Sex offender release
Discussion
Link to what is public information http://www.oldham-chronicle.co.uk/news-features/8/...
Reads like a fairly typical depressing story of abuse in under privileged circumstances. Not the Daily Wail stereotype of stranger rape of schoolgirls and choir boys. So he got seven years (yes, we know about remission) and will be subject to monitoring. On the limited information available, what do the pitchfork wielders think would have been appropriate? More bumming perhaps?
In my opinion there's evil bds like say Brady who indeed should expect nothing from decent society. Then there's weak willed men that fancy a young bit of skirt like this case. Totally wrong, but I'm betting a lot of us have secretly fancied teenage girls at one point or another, teenage, not 6, 7 or 8. So as often happens, paranoia is clouding peoples judgment. Imo of course.
irocfan said:
as has been previously asked... what was the offence?
Was it 'just' having pics?
Was it taking pics?
Was it grooming?
Was it touching?
Was it full on?
Then how old was the child? 5? 10? Virtually 16?
Each of these will give you a different way of looking at things.
I'd venture to suggest that he wasn't raping a baby with only 7 years served and so was possibly at the 'less serious' end of the scale (don't get me wrong it's all serious but there are degrees). As has been mentioned by others if he was viewed as a clear danger he'd have not been released (though obviously mistakes are made!), so if he has served the sentence then he has to live somewhere. Whether that sentence was too short is a whole new kettle of fish.
If he was interfering with a girl a few months before she turned 16 it's still wrong but there could be more to that scenario and so on and so forth....
I had a serious relationship with a girl who was repeatedly raped & sexually abused by her own father, over a number of years, with the abuse starting from when she was aged just 5 or 6 years old and actual rape being at an older age - she was abused into her early teens. Her sister had the same treatment. So did her cousin. They are just the 3 we know about. She only had the courage to bring it to the police when she was in her late 20s. One of the other two known victims stepped forward on the back of the first one - she had suffered the same treatment but 10 years earlier. The third girl didn't want to speak to the police as she didn't want to bring back the old memoriesWas it 'just' having pics?
Was it taking pics?
Was it grooming?
Was it touching?
Was it full on?
Then how old was the child? 5? 10? Virtually 16?
Each of these will give you a different way of looking at things.
I'd venture to suggest that he wasn't raping a baby with only 7 years served and so was possibly at the 'less serious' end of the scale (don't get me wrong it's all serious but there are degrees). As has been mentioned by others if he was viewed as a clear danger he'd have not been released (though obviously mistakes are made!), so if he has served the sentence then he has to live somewhere. Whether that sentence was too short is a whole new kettle of fish.
If he was interfering with a girl a few months before she turned 16 it's still wrong but there could be more to that scenario and so on and so forth....
The man in question admitted to multiple counts of 'indecent assault' and received a 6 year sentence
Obviously my personal connection to the victims and seeing the effect it had on their lives means that I would see hanging as being too good for the evil piece of sh*t. But even though I understand why many if not most on here might not agree with capital punishment, I'd hope most on here would agree that 6 years is pitiful. And that you wouldn't want someone like that living next door to your family home, whether he's served his time or not. No easy answers....
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff