Friday, 31 August 2012

Our Risk Is The Lowest It Can Be, For Anyone, What Is Yours?

Friday, 31 August 2012

Ruling allows sex register appeals

"A Supreme Court ruling means sex offenders [sic] can appeal against having to register with police for life

Sex offenders [sic] can appeal against having to register with police for life from Saturday, despite concerns raised by a children's charity that they must "always be considered a risk".

Thousands of sex offenders [sic] will be able to apply to have their names removed after the Supreme Court ruled it was a breach of offenders' human rights to be put on the register for life with no review.

The Government has already expressed concern about the plans, with Home Secretary Theresa May saying "the minimum possible changes to the law" would be made.

Currently [?] prisoners [sic] have to wait 15 years after being released from jail [?] to be able to apply to be removed from the register. Saturday marks 15 years since sex offenders were first required to register with police.

Chief executive of the NSPCC Andrew Flanagan said: "This is a concerning day for our justice system. Sadly, we are told this legal ruling cannot be overturned but the NSPCC's view remains that paedophiles [sic] who have been put on the sex offender register [sic] for life must remain there as we can never be sure their behaviour will change" [same for you and anyone, Mr Flanagan]

"A Home Office spokesman said: "We are doing everything we can to protect the public from predatory sex offenders. That is why we have taken action to strengthen the law and close loopholes. The review process for offenders is robust and puts public protection first. It also prevents sex offenders [sic] from wasting taxpayers' money by repeatedly challenging our laws. Sex offenders [sic] who continue to pose a risk [no one is zero risk, no one] will remain on the register for life.""

Paedophiles [sic] given right to challenge being placed on the sex offenders register

Sex offender registration appeals introduced

Sex offenders granted appeals against registering with police

Sex Offenders Register Appeals: Convicted Can Now Fight For Removal From List

Sex offenders gain right to appeal against registration

New ruling allows sex offenders to appeal against register


2nd September 2012 


"Predatory sex offenders will be able to launch lengthy, legal aid-funded ­appeals as soon as they are released. Under the previous rule they had to wait 15 years." [classic, absolutely no idea] 


Now, in all its bitter, scaremongering, money-raising, and incorrect entirety ...

Posted: 01/09/2012 00:00

Wrong Right to Appeal for Sex Offenders

"Today's (1 September 2012) 15th anniversary of the introduction of the sex offender register [sic] brings a surprise present for the very people it was designed to control - and a nasty surprise for anyone with the protection of children at heart.

From today, paedophiles [sic] and other criminals who have committed serious [sic] sex crimes will be able to appeal against having their names on the register for life.

The Supreme Court has ruled that if a sex offender [sic], including those whose victims were children, has not re-offended for 15 years they can appeal to be taken off the register At a stroke this could make them almost invisible to the authorities whose job is to track them and ensure they do not commit further offences, such as sexual assaults on children or hoarding vast libraries of sickening child abuse images. [indecent images, Jon] In effect their dangerous [sic] pasts would disappear from view, potentially leaving them free to search for more young victims, both at home and abroad.

But what guarantee is there that they will not abuse again? It is dangerous to rely on re-conviction rates to assess whether a sex offender is still [sic] a risk to children. How can we be sure they have not re-offended - maybe they just have not been caught again? [maybe the sex fairies did it Jon?] And who is to say they will not harm a child again once they are free from the restrictions imposed by the register? In fact, the great majority of child sexual abuse never comes to light [how do you know?] and is never prosecuted as the young victims are often too scared to speak out [how do you know?].

Though we understand this legal ruling cannot be overturned, the NSPCC's view is that we can never be sure a sex offender will not re-offend [same for anyone, even you, Jon]. There is no known 'cure' for adults who sexually abuse children [for there is no 'disease']. We can only try to control and contain their behaviour which is why they should stay on the sex offender register [sic] for life [how does that help do that?].

Sex offenders [sic] are sophisticated predators [evidence, compared to other offenders?]. They are manipulative and will often go to great lengths to get close to their potential victims {ditto]. Some will have abused children many times before they are caught [ditto]. This is why it is so important that they are closely tracked after their release as there will always be a risk they will abuse again [same for anyone, even you, Jon].

Not all child sex offenders receive therapy [for there is nothing to 'cure'] to address their abusive [weasel word] behaviour and even with those that do, there is no guarantee it will stop them abusing children again, sometimes many years later [same for anyone, even you, Jon].

The best way to protect children from known sex offenders [sic] is a combination of treatment [sic] for offenders in prison. And for the police, and in some cases the probation service, to monitor their movements when they are released into the community [how does that stop action?]. However, we must remember, not all sex offenders have been, or are ever, convicted [so, they are not 'offenders'; courts decide guilt, not guesswork by vested interests ... unless you are one of them ... are you Jon?] so it is still vital [sic] that the public also take responsibility for protecting children in their community by reporting any concerns to the authorities or the NSPCC [kerrrrchhingg]

The UK is only one of four European countries to have a sex offender register and it has made a great contribution to child protection in this country. [how, evidence?] Nobody is claiming that the register is a silver bullet [it is almost a bullet, for some, though], but it is still an important weapon [how?] in the fight against child abuse [weasel words]. Not only does it help keep paedophiles [sic] away from children [how?], it has also increased public understanding and awareness about the way sex offenders operate and the risks they pose.[now we know you must be trolling us, Jon]

So even if sex offenders [sic] now have the legal right to appeal against being on the register [sic], it is hard to envisage in what cases a successful appeal could be justified. Without undeniable evidence they are no longer a danger to children [oh, perhaps because they never were a danger to children?], surely taking them off the register after such serious offences [sic] is too great a risk for society to take. [do you understand risk analysis, Jon?] We must never forget how physical and emotional harm from sexual abuse can damage children's lives. [can? - how 'can' it, Jon? provide your expedience of causality and try to avoid reductio ad absurdum] The NSPCC believes [so what?] that justice and protection for children should come above the civil liberties of a convicted sex offender [clearly so] who clearly had no regard for a child's right to be protected from abuse [again, straw man and reductio ad absurdum]".

Jon Brown
NSPCC's Head of Strategy & Development for Sexual Abuse


Comment: Shameful, PR, propaganda.



Victim on abuser's removal from sex register

 "Sally Marston told BBC Radio 5 live's Victoria Derbyshire that her attacker "continues to destroy her life" [sic] and she felt "protected" knowing he was on the Sex Offenders Register." [then, at best, you have been lied to, Sally]

Victoria Derbyshire -  14/5/13

"A woman who was molested when she was a child says she wants a change in the law after her abuser went to court to have his name removed from the sex offenders register. Sally Marston learned her attacker had succeeded in having his name taken off the register when she read about it in a newspaper."

Man who abused me will be threat to kids till day he dies [sic] why is he now off the sex register?

Should sex offenders be named and shamed for life?


July 12, 2011 

Will the Sex Offenders’ Register “Review Mechanism” breach human rights law?

"Updated | In 2010, the Supreme Court ruled that a mechanism should be put in place to review whether convicted sex offenders should remain liable after their release from prison to notify the police of where they live or plans to travel abroad. In June 2011, the government published draft legislation to “ensure that strict rules are put in place for considering whether individuals should ever be removed from the register.” However, it is possible that the “strict rules” leave the government vulnerable to further legal challenges."

April 21, 2010 

Sex offenders’ lifelong living and travel restrictions were breach of human rights


Sexual Offences Act 2003 (Remedial) Order 2012 - The Victory

The Sexual Offences Act 2003 (Remedial) Order 2012 - The Order 

Statement on sex offenders' register

Tightening the law on sex offenders - The Slapped Wrist

Human Rights Joint Committee - First Report
Draft Sexual Offences Act 2003 (Remedial) Order 2012: second Report



Top link (as of 19/9/12) - see Quickview

No comments:

Post a Comment