Huntley and the like from a different perspective
Discussion
I know this is a very touchy subject what with pedophilia being the latest hot topic...well that and speeding. All of a sudden all men are suspected pedo's, and that is now one of the crimes that is most concentrated on, to the point of putting people in prison for downloading pictures of fifteen year old girls.
There have always been old pervs around, as a kid i was 'molested' by one, he was a guy in his fifties and he had the urge to demonstrate to me that a man can produce milk......I was about 4-5 yrs old I actually remember being quite intrigued at the time, not threatened at all...BUT I never mentioned it to anyone (he probably told me not to) and i was not hurt and it never 'came up' it turned into a repressed memory or something because it came back to me in vivid detail when i was about 25, and there was no doubt in my mind where it happened and what happened, but it had just been blanked out.
The only reason I have decided to mention this whole episode here is to point out that this guy would probably have killed me if things were as they are today....
I am not sure what that means, and i am not saying we should not focus our attention on kiddy fiddlers but i don't think it does any good to make the crime so evil that they feel murder is a good option...
sorry, can a mod please put this in general gassing for me??
ooops
>>> Edited by hedders on Thursday 4th December 15:08
There have always been old pervs around, as a kid i was 'molested' by one, he was a guy in his fifties and he had the urge to demonstrate to me that a man can produce milk......I was about 4-5 yrs old I actually remember being quite intrigued at the time, not threatened at all...BUT I never mentioned it to anyone (he probably told me not to) and i was not hurt and it never 'came up' it turned into a repressed memory or something because it came back to me in vivid detail when i was about 25, and there was no doubt in my mind where it happened and what happened, but it had just been blanked out.
The only reason I have decided to mention this whole episode here is to point out that this guy would probably have killed me if things were as they are today....
I am not sure what that means, and i am not saying we should not focus our attention on kiddy fiddlers but i don't think it does any good to make the crime so evil that they feel murder is a good option...
sorry, can a mod please put this in general gassing for me??
ooops
>>> Edited by hedders on Thursday 4th December 15:08
hedders said:
I know this is a very touchy subject what with pedophilia being the latest hot topic...well that and speeding. All of a sudden all men are suspected pedo's, and that is now one of the crimes that is most concentrated on, to the point of putting people in prison for downloading pictures of fifteen year old girls.
There have always been old pervs around, as a kid i was 'molested' by one, he was a guy in his fifties and he had the urge to demonstrate to me that a man can produce milk......I was about 4-5 yrs old I actually remember being quite intrigued at the time, not threatened at all...BUT I never mentioned it to anyone (he probably told me not to) and i was not hurt and it never 'came up' it turned into a repressed memory or something because it came back to me in vivid detail when i was about 25, and there was no doubt in my mind where it happened and what happened, but it had just been blanked out.
The only reason I have decided to mention this whole episode here is to point out that this guy would probably have killed me if things were as they are today....
I am not sure what that means, and i am not saying we should not focus our attention on kiddy fiddlers but i don't think it does any good to make the crime so evil that they feel murder is a good option...
In the midst of all this Peado hysteria I often wonder this. A 14 year girl in my town was 'abused' by a Peado.
She used to cycle bloody miles to his house in order for it to happen. Suggests she didn't mind it too much.
A mates Ex was a scount leader. She f**Ked a young lad in her scout troop. He told his dad. She went to court. If ever there was a victimless crime that was it!!!
It's wrong but there *must* be occasions where the victim is completely unharmed and undisturbed.
Teenage girls are a bloody liability. They get into night clubs easily. They lie about their age.
Dunno what the solution is though. Probably for the weirdos to control thier urges! FFS - I'd quite like to bang Sophie Raworth - I don't kidnap her and kill her! If I can restrain myself why can't these guys?
Crimes against children (such as abduction and 'fiddling') have been at the same level roughly speaking for years and years.
Although I didn't share the same experience when I was younger I certainly remember vividly a local bobby coming round to my school and pretending to be a 'dirty old man' (complete with dodgy coat and hat) to educate us about the dangers of taking sweets or lifts from strangers. I was only seven at the time but it was one of the best lessons I ever had.
