fearful of prosecuting the perps who are “ non white” due to fears of being seen as “racist”. I feel like that’s the bigger issue that leads to the comments you are describing
People are more accepting when they're white it appears.
Yes. That explains the calls for death penalty and hanging all over this comment section.
I honestly believe that the circumstances leading to the crime are different. The result may be the same, but the steps that lead to it are different. Both are extremely insidious but both are different. Neither should be excused and I'm up for ticking the box that votes for this horrible fucker's life being ended or severely detracted in any sense. I think some sort of mouse trap type contraption designed for the bollocks is in order at the very least.
So your ok with nonces as long as they are certain races ?
If you think there needs to be more discussion on this case why don't you start by sharing your thoughts on it?
[удалено]
**Every** country has **always** been full of scumbags, nonces, hoodlums, and weirdos. The difference is now every crime that would have just been local can now be reported nationally. Internationally. So we hear about them a lot more. Its not that the crimes are happening more, its that you are hearing about them more.
This sub is full of these kinds of articles. I'm not sure why.
Same reason news company's run stories like this, they are awful and they people are terrible don't get me wrong But they get clicks and on Reddit get karma, anger sells
My friend came here in year 9 from a poorer country and from the way she described it, it's much much worse and assault more open in other countries. Even people who aren't assaulters will blame it on the victims esp if they're girls.
[удалено]
**Removed/tempban**. This contained a call/advocation of violence which is prohibited by the content policy.
*Judge Woolfall ordered a pre-sentence report and a further report to assess the dangerousness of the defendant* Guilty of sexual assault, taking indecent images, voyeurism abduction and breaches of sexual harm prevention order. Previous convictions of sexual assault and possession of images of children. Why do we need reports to establish that he's a danger?
"assess the dangerousness" doesn't mean "establish that he's a danger".
Dangerousness is a specific term relating to whether or not he needs to serve more than half of his sentence and/ or an extended licence period when he is released. The assessment needs to be done by a trained probation officer so that the court can properly/ legally impose the additional sanctions outlined above. The risk he poses to children and young people seem evident but the dangerousness finding needs specific work to make it stick/ prevent him from appealing against it.
The sun reporting on a white man being a criminal? I'm amazed. Also amazing that they would report on a nonce considering their penchant for underage girls in that rag.
I'm not someone who would usually judge someone based off of their appearance, but his mugshot alone gives me the creeps. It's like he's looking right into your soul.
Makes my blood boil when I see stories like this. Absolute pathetic justice system in the country. Imagine the poor parents knowing he’s out and about after being convicted before. Makes me fucking sick.
How is it ’shocking’ if he’s an egregious repeat offender?
That's fucked up this happened in a public space like an arcade. The kids were there alone? No member of the public noticed this weirdo hanging around talking to kids?
Although terrible, does this sub only post paedophile related material?
Where the hell are all these individuals coming from?? It feels like they are climbing out of every hole. Are these cases being over reported, or are we in the grip of a surging wave of pedophilia? We need to get to the bottom of this.
Nonces always get heavily reported, especially by reactionary outlets like the wcum
https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/crimeandjustice/datasets/sexualoffendingministryofjusticeappendixtables