If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨
Options
Essential support for under 25s
Essential support for under 25s
Take a look around and enjoy reading the discussions. If you'd like to join in, it's really easy to register and then you'll be able to post. If you'd like to learn what this place is all about, head here.
Comments
I also completely agree that it does more harm than good- whilst this time the offender is safely in police protection, that was through luck not judgement, and next time he may simply abscond in the night and be free to offend again far from police supervision.
I can't bring myself to condemn the people who are angry at finding out this piece of filth is living in their town, walking with their children, and I can fully understand why they are angry and why they want that scumbag driven out of town. I would be the same, I wouldn't want a killer paedo anywhere near my house and my family.
To say that they are doing the "best thing" is stupid as it undermines and destroys the whole supervision programme, but it is an understandable reaction.
The blame lies with the newspaper for stoking this up simply for sales- if anyone thinks that the newspaper cares about the people of that town they are fucking idiots. The reaction of the people was entirely justified and entirely predictable, but the newspaper should have known better and the editor should be brought before the court for harrassment and conspiracy to cause public disorder.
No, I mean those who are not only concerned but create mobs that serve no good purpose whatsoever.
I don't need to. Being a parent doesn't give anyone special authority to take the law in their own hands.
I'll ask you again. How can mob prevent a paedo from hanging outside a school?
How can a mob prevent a paedo from a different area drop by at any time and try to attack a child?
They can't, and you know it.
That's why there is absolutely no point whatsoever in making their address public domain.
I can understand not wanting a paedophile living next door for sure. Its hardly your ideal neighbour, but tbh, I wouldnt know if my next door neighbour was one or not, because hes never gonna babysit my kids, and hes not a threat at the school gates because the school has measures to prevent unauthroised people getting in. He also wouldnt be a threat for my children playing outside, because while theyre young, they should be supervised, and they should also know not to talk to strangers.
Sarahs law doesnt make it any safer for anyone, because the VAST VAST majority of paedophilic offences happen by family members and by people whove never been caught.
Well that makes it okay then. Jason Swift was 14 years old. One of his torturers was 72 years old. The very fact that all of the perpetrators of such a heinous crime are not in jail is scandalous.
The paedophile scum that abused Swift and participated in the session in which he was strangled to death should be behind bars. Anything less than a maximum security jail cell is unacceptable and puts innocent children at unnecessary risk. Driving paedophiles underground would be a bad thing but no responsible parent would feel comfortable living near scum like Robert Oliver. For as long as our government allows dangerous paedophiles who have committed monstrous crimes to walk the streets by not ensuring they're jailed for life the NOTW are justified in their actions.
His previous actions show that he is a menace to society, IMHO.
Do you have any evidence to suggest that he will not re-offend?
No one can say with any certainty that he will not take part in another paedophilic sex session with a 14 year old.
In the absence of overwhelming evidence to suggest that they are completely rehabilitated paedophiles who have attacked children should never be released. (I feel the same way about rapists too).
Therefore, perhaps we should simply give all people who commit crimes life without parole. At the end of the day you never know...
I have no problems with this man being hounded out, I hope the rest of his life is one long perpetual misery. With a bit of luck he might even do the decent thing and kill himself.
The paper should not have named and shamed him for public safety reasons, but as for his personal safety, well, he lost the right to that when he killed a teenage boy.
Tbh I would jail serial burglars for life, if they consistently re-offend they should be prevented from inflicting more misery. If you've seen first hand an elderly person trying to pick up the pieces after a burglar has invaded their home, rifled through their possessions and nicked a few things of enormous sentimental value you'd agree.
Of course though paedophilia and rape are different; the suffering for the victim and the infringement of their person make it an extremely serious crime and those who have shown themselves to be capable of it should be put in a position where they cannot re-offend. (i.e. in solitary confinement in a maximum security prison).
Until that happens, if a court of law has decided a man has served his time and can rejoin society, he should not be hounded by anyone else.
I wonder how many of those outraged and concerned parents have thought of starting a campaign to demand to know where convicted drunk drivers live... seeing as children are infinitely more at risk of being run down by a pissed driver than they are of being killed by a paedo.
Though that is perhaps asking them too think too deeply about things. Far easier to reach for the pitchfork and wave placards saying 'don't house them- hang them'. It sure makes their kids a lot safer...
The blame is with the newspaper that has done this simply to boost sales. The consideration of the people of that town was not involved in the decision to print, and the newspaper should be done for inciting this reaction.
Exactly, tbh. the problem with what the vigilantes did was to just hound him out to go and live somewhere else, when really they should have beaten the fucker to death.
Feel the sarcasm
I wouldn't shed a tear if someone did do that, mind.
Im becoming one of those shitty mothers maybe that cant grasp why we shouldnt do this?
Or maybe I can grasp why theyd do it, and thats why we shouldnt be able to just find out the name and crime of every wrongun. Too tempting to just go and weed them out.
I dont really believe that anyone can adequately do their time for something like that. A complete psychotic depraved abuser/killer - its not as if all of a sudden will see the error of his ways when previously didnt know it was wrong.
I dont believe all paedophiles are evil. I believe some of them try really hard to control their urges and some of them feel a great deal of guilt and remorse, but there are a fair few that dont, and the fact that we KNOW this, and they STILL get let out of prison because of lenient sentancing laws is just beyond belief. He didnt just rape the kids, he killed them too. How much worse need it get for him to get life?
People should understand the complexity of this issue tbh
I don't condemn the people for hounding him out, and anyone who does condemn them doesn't get it, I don't think. I'd beat the fucker to death, mental illness or not.
Im sure Kermit realises that if he did put those fantasies into action he would be dealt with by the law too, same as I would.
The fact you find it okay that he died is really sick ... :yeees:
The death was never 'okay then'. Did I say otherwise? Bear in mind this boy was not like the Soham girls - if you going to prostitute yourself, you are inclined to run into people like this.
Which makes you just as bad (if not, then nearly) as him.
Seriously?
Are you nuts?
Nothing has been gained by this mob nor by the NOTW. It is not right for mob rule, as paediatricians will tell you.
And HIT, I am a parent. I'd have no problem living next door to this man, in fact I don't know who lives in my street or what crimes they are capable of which is why I am always looking out for my children, it's about being vigilant not being a vigilante.