The trouble is that now the public has such greater access to the press that what may have once been a local child crime issue, people nationwide can suddenly get information about it. In the 1970s people relied on their local rag for news but even local news is accessable to the masses now.
Whether the Huntley case is based on his initial desire to do unmentionables to these girls, did he have any history of abusing kids (I think he had had a caution for assualt but on an adult)... I don't think so... he wouldn't have been working at the school.
Had he done that kind of thing before? From what is said above, kiddy fiddlers obviously can get away with it because some kids just don't know it's wrong, they are naive and won't report it.
This is so difficult to tackle but hopefully, depending on the Huntley outcome, this kind of thing may be brought to public knowledge once again.
Now this is the kind of thing Bernardos should be persuing.
Although I didn't share the same experience when I was younger I certainly remember vividly a local bobby coming round to my school and pretending to be a 'dirty old man' (complete with dodgy coat and hat) to educate us about the dangers of taking sweets or lifts from strangers. I was only seven at the time but it was one of the best lessons I ever had.
The trouble is that now the public has such greater access to the press that what may have once been a local child crime issue, people nationwide can suddenly get information about it. In the 1970s people relied on their local rag for news but even local news is accessable to the masses now.
Whether the Huntley case is based on his initial desire to do unmentionables to these girls, did he have any history of abusing kids (I think he had had a caution for assualt but on an adult)... I don't think so... he wouldn't have been working at the school.
Had he done that kind of thing before? From what is said above, kiddy fiddlers obviously can get away with it because some kids just don't know it's wrong, they are naive and won't report it.
This is so difficult to tackle but hopefully, depending on the Huntley outcome, this kind of thing may be brought to public knowledge once again.
Now this is the kind of thing Bernardos should be persuing.
Whatever verdict Huntley gets, no doubt he's going to some form of prison, where he won't last long with the other inmates.
There is an issue about 'victims' who are just not interested in reporting crimes. Look at all those sad women who refuse to report their violent partners for assault becuase 'I love him too much and it was probably my fault anyway'.
The US just changed the law about children testifying (becuase of the original Michael Jackson case). Kids couldn't be forced to testify if caught up in an abuse trial but now they can.
There is an issue about 'victims' who are just not interested in reporting crimes. Look at all those sad women who refuse to report their violent partners for assault becuase 'I love him too much and it was probably my fault anyway'.
The US just changed the law about children testifying (becuase of the original Michael Jackson case). Kids couldn't be forced to testify if caught up in an abuse trial but now they can.
wanty1974 said:
Whatever verdict Huntley gets, no doubt he's going to some form of prison, where he won't last long with the other inmates.
.
Thats the point I am making though, Huntley will get done for murder, and rightly so. But we as a society are going to have to fund this whole murder trial and then fund his long imprisonment at hundreds and hundreds of pounds a week for decades. All cos he wanted to put his hand down the knickers of a young girl, or maybe more but ended up killing them because he thought that was the best option...
I think the best option for convicted pedo's would be to permanently adjust their skin pigmentation so they were bright green or something and then let them get on with their lives...it would be a great warning to any potential pedo's
>> Edited by hedders on Thursday 4th December 15:38
>> Edited by hedders on Thursday 4th December 15:46
The justification for the maximum sentance available when sentencing a convicted rapist is set at whatever it is (15 years?) because it's believed if rapists were sentenced to life, they'd be much more likely to kill their victims. It's not going to be any worse for them if they're caught having killed and raped the victim, but killing them reduces the chances of them getting caught by being identified.
With the way that paedophiles are villified by the public, media and then given a kicking by fellow inmates, I can see that the temptation to remove that extra chance of being caught can be there in much the same way.
With the way that paedophiles are villified by the public, media and then given a kicking by fellow inmates, I can see that the temptation to remove that extra chance of being caught can be there in much the same way.
hedders said:
Huntley will get done for murder, and rightly so. But we as a society are going to have to fund this whole murder trial and then fund his long imprisonment at hundreds ands hundreds of pounds a week for decades. All cos he wanted to put his hand down the knickers of a young girl, or maybe more but ended up killing them because he thought that was the best option...
That's a really good point.
Take it to the extreme. Assume Huntley's motive was the obvious one. If fondling 10 year old girls was legal and socially acceptable then he'd have tried it, they'd have said no, he'd have let them go. No harm would have befallen anyone.
Instead, after trying it on and failing he had the choice of going on the offenders register and getting aload of daily mail readers kicking sh1t out of his house or killing them and hoping for the best.
Still don't know what you do about it because making kiddie fiddling legal and acceptable has its obvious drawbacks...
hedders said:
But we as a society are going to have to fund this whole murder trial and then fund his long imprisonment at hundreds ands hundreds of pounds a week for decades.
When I worked for a company that was doing IT work in a prison many years ago someone said that it cost £200 a day for prisoners. So ten years would be close to 3/4 million per prisoner for ten years. Given this was over 6 years ago it must be much more now.
Why is it again that we can't do the cheap option and hang people?
On a generally more cynical note I think this sort of story gets used as a nice political tool as such stories distracting from other things, such as parents realising that they are rearing potential debt-slaves what with tuition and housing costs!
RichardD said:
On a generally more cynical note I think this sort of story gets used as a nice political tool as such stories distracting from other things, such as parents realising that they are rearing potential debt-slaves what with tuition and housing costs!
And that we are losing the war in iraq...and our taxes are going up...etc...
Added: i also found it very interesting that Micheal Jacksons place was raided at the same time that GW Bush had his charade going on at buck house...
>> Edited by hedders on Thursday 4th December 16:04
>> Edited by hedders on Thursday 4th December 16:05
toad_oftoadhall said:
Take it to the extreme. Assume Huntley's motive was the obvious one. If fondling 10 year old girls was legal and socially acceptable then he'd have tried it, they'd have said no, he'd have let them go. No harm would have befallen anyone.
And there, in a nutshell, is the argument for lowering the age of consent & legalising drugs. Make it legal, give people all the information they need and then let them make up their own minds.
However, up to what age do you think kids need to be protected?
toad_oftoadhall said:
That's a really good point.
Thanks
toad_oftoadhall said:
Take it to the extreme. Assume Huntley's motive was the obvious one. If fondling 10 year old girls was legal and socially acceptable then he'd have tried it, they'd have said no, he'd have let them go. No harm would have befallen anyone.
Yup, that is my thinking...obviously it would not always work out that way, after all some people DO want to kill other people...
toad_oftoadhall said:
Instead, after trying it on and failing he had the choice of going on the offenders register and getting aload of daily mail readers kicking sh1t out of his house or killing them and hoping for the best.
Still don't know what you do about it because making kiddie fiddling legal and acceptable has its obvious drawbacks...
No, i don't have an answer either, but i don't think it is working out very well at the moment..
RichardD said:
Why is it again that we can't do the cheap option and hang people?
'Cos after three appeals it's cheaper to keep them in prison. ;-(
Personally I reckon it would be worth the extra. ;-)
Having said that you just create crims with nothing to lose. Light sentence for rape, heavy sentence for murder seems to actually help women...
wanty1974 said:
However, up to what age do you think kids need to be protected?
And to what extent should they be "protected"?
I'm sure I'm not the only person who got a reasonable amount of "early education" playing doctors and nurses with a couple of girls who were a year or two older than me at the time but that would probably be frowned upon nowadays.
Certainly getting my arse shagged off by a woman more than twice my age when I wasn't even yet "legal" is classed as an offence but I still count it as one of the highpoints of my past!
Wasn't there something proposed recently about a "maximum allowable age difference" for teenagers so that they could be able to "experiment" with their own agegroup with the thinking being that kiddiefiddlers would be too old and therefore liable to prosecution still?
What a nightmare ... I mean, haven't we all had that "Trainspotting Moment" after a night on the beer when you wonder just how old she actually was? Thank Christ I'm now an old fart and waaay past all that stuff ... the young lass that babysits for me and the wife occasionally has to only be fourteen or thereabouts but I've seen her getting her tonsils checked out by one of the local lads on a few occasions on my way home. A few years and it'll be my lad that's working his way through the minefield - hopefully we'll be able to give him enough solid advice that he won't get himself into trouble but am I glad that we have a lad to bring up and not a lass - *THAT* can't be easy!
