Friday 4 September 2009

Next Time, Try A Bunch Of Flowers...

A man sent child porn to a woman he had never met after an online conversation.
*sigh*

I can see I'll need to break in a new tag...

22 comments:

Dr Melvin T Gray said...

I recall something has to be done to secure a place in jail. Gosh, I will have to check in later but I do know this one, Julia.

Mike said...

I despair. Melvin, why don't we just skip prison, collect all the people you identify in some concentration camp, at the beginning of football matches bring a few out and throw rocks at them?

The judge in this case seems to have done a better job than most. Firstly taking the matter of the protection of children from this kind of abuse as the priority and as seriously as it should be. Making the punishment fit the crime and allowing an opportunity for an offender to change. Taking steps to understand how this individual could have got himself into this situation.

I agree with the judge, this guy seems to not be a clear and present danger to children. Probably more a victim of those that are dangerous and his own inadequacies.

The woman that reported this crime seems to have been less hysterical and reactionary than most. Rightly offended and concerned, did she gather up the local community to go round his house and 'burn the pedo'. No, she contacted the authorities and let the people we pay and trust deal with the matter. Well done to her.

It’s now up to the authorities to monitor him, change him and protect us and our children. Why am I suspicious that given some good work by the woman who reported him and the judge things are likely to go from bad to worse?

Mike said...

Julia, on a separate but previously discussed note:

http://www.harrogateadvertiser.net/harrogatenews/Woman-faces-charges-after-false.5616507.jp

This is the first of a few cases in a small area being handled by the same solicitor, You will not believe how hard it is to get the police to act, I can't go into too much detail, watch this space, here we go......

JuliaM said...

"I recall something has to be done to secure a place in jail."

I'd think 'sending child porn to an acquaintance' should have it covered..

"Taking steps to understand how this individual could have got himself into this situation."

It shouldn't matter.

"I agree with the judge, this guy seems to not be a clear and present danger to children."

By providing a market for this stuff, that's just what he's furthering, though...

"This is the first of a few cases in a small area being handled by the same solicitor, You will not believe how hard it is to get the police to act..."

Increasingly, it seems that anything that we'd class as 'real police work' (see here for a typical list) is ignored in favour of the box ticking, 'softly softly' PR-lite stuff.

Mike said...

Julia, of course it matters. In the same way that manslaughter is not murder. A mad person is not responsible for their actions in the same way that a sane person is.

The consequences of his actions are the same. And that is why no leniency should be given in any crime considering its seriousness. However if, after professional and expert opinion it can be adduced that the appellant has mitigating circumstances then these must be addressed.

The alternative, witch hunt.

James Higham said...

Deliberately?

Mike said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Mike said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Mike said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Mike said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Mike said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Mike said...

or try these for size -

www.theonion.com/content/video/supreme_court_rules_death_penalty

www.theonion.com/content/video/is_using_a_minotaur_to_gore?

Mike said...

fucking html, hope it works for ya

Mike said...

on dum dums -

www.theonion.com/content/video/manufacturer_recalls_hollow_point

Mike said...

My false accuser has, I am informed by the police made a number of threats to kill me to her doctor. Serious enough for the doctor to contact the police.

Anyone think this has anything to do with her facing bieng prosecutect for her crimes now?

JuliaM said...

"Julia, of course it matters. In the same way that manslaughter is not murder. A mad person is not responsible for their actions in the same way that a sane person is."

That should be a matter purely for mitigation at sentencing, not for the charge they actually face.

"Serious enough for the doctor to contact the police."

That is serious...

Mike said...

Your right Julia, the crime that this man committed and how he is dealt with in respect of that are completely separate issues. I never suggested leniency in respect of the charges, perhaps the manslaughter and murder analogy wasn’t completely thought out.
I just despair that once the authorities are involved and a criminal is in the system, prevented from committing more crime there the story ends. The public and authorities seem to miss so many golden opportunities to invest in changing people for the better. An almost animal instinct takes over of revenge. It sometimes looks like Catholics beating themselves to atone the sins of the world. How many more Baby Ps, innocent men dragged before the courts charged with a rape that never happened or gangs of chavs attacking Jo or Jane Bloggs will it take before people do something.
Our prisons are full of drug addicts, the poor, lost and mentally ill. They way we treat these people once we have identified them, protected ourselves from them can only comment on what kind of civilisation we choose to be.

Mike said...

In respect of my false accuser. I sit here shaking with fear. I feel I will simply become another statistic like the man who was recently stabbed to death by his estranged wife locally.
The moment someone, I have to say especially a woman, picks up the phone, to use the police to attack an innocent person, usually a man, hell hath no fury.
The CPS is routinely dragging people before the courts on the grounds that there is any chance of convicting them of a crime to further statistics of specific crimes. This is of no use to society or justice.

Rob said...

"They way we treat these people once we have identified them, protected ourselves from them can only comment on what kind of civilisation we choose to be."

How about a civilisation which does not protect its innocent citizens because it does not jail the violent and dangerous? Tolerant, or indifferent to suffering?

Mike said...

There no suggestion that this man is violent or dangerous. In fact quite the opposite.
I've gone out on a limb here and I want no-one to believe for one minute that I condone, tollerate or sympathise with his crime. I am simply saying that how we treat criminals after we have taken whatever steps we need to to protect the public from them is important.
Identify, protect all from further harm, punish appropriately and last but not least prevent repitition.
It's that last point that seems to be lost.

Mike said...

In fact in Julia's post before this prison first, questions later for the man waving a baseball bat arounf seemed most appropriate.

JuliaM said...

"They way we treat these people once we have identified them, protected ourselves from them can only comment on what kind of civilisation we choose to be."

True, and I agree that the mentally ill should not be in prison. But the progressives led the 'care in the community' charge, and so all the old Victorian-style asylums were closed.

And has that ushered in a kinder, gentler society? Or has it simply left more prey on the streets for the predators?

When are we going to realise that some people are just no damn good, and not worth attempting to save?

"The CPS is routinely dragging people before the courts on the grounds that there is any chance of convicting them of a crime to further statistics of specific crimes."

Yup. It looks like Jack Tweedy is another one.