News of the World succeeds in driving paedophile underground

BillieTheBot

A convicted paedophile has been moved from his Somerset home by police after a crowd of angry residents protested outside his home.
Robert Oliver, 52, was a member of a gang involved in the killing of 14-year-old Jason Swift in 1985.

His whereabouts in Bishop's Lydeard were revealed by a Sunday newspaper and about 100 people demanded he be moved.

Earlier police had appealed for calm, warning "persistent media attention" could drive Mr Oliver underground.

The protesters grew in number throughout Monday. More police officers were drafted in as fears for his safety increased.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/somerset/6170849.stm

Would anyone in favour of implementing the so-called "Sarah's Law" care to explain what good exactly this action has achieved?

Can someone publish the address of the editor of the News of the World and of its proprietor Rupert Murdoch? I'd like to pay them a visit of my own...

:rolleyes:

Former Member

He is a scum bag, he dont deserve to live in piece of mind. I hope where he's moved to next, the same happens.

BTW alladin, are you a parent?

Former Member

Oh so you welcome vigilantism and taking justice into one's hands?

Even after the laws of this country have determined a person have paid their price for a crime?

Shame time machines haven't been invented. Otherwise you could transport yourself to a time and place where such things were commonplace, and live happily ever after (until the lynch mob set their eyes on you, for a real or imaginary offence of course).

And no, I'm not a parent. Why? Why are you trying to suggest? And why should it matter? If I were a parent I would want sex offenders to be left alone. The tabloid-reading, placard-waving hoardes should try to think for 5 minutes which situation is worse: sex offenders' locations being known to the police, or sex offenders being driven underground by idiotic hate mobs and the police losing track of them.

Former Member

Didn't you just think "now there's a group of responsible parents" when you saw those people who brought their kids along to hurl abuse (and more) at the police van bringing Ian Huntley to his trial (before he'd even been convicted). If those kids end up fucked up, I'm pretty sure that a paedophile won't be the reason why.

Former Member

He's in police care, so he hasn't been "driven underground". That's more luck than judgement though.

I'm torn. Sitting 300 miles away I don't think that the paper should have named him and the vigilantes shouldn't have won. It's better to know where they are.

But if I knew that a murdering raping nonce had moved in next to my family then I'd drive him out too, and I can fully understand why the community does not want that cunt in their area. I wouldn't.

The solution, of course, would have been to give proper justice for what he did to that young boy- he should be in prison forever.

Former Member

It's just a case of people not having faith in the police. I do understand the concerns of the people, but if the police are doing their job correctly (and that may be a big if), then they should be able to protect all of the children without the community needing to know who he is. Do campaigns like this help the police do their job? I wouldn't reckon so myself.

Former Member

I'm With Stupid wrote:

It's just a case of people not having faith in the police.

Unless the police are monitoring 24/7 then they can't guarantee protection.

And when a convicted paedophile under supervision is given enough leeway to abduct a child from her bath, brutally and violently rape her, and then dump her naked in an alleyway in a snowstorm, I can't exactly blame communities for wanting to take things into their own hands.

The supervision meant that he was caught quickly, so it worked, but that isn't much consolation to the six-year-old girl who was almost killed by him.

Former Member

Kermit wrote:

I'm torn. Sitting 300 miles away I don't think that the paper should have named him and the vigilantes shouldn't have won. It's better to know where they are.

But if I knew that a murdering raping nonce had moved in next to my family then I'd drive him out too, and I can fully understand why the community does not want that cunt in their area. I wouldn't.

.

thats my fence sitting position exactly.

Former Member

Aladdin wrote:

Oh so you welcome vigilantism and taking justice into one's hands?

Even after the laws of this country have determined a person have paid their price for a crime?

Shame time machines haven't been invented. Otherwise you could transport yourself to a time and place where such things were commonplace, and live happily ever after (until the lynch mob set their eyes on you, for a real or imaginary offence of course).

And no, I'm not a parent. Why? Why are you trying to suggest? And why should it matter? If I were a parent I would want sex offenders to be left alone. The tabloid-reading, placard-waving hoardes should try to think for 5 minutes which situation is worse: sex offenders' locations being known to the police, or sex offenders being driven underground by idiotic hate mobs and the police losing track of them.

Once you become a parent you think differently about life. You tend to worry about your children and the environment your children are in. You wouldn't understand though.