Phil
toad_oftoadhall said:
A mates Ex was a scount leader. She f**Ked a young lad in her scout troop. He told his dad. She went to court. If ever there was a victimless crime that was it!!!
I'm not actually sure that's an offense you know......
Immoral possibly, as well as a possible abuse of power. Christ, my dad would have given me a medal if he'd found out something like that.
Bassfiend said:
And to what extent should they be "protected"?
I'm sure I'm not the only person who got a reasonable amount of "early education" playing doctors and nurses with a couple of girls who were a year or two older than me at the time but that would probably be frowned upon nowadays.
For some strange reason, where I grew up, most of the kids my age were boys. Girls were a bit thin on the ground. Best I did was to get my hands (briefly!) down Julie Greaves' pants behind my dad's garage - we must've been about 10?
Then she had to go home for her tea. Hardly thought any more about it till now... (last I heard, Julie was Clerk of the Court in Luton 
) Bassfiend said:
Certainly getting my arse shagged off by a woman more than twice my age when I wasn't even yet "legal" is classed as an offence but I still count it as one of the highpoints of my past!
Biggest difference I managed: I was 22, she was 36
She must be 54 now The biggest the other way round: I was 29, she was 19. And ugly. But built like a schoolie.... :dohwhatamIsaying:
Bassfiend said:
What a nightmare ... I mean, haven't we all had that "Trainspotting Moment" after a night on the beer when you wonder just how old she actually was?
No. You jammy barsteward...
Bassfiend said:
A few years and it'll be my lad that's working his way through the minefield - hopefully we'll be able to give him enough solid advice that he won't get himself into trouble but am I glad that we have a lad to bring up and not a lass - *THAT* can't be easy!
Phil
You want to try being a male single parent. Right about the time that some stupid doctor a few miles away decided that she'd come up with a test that 'proved' loads of kids had been fiddled with. Oh yes, a right laugh that was. Already had the NSPCC keeping an eye on me (long story and not because of the obvious - ask my daughter, she's on here somewhere
) Ian
The system is 
ed.We should hang the ones who are caught where there is no shadow of a doubt. With Huntley clearly he did it, however what will he get 15 20 years and a raft of "experts" who will try to find excuses to explain it away. As a kid I remember vividly the moors murderers case, I have seen the appeals the waste of money keeping them in jail the clap trap from Lord Longford, but most vivid the pain that the mother of the little boy Keith shows every time you see her when some do gooder is on the band wagon. And if one of the prisoners tops one of these bastards guess what more court cases more cost. We have people telling us how barbaric we would be if we had the death penalty, to those people I would let them listen to the taped torture of Lesley Dowling by Hindley & Brady and them let them pass judgment. The chinese have the right idea, top them and use there organs to transplant into ordinary decent people. We belive in democracy in this country so let us have a vote, I am sure it would be overwhelmingly in favour of the death penalty but we will never get it. So we just have to wait for the next case and the next.
ed.We should hang the ones who are caught where there is no shadow of a doubt. With Huntley clearly he did it, however what will he get 15 20 years and a raft of "experts" who will try to find excuses to explain it away. As a kid I remember vividly the moors murderers case, I have seen the appeals the waste of money keeping them in jail the clap trap from Lord Longford, but most vivid the pain that the mother of the little boy Keith shows every time you see her when some do gooder is on the band wagon. And if one of the prisoners tops one of these bastards guess what more court cases more cost. We have people telling us how barbaric we would be if we had the death penalty, to those people I would let them listen to the taped torture of Lesley Dowling by Hindley & Brady and them let them pass judgment. The chinese have the right idea, top them and use there organs to transplant into ordinary decent people. We belive in democracy in this country so let us have a vote, I am sure it would be overwhelmingly in favour of the death penalty but we will never get it. So we just have to wait for the next case and the next.Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff