RE: Sarah's Law?
Good point, Derek! God knows who'd end up on such a register...
When I used to work on a newspaper I was invitedto the local police force headquarters to be requested NOT to publish details of where known paedophiles might be living. The police concern, which I think is justifiable, is that it is most important for police to know where released paedophiles are living. If their addresses are published, they are likely to move on and become invisible both to the police and to the general public. So everyone loses. Of course, you could argue that the police/probation servicedon't have the resources to keep tabs on all released convicts - but what can we do (if we know of paedophiles' whereabouts) to make up for that? Beat them up? Paint graffiti on their houses?
But why stop at paedophiles? If we publicise their whereabouts, why not let us know where convicted murderers live? And, asa householder, wouldn't you liketo know if you lived next door to a convicted burglar? And, talking of children's safety, what about people with speeding convictions? There are a lot more of them than there are paedophiles - and they are far more likely to cause harm to your children. Where do you stop?
RE: Sarah's Law?
I'm afraidI believe that Sarah's Law will not help at all for various reasons: vigilantes, ill feelings, malicious gossip, witchhunts...already mentioned in posts above. Furthermore, this law will not include those people, who haven't been caught yet and may still live in a house near you...
Why don't people/parents realise that this is a dangerous world we're living in, and we just have to assume that the people around us are not always what they seem to be? It's sad that I can't let my son play out unsupervised anymore, but even if a register told me that no peadophiles live in my area doesn't mean I would be careless and throw all caution in the wind.
And what about other convicted criminals like drug dealers, burglars, robbers, rapists etc.? As far as I know, there is no naming-and-shaming law for them, yet these could be dangerous people to anyoneas well. How many registers do we want/need?
What fundamentally needs to change is the criminal justice system. Life should mean life, not just 5 years; this change alone would keep all dangerous peadophiles already convicted away from us for good. If Sarah's killer had not been released early, she would still be alive today.
RE: Sarah's Law?
Excuse me for interrupting the huge amount of empty venting that is going on here but when I read the following
What fundamentally needs to change is the criminal justice system. Life should mean life, not just 5 years; this change alone would keep all dangerous peadophiles already convicted away from us for good.
I just have to tell you that when a criminal receives a life sentence he/she is given a minimum tariff i.e a minimum number of years which must be served before parole can even be considered. I don't know where the idea came from (I suspect the red top newspapers) that a tariff of five years means automatic release after that amount of time. It does not. Only rarely do lifers 'achieve' their tariffs. It is far more common for a life prisoner to serve many years past their tariffs until the parole board is absolutely certain that they are not a danger to the public. When they are released, they are then on 'life licence' and can be pulled back in for any minor infringement. Yes, sometimes criminals reoffend on release but not every time. There is such a huge amount of hysteria being engendered around this subject. I'm surprised that no one has proposed putting all criminals against a wall and shooting them. That would certainly make life safer for the rest of us, wouldn't it?
Personally, I don't believe there is more danger to children on the streets now than there used to be, say, fifty years ago when I was a child. There is more awareness of danger and greater publicity when something bad happens to a child but the greatest danger to children is posed by family members and friends. How would a register help in those cases? The instances of truly evil paedophilia are, I believe, thankfully small...let's keep a sense of proportion here. Surely if a paedophile register were available to parents it would be very easy for enthusiastic vigilantes to get hold of the details; the thought of a lynch mob baying for blood is not, to me, an edifying one.
Love
Sunanda xxx
PS To those of you who are parents of small children who say that you would like to have access to such a register, I ask what would you do with that knowledge?
RE: Sarah's Law?
Hi Sunanda,
Okay where shall I start, I do have issue with a few of your comments, firstly I don't read newpapers so although Im vagely aware of Sarahs campaign and the recent press it's not where I gain my opinions from.
It is a fact that dangerous criminals are released inorder to re-offend - this in my opinion should be addressed imediately.
Secondly, you mention about children not being in any more danger, to a degree I would agree with you, although the fact that communities are much larger I would think leads to less security for anybody out alone, however this is not the reason behind me wishing to discuss the disclosure of information.
I've already mentined that I work with children and employee people to work with children and I can tell you that the system is inadequate, often you would have to apply for a disclosure 3-6months before requiring it and it is only valid for that moment in time.
Sexual abuse I think you would find is much much more common that people realise,
I don't know how I feel about disclosure of information to the public, but our current system is not working so we need to at least discuss it.
In answer to your question - I have young children and if my neighbour was a known peodophile I would want to know, behaviour which is considered normal would be suspicious if you knew a persons history. So I would watch them, surely its better to know than to deal with the aftermath.
Love SaffronXX
RE: Sarah's Law?
I agree with you Red Dragon (and strangely enough, I also don't read those papers...). the current system doesn't work properly, but Sarah's Law would only add more problems rather than a solution. I don't want to know, if my neighbour is a paedophile; I use common sense and caution with all people around me. LikeI say, someone who's not convicted will not show up on the register and can still live near you. And it makes sense to ask 'what would you do with the information?' You may be a sensible person, who won't throw a brick through that man's window, but what about other people?
Oh so much empty venting going on here ...:eek:
RE: Sarah's Law?
Hi Saffron
Yes, I can see that it must be hugely frustrating to have to wait so long to discover whether or not potential employees have a history of child abuse. It is this inadequacy of the relevant authorities to which derek drew our attention above. I can also understand that you believe it would be helpful for you to know if, to cite the worst possible scenario, a convicted paedophile were to move in next door. But honestly Saffron, how exactly would you 'watch' him? It would take over your life: you would need help, you would tell your friends and neighbours and it might just happen that certain of them would not be content to just watch, but would want to take action, possibly vigilante action, possibly violent action. And it might just happen that the powers that be had got the details wrong, misspelled the name or something and you might end up attacking (OK watching) an innocent man. What then? More productive, I would think, to watch your children (which I'm sure you already do.) to instil in them the notion of 'stranger danger' of 'not talking to strange men' etc.
I know better than to ask for compassion for paedophiles on this thread but I have to say that IMV so many of these 'monsters' are really really sick (as in ill) and I repeat that most instances of child abuse take place within the home and are carried out by family members or by people known to the parents and trusted by them. I suppose at the end of the day I'm just happy that I don't have young children and can view this subject objectively rather than subjectively but I do believe that these campaigns, such as the one about deportation of released foreign prisoners, are thought up as much to sell newspapers as anything else. And this government jumps on the bandwagon....and creates kneejerk legislation which does more harm than good. For example, sending teams in to the homes of long term foreign residents such as the two guys in Scotland, dragging them from their beds and putting them in detention centres just so they can appear to be addressing the problem. What we need is that old cliche joined up thinking on these and so many other problems of modern life.
Love
Sunanda xxx
RE: Sarah's Law?
Hi CosmicFaery,
I'm naturally a suspicious person, but unfortunately if you wanted to truely protect you child with the current system they would never go to school, play sports, swim, walk in street, go to the doctors, ect...
The current system does not work, peodophiles are well known to work in positions which gives them contact with children.
I have children and I want them to feel safe and secure, I want them to enjoy activities and put their trust in human beings, whilst the "system" fails us this makes it so much harder.
It would be interesting to hear some more views from Megans Law in US.
Thanks SaffronXX
RE: Sarah's Law?
Gosh, so many strong opinions I think that I'm just going to have to agree to disagree on this one, just a few things spring to mind though, I'm under the understanding that Sarahs law doesn't mean that it's going to make the where abouts of every convicted peodiophile public knowledge, just alert parents in the neighborhood of the 'protential' yet hopfully monitored risk if 'one' moves into the street/villiage!
I agree with the fact that as a parent you need to keep a close eye on your children & you (& them) should treat a stranger with caution..BUT, I have difficulty with the feeling that you need to keep afull timewatch on your kids when they're out playing. I used to be very paroniod about my two older boys (now 8 & 10) playing in the front of the house & going out of sight, it;s only farely recently that I let them go a little bit further because I realised that I had to give them freedom at some time, children need to learn independce. When I was a youngster I used to go all over the place having adventures but these days we're too scared to let our kids out..partially media fear agreed but still the fact that child snatching/rape does happen & I'm sorry but I often wonder if the internet is helping to fuel the situation at all!!...but thats going off topic & not one for hp
As for 'attack' I supose that depends on who the neighborhood are. When I first moved into the house where I live now there was a man around the corner who had been caught 'trying' to abduct a young girl, we where told about him as soon as we moved into our house, everyone knew about it but nobody attacked him, or vandisied his house...nothing at all, but kids wern't allowed to play by his house nor where they allowed to go about alone, it didn't really effect me as then my boys where only 2 & 4 so I didn;t let them play out anyway & the man has now moved house, the point I'm making is that he wasn't insulted, assulted or anything, people where just aware that he wasn't a safe person to be near children...!!..But true, where kids are concerned really theres no such thing as a 'safe' stranger....it's kind of sad in a way
Ihave no objection topeople that can give them thebenifit of the doubt ..there needs to be people in this world who can....but i'm just not one of them..sorry. Maybe it's because I'm a mum of 3, the lioness instincts or somthing:eek:
With the summer holidays dawning again this is always a fear...not to mention other issueslike bad drivers[:'(]...theres so much to worry about when it comes to childrens saftly!!