If I was a parent I wouldn't want this scum bag that was part of a paedophile gang that killed a 14 year old boy living near my my children, where my children play.

There not idiotic hate mobs as you put it, there concerned parents concerned over the welfare of there children. If you was a parent and wernt protesting for this murdering scum bag to be moved, I think people would start talking about you.

Former Member

Kermit wrote:

He's in police care, so he hasn't been "driven underground". That's more luck than judgement though.

I'm torn. Sitting 300 miles away I don't think that the paper should have named him and the vigilantes shouldn't have won. It's better to know where they are.

But if I knew that a murdering raping nonce had moved in next to my family then I'd drive him out too, and I can fully understand why the community does not want that cunt in their area. I wouldn't.

The solution, of course, would have been to give proper justice for what he did to that young boy- he should be in prison forever.

But the guy did his time. Surely the whole English justice system is based on the premise that a convicted criminal can change? Granted some do and some don't but this guy hasn't offended in 9 years. Does that not suggest to you that he's going straight and has some sentiment of remorse over what he did? He has paid his due to society and thus has a right to pursue his life without harassment from these kind of vigilante cunts.

However, in this country, anyone who has been in prison is immediately tarred with the brush that they must be evil to the bone and it's only a matter of time before they'll be back inside. For a 'free' country, there is a fuck of a lot of retarded discrimination flying around the place where people are treated as second-class citizens. This is just another example of this.

The guy did his time. His sentence may have been a little lenient but that's not his fault. He hasn't reoffended in 9 years. Just leave the poor guy alone and let him get on with his life.

Former Member

HIT wrote:

Once you become a parent you think differently about life. You tend to worry about your children and the environment your children are in. You wouldn't understand though.

Is that why many parents don't agree with naming paedophiles and the vigilante action it promotes?

There not idiotic hate mobs as you put it

Apart from those who chase paediatricians or put bricks through the windows of the wrong man simply because he's single and a bit of an oddball...

there concerned parents concerned over the welfare of there children. If you was a parent and wernt protesting for this murdering scum bag to be moved, I think people would start talking about you.

What about a man who's got a record for sleeping with a 15 year girl? Would Graham Rix be a danger to local children? Should he be hounded out?

What about people with convictions for drug dealing? What about those who have been done for drink driving?

Where do you draw the line?

Former Member

Hang on a minute. HIT, are you a parent?

It's a very difficult one. But when push comes to shove there is nothing to gain by revealing the whereabouts of sex offenders, really, as they do have to live somewhere once they have served their time. It seems crazy to talk about behaving in a way that is "fair" to a paedophile but there is no other choice post-sentence. Unless you subscribe to that lovely old idea of shipping them all off to a desert island somewhere... and even then you know there'd be a rabid mob chartering a boat there post-haste.

Former Member

briggi wrote:

Hang on a minute. HIT, are you a parent?

It's a very difficult one. But when push comes to shove there is nothing to gain by revealing the whereabouts of sex offenders, really, as they do have to live somewhere once they have served their time. It seems crazy to talk about behaving in a way that is "fair" to a paedophile but there is no other choice post-sentence. Unless you subscribe to that lovely old idea of shipping them all off to a desert island somewhere... and even then you know there'd be a rabid mob chartering a boat there post-haste.

Bloody hell, we did that once before, and look what we ended up with - Australia. We can't take that risk again.

Former Member

I AM a parent and i agree with Kermit.
It's all very well saying leave them alone, that its best to know where they are BUT if they were living in your street by your children, it would be a different kettle of fish!

Former Member

Aladdin wrote:

Is that why many parents don't agree with naming paedophiles and the vigilante action it promotes?

Apart from those who chase paediatricians or put bricks through the windows of the wrong man simply because he's single and a bit of an oddball...

What about a man who's got a record for sleeping with a 15 year girl? Would Graham Rix be a danger to local children? Should he be hounded out?

What about people with convictions for drug dealing? What about those who have been done for drink driving?

Where do you draw the line?

Aladin go and have kids, then in 10 years time when your kids are playing outside with there mates and there a murdering paedophile living across the road, post back what you will think then.

Your absolutly out of order referring to parents as idiots because they dont want there children out playing where theres a convicted murdering nonce. Until you become a father you have no right passing judgement on concerned parents like this.

