cresta57

Indeed, I think we decided this [rusty razor blade] when it happened to my daughter. My views have either mellowed with the passage of time or I've become a grown up able to see the bigger picture. My worry with the far right "Kill 'em all" scenario is that it won't stop with paedophiles. The next group of extremists will want the same for one punch "king hit" deaths, the next for drink drivers & so on & so forth.

Then we end up in a warped Niemöller cliché

First they came for the Paedophiles and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Paedophile
Then they came for the Rapists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Rapist.
Then they came for the Drink Drivers, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Drink driver.
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.

scrubbedexpat098

That's easily as low as anything you read into my posts, I'd say you should listen to your own advice, I have never said or insinuated that.

Still no answers to my question, perhaps because the answer makes other solutions untenable. I know I've got all bent out of shape on this subject and I always will, but I have a point, uncomfortable to many obviously, but no less valid than anyone elses

can't believe you made me post again

Beoz

Stepping back a little here, yes if you are accused, go through the time consuming, stress of bail and or court, and you are innocent, either no further police action, or no conviction I believe you should be compensated for the stress and the time of bad processes, suspicion, allegations, usual police f8ck ups, and just general incompetency has cause any defendent. No matter what the alleged crime.

Kapri

Rightly so because if he is going to be having sex with young girls he should be very, very sure that they're not too young.
If he desires young girls then he needs to stay within the letter of the law.
Claiming ignorance is not a defence.

I'm telling you what a policeman told me during child protection training.
A 17 year old and a 15 year old would be seen as ok providing there was no coercion.
A 40 year old and a 15 year old would not be seen as ok.

Let's face it, if a 40 year old tried it on with my daughter when she was 17, even though it's legal, I wouldn't be happy.

Beoz

You might not be happy, but lets face it, he would be and be legal at that. Emotion and protective parenting aside, this is not poeodo activity and really shouldn't be the subject of any confusion.

scrubbedexpat098

Mate first off, sorry for whatever your daughter had to suffer, you've mellowed and hats off to you, I can't and it's nothing to do with being grown up.

Second, I did say in an earlier post that I'd never wished harm on anyone that wasn't a paedophile.

Thirdly I'd love to know how Jews got in there, you wierdo

Kapri

No, but our original conversation was about a 40 year old man and a 15 year old, that's wrong whether you like it or not.

I find it very worrying that some people are so obviously in favour of old men and young girls in a sexual relationship. Inadequate men Imo

ozzieeagle

There is apparently a formula for this... past the legal age of course.

Double plus 7 years is when your past the social acceptablity..... So 17 and 40 makes it in by just one year.....

EDIT Actually thats wrong... it's half your age plus 7... So 27 is the cut off point.

cresta57

Firstly I couldn't be arsed to change any more lines from the original poem:

First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Socialist.
Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Trade Unionist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.

Secondly my daughter did suffer & at the time I was outraged I caught the guy red handed & thought I'd killed him when he lay unconscious in the road. It was a life changing experience & but for the quick thinking of the Asian shop keeper deleting the security video tape I'd probably have been sent to prison myself. I posted about it on here at the time HERE & when he got off by pleading guilty it was as is we had to live it all over again.

OzTennis

Having spent a lifetime in education and tennis coaching I've seen a few cases of adults falsely (and maliciously) wrongly accused by children too immature to understand the gravity of their allegations. Fortunately the accused got off in all cases but careers and lives (and marriage in one case) were blighted thereafter. I'm not saying Rolf, Jimmy et al are innocent; we've just got to be very careful how we tread and not immediately assume that those accused are guilty in all cases.

On the punishment issue; we've fortunately moved along a bit on the capital punishment front and there is no way the law in either the UK or Australia will regress to that. As for death for indecent assault, what would be the tariff for murderers, terrorists etc in that system?

I'm also intrigued as to how a sex offender who should be supervised 24/7 on mental deficiency grounds would be identified? And how would the system cope and fund 24/7 supervision of these and worse offenders? As for analysing the brains of offenders (seems to me you would have to kill them for that), Hitler's medical experiments anyone?

Everyone is horrified by the crimes of Rolf and Jimmy; all will never agree on how to punish such offenders and how to tackle the problem. The so called deterrent of capital punishment, birching etc has been proven to not be a deterrent - it just seems to be a way of venting the anger of the rightist leaning and not addressing the problem or fixing a penalty which would fit into the overall penalties for all crimes.

There is going to be a lot of the proverbial hitting the fan in the UK once details previously suppressed (and files destroyed) of a widespread paedo gang at the top levels of government and civil service start to be released by the enquiry set up.

mikelincs

There are already problems with that enquiry as the person chosen to head it is the sister of the attourney general at the time, however she has refused to step down, so there could be a lot of people who feel that they will not get a fair hearing due to her relationship, Sir Michael Havers died a few years back, but there are still fears that, should his name come up in the enquiry, she may feel pressure to choose to dismiss it.

Domino

surely there are others who could head the enquiry who do have a similar CV but are not related even twice removed


or is this all part of the cover up.

If it was you, me, or him the full process of the law would apply.
once again it is one law for the rich (and famous and connected) and another law for the rest of us chumps.

OzTennis

Tories appoint Tories to investigate Tories ; just like Abbott appoints Liberals to investigate Liberals .... Labour appoint Labour to investigate Labour etc.

The Home Secretary at the time the files disappeared and weren't investigated further was himself the subject of a rape allegation dating back to before he entered Parliament (Leon Brittan). Scotland Yard passed on 2 dossiers naming 15 and 8 high profile public figures to Leon Brittan and he passed them on to the Home Office. These dossiers and 114 files have been lost by the Home Office. Brittan is saying the allegations were investigated at the time and subsequently dropped.

The Inquiry is to establish how/why the files disappeared and if there was any substance to their content. It's going to be difficult to unshred/find the documents shredded/lost 30 years ago.

mikelincs

But, some of those involved are still around and very much alive, particularly the victims.

Domino

just goes to prove that having a clear desk is a sign of efficiency. Get a file and then pass it on to some other sucker who has a desk full of them but is viewed as inefficient.

And if you should forget to ask what happened to the file, well that's what happens in a busy office. Especially if no one bothers to include you on any updates.

been there, done that.