Love
Amy
xx
RE: Sarah's Law?
As a retired paediatric nurse I have over many years dealt with the consequences of sexual abuse (as well as physical abuse). All cases I have nursed the abuser is a member of the family. Usually a step dad or uncle. The best solution for older children at risk is childline. I have seen this in action. A child of approx 13 came in he hosp, complaining of abdo pain. It was obviously psycho-symatic. When we were all busy she quietly used the public phone and phoned childline (we had a poster on the wall) and told the staff there her father was sexually abusing her. They told her to confide in a member of staff on the ward she trusted.She did and we got social services involved.
I have seen on average 4 to 5 cases of abuse a month, either physical or sexual and remember emotional abuse is out there as well. The most dangerous place for children is the home environment where it can go on for years and no one would know.
I must say mothers can also abuse their children, not just men.
Ihave attended many child protection courses over the years and that included a talk/video about paedophiles. They will never willingly go for treatment because they do not think they are ill. They are genuinlycannot understand why the public are against themthey think the little children enjoy it!!!.
I personally think when prosecuted they should stay insomewhere for life. Like Rampton or Broadmoor. Tagging would be a good idea. If they are thinking of chemical castration that is the only way they could do it by tagging.
RE: Sarah's Law?
this is all im going to say here
mother to 4 ,12 girl and 18 11 boyz
i live on a really rough est bad name the lot around here but if your face fits you stay
were going though a generation program with rebulid the area as barrett have build new houses next to ours barrett built a park for the kids around here very open next to main rd and one saturday 1 little girl gets seen draged off local kids run off crying to there moms telling them some called the police other went and looked this man did this in day light park was full as it was newthe child mother was informed there was alocal serch for the child she was found gagged under a bush on a bike track clothes ripped child had give him a good fightbut he had hurt her hit her and had sex withher ONLY 8 poor thing was taken to hospital and her family moved out the area,
the councilhad put him in a 3 bed house as he was waiting trial on other things to do with kids his house had good veiw of park and he had been watching the kids for weeks on there it was packed on there knowing it was new for the kids to have and while packed he went and took a child the locals found out his house
ram sacked it and burned it out
but it was never put in the local paper at all that parki s hardley used anymore or mother and fathers take there kids there and weve been given wardens and more police
sorry if up sets any 1 but you be that CHILD THAT CHILDS MOTHER OR FATHER OR FAMILY
WITH IN DAYS THE KIDS WERE LOOKING FOR MORE AND THE POLICE ENEDUP2 MORE FROM OFF THE EST IN THE MIDDLE OF THE NIGHT SO IT GOES TO SHOW YOU THATYOU REALLY DONT KNOW WHO LIVES BY YOU
AND HOW SAFE ARE YOUR KIDSTHIS AS BEEN SINCE EASTER MY KIDS WONT EVEN PLAY AFTER SKOOL WONT GO OUT THERE A FEW STARTING TOCOME BACK OUT
BUTS IT FRIGHTED ALOT
CAZWIX
RE: Sarah's Law?
If he was awaiting trial he should not have been given bail.
RE: Sarah's Law?
Everyone is saying that Sarah's Law will protect children against the random chancer paedophile.
But nobody has said how it will help the other 80% who are attacked by family members, apart fromit being a deterrent. Jail should be a deterrent, and I very much doubt the threat of Sarah's Law will affect their behaviour.
Example when Jamie Bulger was taken , mothers held onto their children in the street in the shops and all public places, they kept up this diligence for a short while,but slowly and gradually relaxed their hold.
Its human nature for children to want to run and play, its human nature for mothers to want to protect their children without stifling them, sadly its also human nature (however obscene) for paedophiles to attack.
The system that runs our country is over stuffed with issues, and it cannot run the essential services well because of this.
Whether ill or just plain unspeakable, paedophiles, once caught and been through the legal system need to be retained within it, not released back into the community.