And for the record, a few years ago everyone signed a petition to tell the public where peodos live. Are the parents idiots for doing so and wanting to protect there children? A few months back a pedophile has been spotted down a primary school near me. Now you tell me when your a father, you arnt bothered if a peado is waiting outside your childs primary school.

Former Member

Tweety wrote:

I AM a parent and i agree with Kermit.
It's all very well saying leave them alone, that its best to know where they are BUT if they were living in your street by your children, it would be a different kettle of fish!

Bloody NIMBY!

Former Member

briggi wrote:

Hang on a minute. HIT, are you a parent?

It's a very difficult one. But when push comes to shove there is nothing to gain by revealing the whereabouts of sex offenders, really, as they do have to live somewhere once they have served their time. It seems crazy to talk about behaving in a way that is "fair" to a paedophile but there is no other choice post-sentence. Unless you subscribe to that lovely old idea of shipping them all off to a desert island somewhere... and even then you know there'd be a rabid mob chartering a boat there post-haste.

If you had read my post, you would have seen I wenrt.

Having a murdering paedohile is in a completely different ball game from having just a peodo.

Its a well you feeling sorry for them saying "theres no choice post sentence", but the parents of that murdered boy are serving there own life sentence having lost there son.

And yes, I would love to see them shipped off somewhere then dumped.

Former Member

HIT wrote:

Aladin go and have kids, then in 10 years time when your kids are playing outside with there mates and there a murdering paedophile living across the road, post back what you will think then.

And I am telling you I know parents who don't agree with Sarah's Law and don't want sex offenders being named and hounded out.

Your absolutly out of order referring to parents as idiots because they dont want there children out playing where theres a convicted murdering nonce. Until you become a father you have no right passing judgement on concerned parents like this.

The ones I'm calling idiots are those who create hate mobs and more often than not end up chasing the wrong man.

And yes, sure as fuck I am able to judge others whether I'm a parent or not. The entire justice system of this country is based on the principle that once a prisoner serves his time he is entitled to rejoin society. There is no place for hate mobs and vigilante 'justice' in this country. Not regarding sex offenders, not regarding anyone.

And for the record, a few years ago everyone signed a petition to tell the public where peodos live. Are the parents idiots for doing so and wanting to protect there children? A few months back a pedophile has been spotted down a primary school near me. Now you tell me when your a father, you arnt bothered if a peado is waiting outside your childs primary school.

Could you kindly explain how knowing where sex offenders live is going to help you or anyone else stop them from hanging around a school?

This is what you are failing to grasp. IT DOESN'T MAKE ANY DIFFERENCE IF A LOCAL HATE MOB DRIVES ALL THE PAEDOS OUT OF THEIR HOMES IN AN AREA. NOTHING CAN STOP THEM FROM VISITING THE SAID AREA IF THEY WISH. YOU GAIN ABSOLUTELY NOTHING FROM DRIVING PAEDOPHILES UNDERGROUND. YOU ACTUALLY MAKE THINGS WORSE.

Former Member

I don't feel sorry for them, I'm not sure why you think that as it is not what I said at all! You are obviously not to know this, but as a child I was actually the victim of a paedophile - so I do obviously feel VERY strongly indeed about the sentencing and punishment of such people. I would guess there is nary a person - on this board or in this world - who doesn't, to be honest.

However, I don't think we can continue to deal out our own unique brand of punishment and "justice" once someone has been dealt with by the judicial system (even if it is not considered by all to have been real justice). Just what is at the bottom of that slippery slope?

Former Member

Aladdin wrote:

Bloody NIMBY!

Too right!
Personally i think that those kind of people sholdn't be let out of prison/a secure unit. As they clearly have something wrong with thier head.

Former Member

Aladdin wrote:

And I am telling you I know parents who don't agree with Sarah's Law and don't want sex offenders being named and hounded out.

Well I know plenty of people that agree (parents and non parents). I wonder if they would think differently to having a murdering peodo living in there area.

The ones I'm calling idiots are those who create hate mobs and more often than not end up chasing the wrong man.

You mean the concerned parents that dont want there children living near a murdering peodo?

And yes, sure as fuck I am able to judge others whether I'm a parent or not. The entire justice system of this country is based on the principle that once a prisoner serves his time he is entitled to rejoin society. There is no place for hate mobs and vigilante 'justice' in this country. Not regarding sex offenders, not regarding anyone.

