Paedophile awarded $25,000

[Streetwise]

No discrimination here just a time and a place,

[Grahameeboy]

Bloody long way to go to hug that innit?

Yep...planted in 1996........I took a group of school kids with a mate to Kenya to give money and books etc to schools out there and just do projects etc....and climb Mt Killy.........there were 14 of us and we each had a tree planted in our name.......intend to go back one day.........and no it was not a Religious thing Mr OnePack......

[Grahameeboy]

No discrimination here just a time and a place,

......but isn't time and place constant.............

[MisterD]

......but isn't time and place constant.............

Not according to this fella called Einstein.

[Grahameeboy]

Not according to this fella called Einstein.

smart ..........................

[Lias]

OK, I see it's redneck time again. I just bet any of you would be able to castrate him personally, or look in his eyes and pull the trigger.

Call me a redneck all you like, put me in a room with a gun and ANY convicted pedophile, even one with a low IQ and I will happily look in there eyes and pull the trigger.

I already have one conviction for some baseball bat re-education, I have NO qualms about using violence to reducate these filthy sick fuckers. I have seen first hand the long term effects of sexual abuse on people I give a fuck about, and I have no mercy at all for pedophiles.

[Flatcap]

OK, I see it's redneck time again. I just bet any of you would be able to castrate him personally, or look in his eyes and pull the trigger.

Don't be silly Lou - thats why we employ corrections people. Why have a dog and bark yourself?

[Patrick]

Of course, you're right. How could you not be, having been the recipient of the font of all knowledge at Police College for a few months.
I'll even pay for the round, if you shoot him.

Not even close...try front line for 21 years... a good learning curve methinks...

[Lou Girardin]

I already have one conviction for some baseball bat re-education, I have NO qualms about using violence to reducate these filthy sick fuckers..

And the recipient of this re-education was armed with, a gun? a knife? a bat too?
Surely you wouldn't beat an unarmed person with a bat.
Would you?

[Streetwise]

too right. If they has touched my kids i would,

[Phurrball]

Sorry. Disagree on several counts.

And quite cogently too. A long and thoughtful post Ixion.

Firstly, the PDF got the 25K . So, clearly the RESULT was to reward him.

Yes I agree, I don't like the thought of this person being enriched - you make a valid point, but I still think it's a policy case (I say this with the caveat that I haven't read the decision) The judge can't make an order to return the lost privacy.

(snip)
My opinion would be different if someone were to dredge up stale history - if the man had been living quietly without complaint for years, and someone suddenly discovered his past and publicised it. But that was not the case here. The police released the informatioon immediately after his release from prison. I think they were right to do so.

And there is no question of the police breaching the privacy of "any person". It was not "any person", it was a convicted criminal. I have no problems with the police breaching the privacy of convicted criminals. That is not the same thing as "any person". Not everyone is a convicted criminal (for simplicity let's take it that by "criminal" I mean serious crime - what we used to call felony) .

Quite. But where is the line? Police are not the judiciary, and nor should they be - that is the point I think. If the police wanted to disclose our charming gent's location, I sure there was due process they could have followed to do it within the law. The idea that this wrong by the police against an individual should be permitted just because of the criminal's background is worrying. I wouldn't like to see it affirmed or extended (even though this disclosure may have been in the public interest)There is law on protected disclosures - the judge in question obviously didn't see this as fitting the test.

The right to privacy of the lowest scum is indeed worth protecting. Except where their right to privacy conflicts with the right of the public to know about a peril in their midst.
(snip)

Ahh, our friend the balancing test. I quite agree - this kind of quid pro quo permeates throughout our rights and obligations in many fields. X is fine so long as it does not impinge on Y. I'd be disapppointed if the judge in the case in point did not carry out this test in reaching their conclusion.

Would you be happy in this scenario, if your aged parents put their life's savings in the criminals new investment company? Would you not think that they were entitled to know that their new investment advisor was a convicted fraudster?

Of course I wouldn't be a happy camper, my feelings would cloud any shred of objectivity I may possess. That's why the judge/jury do not have a vested interest in either side of a case - and why the police should not be making decisions to release details that they know they have no cause to lawfully.

No, I don't like the idea of this fellow out and about - but it is a fact we have to live with when the time is served. I don't like our 'PDF' being handed 25K on a plate - but I understand the decision - I like the idea of the police acting as arbiters in what private information to release even less.

[Wolf]

We certainly have a mix of views here.

I disagree with the "he's done his time, he may have rehabilitated" view - most psychs I've read articles/books by deem paedophiles to be recidivistic - they get worse, not better.

All paedophiles should be imprisonned for life - and no pampered "KF wing" where they're safe from the other inmates, either. Our society deserves to be protected from the likes of them. The judges and the lawyers who let KFs out into the community are co-offenders!

The lawyer and the judge that gave that KF 25K are also co-offenders.

The bastards should all (KFs, their lawyers and the judges that dish out the pissy little sentences) serve life imprisonment doing hard labour, the proceeds of their employment to go to the families that were harmed by the monsters.

[Lou Girardin]

It's interesting the revulsion that paedophiles evoke. I think they beyond the pale too. But I think some form of murderers are far worse. Like the psychotic scum that throw boulders off bridges, or gang up on one person yelling "hit him till he dies" and do so.
Why don't we see warnings being posted around neighbourhoods when they're released?

[Motu]

Because they are welcomed back into their community with open arms,got a real patch now man,not just the prospect patch.

[Ixion]

It's interesting the revulsion that paedophiles evoke. I think they beyond the pale too. But I think some form of murderers are far worse. Like the psychotic scum that throw boulders off bridges, or gang up on one person yelling "hit him till he dies" and do so.
Why don't we see warnings being posted around neighbourhoods when they're released?

Well, in some cases this has happened. But the probable reason it is more common with paedophiles is that the boulder throwers/bashers are usually fairly easy to spot as unpleasant people. They provide their own warning. Whereas it is the nature of paedophiles that they are usually apparently very pleasnt and harmless people. they would not succeed were they not. So people will not be on their guard as they would be with Billy the Basher.

'Tis the same with fraudsters - they too must be apparently smooth nice people .

Though I do agree that paedophiles have taken the place of witches , Jews or communists as the villain against whom all hands are raised. I imagine the psycology of paedophile hunting is much the same as witch hunting.