RE: Sarah's Law?
sadly its also human nature (however obscene) for paedophiles to attack.
erm....I don't see it as Human Nature, sorry but I'm going to have to strongly disagree with that one
It's all done in private, hidden, because of what it is, they have groups (& there are organsations out there..it's an underground business mainly on the internet), if these people were recognised by Joe Public I think it would make them think twice, perhaps even seek help before they strike...true, sarahs law doesn't mean it will stop the problem, but i still agree with it...yes ideally bigger/longer/life prison time would be better, but do you think the goverement will fund that??..and,it does seem that lesser prison sentences are given to offenders as it is!!!
I don't have any answers for abuse in the family, sorry
xxx
RE: Sarah's Law?
Hi Guys,
Please let me say that I don’t want to upset anybody with anything that I say as I understand that this is a very emotive subject.
Also that I have been rude enough to only skim read this thread, apologies, moreover, it's just a straight rant... from headto type, so I may get some stuff or facts horribly worng [:-]
Anyway, the point is a serial chocolate junkie should not be housed in a sweetshop… end of! – it ain’t hard is it?:eek:
I’ve raised three children (whatever that means, the truth is my wife did the raising & I watched them grow) and I also have three beautiful grandchildren… I know that if anything like what happened to some of the kids in recent years happened to them – I’d find the perpetrator and I would meat out what I feel is justice.
Now I’m a pretty sane guy (all things are relative), yet I just know I’d torture the ‘bloke’ and then kill him… I just know I would… yet I also know with clear thinking that he or she is actually sick.
In the 70’s I schooled in Hayes, a predominantly white and racist area at the time, as a town it is separated from Southall (a predominantly Asian town) by a canal bridge effectively. At that time guys from not just Hayes, but 3 or four of the neighbouring towns would think it great and regular entertainment to ‘Paki Bashing’…a common and weekly occurrence, tolerated by the authorities.
Launch Sarah’s Law, and you’ll have the same in no time, guys in white vans with bats embarking on their new sport of looking up the potential targets address on multimap or feeding it into their Sat-Nav and off they go on their weekend hunt ‘Paedo-Bashing’ a few ‘tinneis’ for the way and a stop for kebabs on the way back…weekend sport[:'(]….You think it wont happen?
For me, the real problem here is that emotionally charged stuff is being used to whip up public outcry and induce enough fear from the public to get us to allow something to happen, but I haven’t worked out what that ‘something’ is…
But it’s clearly to do with (& driven by) the ‘unknown individual’ mythos… You know ‘unknown killers’, ‘illegal immigrant criminals’, ‘untraceable rapists’, ‘the next-door paedo’ etc.etc. Yes I know Sarah’s law is a public movement, but it’s a vehicle that fits with the above ‘drive’ ergo fits the agenda.
& as I said at the beginning, 'serial sweet junkies' shouldn’t be housed in a sweetshop… any idiot can work that out – so why do it… coz it beats me - yet they are?[sm=scratchchin.gif]
I think Derek clearly pointed out just a few of the technology failings of criminal records and govt IT systems in general, many have pointed out that the majority of this kind of crime is committed by family members or those known to the family and the wealth of the rest is committed by those that are in a position of trust or power… that leaves very few ‘random’ events.
W
RE: Sarah's Law?
Amy, and yet 80% of child sexual abuse is within the family.
Incest and other child abuseis a well known human failing and therefore part of human nature.
We had some perfectly nice neighbours, Mum ,Dad one beautiful daughter and 3 healthy handsome sons, yet the the daughter and one of her brothers (the same one) were found to be having a sexual relationship of 5 years standing by the Mother...
The Internet may make it easier to target children, especially the downloading of pictures.
Do you remember the outcry when Julia Somerville was accused of child abuse, because they had taken pictures of their child in the bath? yet we regularly see babies bottoms on TV. Now the baby care industry is obviously targetting mums to buy their product, BUT who else is watching? who gets turned on by it, and goes and finds a child to rape?
If Sarah's law were to be implemented, would you feel more secure in the knowledge and allow your children more freedom, what if the child abuser registered had actually 'attacked' with her consent his 15 year old girlfriend, and he was also 15?
As to the Govt not funding any more jails etc, they should be made too, a woman yesterday jailed for non payment of rates, a protest against non cleaning of streets, but I digress.
After any big event such as Dunblane there is an outcry, and sticking plaster remedy applied, but since Dunblane gun crime has increased
Sarah's Law will just add to the mayhem out there, not lessen it.