Again you dont see it through parents eyes.

Could you kindly explain how knowing where sex offenders live is going to help you or anyone else stop them from hanging around a school?

This is what you are failing to grasp. IT DOESN'T MAKE ANY DIFFERENCE IF A LOCAL HATE MOB DRIVES ALL THE PAEDOS OUT OF THEIR HOMES IN AN AREA. NOTHING CAN STOP THEM FROM VISITING THE SAID AREA IF THEY WISH. YOU GAIN ABSOLUTELY NOTHING FROM DRIVING PAEDOPHILES UNDERGROUND. YOU ACTUALLY MAKE THINGS WORSE.

Because as peodos arnt allowed to go near schools, this one has gone near a school, so now he is a possible threat so hopefully concerned parents for there children can protest with flamed torches outside his house.

Former Member

HIT wrote:

You mean the concerned parents that dont want there children living near a murdering peodo?

That's irrelevant. It's how they deal with it that's the issue. Are you saying that parents who don't agree do want paedos to attack their kids? No-one wants terrorists to plant another bomb, but that doesn't mean that it's the right answer to go bombing the middle east. It's their solution that is idiotic, not their fears.

Former Member

I'm With Stupid wrote:

That's irrelevant. It's how they deal with it that's the issue. Are you saying that parents who don't agree do want paedos to attack their kids? No-one wants terrorists to plant another bomb, but that doesn't mean that it's the right answer to go bombing the middle east. It's their solution that is idiotic, not their fears.

No not at all. I think its relevant that parents are furious of having a murdering nonce near there children. If I was in them parents shoes, I for one would like to see him gone so hes not near my children. You cant call a parent an idiot for fearing for there children. What you seem to forget is he has murdered a child.

Former Member

HIT wrote:

What you seem to forget is he has murdered a child.

Yes but he has done his time, repaid his debt to society and has not offended in 9 years. There is such a thing as remorse and regret; factors on which the English judicial system is founded.

Just because he murdered a child 20 years ago doesn't necessarily mean that he'll do it again.

Remember that hate fuels hate.

Former Member

HIT wrote:

No not at all. I think its relevant that parents are furious of having a murdering nonce near there children. If I was in them parents shoes, I for one would like to see him gone so hes not near my children. You cant call a parent an idiot for fearing for there children. What you seem to forget is he has murdered a child.

I didn't call anyone an idiot for fearing for their children. I called their proposed solution of hounding him out and publicly shaming him to be idiotic. And the constant rhetoric that he has murdered a child, or "look at it from the parents point of view" doesn't make your proposed solution any more valid.

Former Member

I'm With Stupid wrote:

I didn't call anyone an idiot for fearing for their children. I called their proposed solution of hounding him out and publicly shaming him to be idiotic. And the constant rhetoric that he has murdered a child, or "look at it from the parents point of view" doesn't make your proposed solution any more valid.

Well yes, because again if you was a parent you would see it from there eyes. At the end of the day what these parents done were out of the best interest of there children.

Former Member

FFS you keep saying the same thing! You don't speak for every parent, anyway, even if you may well speak for the majority.

Former Member

briggi wrote:

FFS you keep saying the same thing! You don't speak for every parent, anyway, even if you may well speak for the majority.

FFS what? I keep saying the same thing because its true. Those parents done what they fault was relevant for the safety of there children. And I will keep saying that.

Former Member

HIT wrote:

Well yes, because again if you was a parent you would see it from there eyes. At the end of the day what these parents done were out of the best interest of there children.

Yes, and I'm saying that it was a stupid solution. So argue your point. Tell us how the end result of such actions is in the best interest of their children. The Iraq war could very well have been carried out with the best interests of the Iraqi people, but that doesn't mean that the result actually is in the best interests of them.

Former Member

It's worth remembering that Jason Swift was a rent boy. He was hardly an 'innocent' 14 year old snatched off the street while playing football. As awful as his death was, it was never proved to be murder but was manslaughter - where drugs and sex sessions went terribly wrong.

Former Member

If the government werent running the probation service into the ground then we could keep better track of ex-offenders.

That and treating sexual offences against children as a mental health issue would mean we could keep them locked up until they were deemed safe, not just for a set period.