A man has been charged with sexually assaulting a 10-week-old baby girl.

ntg said:
Do you remember ANYONE from the previous 'named and shamed' criminals? Aside from the high profile cases that were in the media spotlight for weeks.

NO?

Didn't think so..
Click to expand...

He wants a witch-hunt.

Probably reads The Mirror.
 
mehuk said:
Waiting for the tree hugging OCUK brigade to come in and blame the child for this.

Shouldn't have been born without clothes on or something will be their battle cry.
Click to expand...

Don't be ridiculous :rolleyes:

The majority of people however that are able to commit crimes like this are clearly not wired up correct and their brains do not function like a normal persons!
They are actually SICK, I also feel sorry for them as they didn't ask to be born that way!
If thinking this way instead of the typical Sun/Daily Fail 'pedo scum, kill the evil pedo' makes me a tree-huger then so be it!
 
Nightglow said:
images
Click to expand...

+1

He'll do prison time, come out within a few years and then abuse more children.
 
It is messed up, i recently received a CRB for someone who I offered a job to. Not only did she lie on her application form, lied when we asked if she knew a reason why we had to wait on a full CRB. Received the CRB today, drunken disorderly, assualt and battery, stealling a car, no insurance and to top it off kicking and hitting her own 5 year old son in the head. Needless to say I withdrew the offer of employment and the people we look after will be safe from scum like her.
 
Last edited:
wnb said:
It is messed up, i recently received a CRB for someone who I offered a job to. Not only did she lie on her application form, lied when we asked if she new a reason why we had to wait on a full CRB. Received the CRB today, drunken disorderly, assualt and battery, stealling a car, no insurance and to top it off kicking and hitting her own 5 year old son in the head. Needless to say I withdrew the offer of employment and the people we look after will be safe from scum like her.
Click to expand...

Quite the rap sheet, did you think there was anything dodgy about her when you interviewed her?
 
jfp said:
Quite the rap sheet, did you think there was anything dodgy about her when you interviewed her?
Click to expand...

She interviewed well, we had three good references and we waited 10 weeks on the CRB. Normally we get an email saying if the ISA is clear but istead of the ISA been ok it said to wait on the full CRB. I then called her back and asked her again if she had a criminal record and she said no.
 
wnb said:
She interviewed well, we had three good references and we waited 10 weeks on the CRB. Normally we get an email saying if the ISA is clear but istead of the ISA been ok it said to wait on the full CRB. I then called her back and asked her again if she had a criminal record and she said no.
Click to expand...

And this is why I think people who serve their time in prison should have their record wiped. If they have served their time, it is meant to show they are rehabilitated. By forcing them to declare it, people will never employ them and its a complete circle. It basically says if you do something bad you're screwed even if you have changed. No wonder there are so many repeat offenders with your attitude.
 
Totality said:
And this is why I think people who serve their time in prison should have their record wiped. If they have served their time, it is meant to show they are rehabilitated. By forcing them to declare it, people will never employ them and its a complete circle. It basically says if you do something bad you're screwed even if you have changed. No wonder there are so many repeat offenders with your attitude.
Click to expand...

YES.

Rehabilitation is more important than the time spent in jail, this is why I believe in a maximum jail sentence.
 
Why would they wipe someone's record after they have been in jail??? So a sex offender can come back out and apply to work in nurseries because he has a clean record??

The way criminal records are handled now has all changed because of MOPI. Ian Huntley was the one that sparked it all off, he had been arrested (but not charged) with burglary, sex with a minor (on two separate occasions he was arrested for this), as well as numerous other offences and he still managed to get a job working in a school environment.

So I can't really see anything WORSE than people have their records wiped....what about sex offenders with Sexual Offenders Prevention Orders (SOPO)?? Are they to be gotten rid of as well so we can let all the kiddy fiddlers of the world do whatever they want??
 
Smigly said:
The way criminal records are handled now has all changed because of MOPI. Ian Huntley was the one that sparked it all off, he had been arrested (but not charged) with burglary, sex with a minor (on two separate occasions he was arrested for this), as well as numerous other offences and he still managed to get a job working in a school environment.
Click to expand...

Slightly different. If someone is not convicted of an offence then they have no record to be wiped.

There are other measures in place which show if someone has had allegations against them however I am on the fence with these. Sure, in the case of Huntley it may have prevented him from getting a job as a school janitor but what about malicious or unfounded allegations, both of which the police are obliged to investigate and report on? Should these people have their prospective careers ruined by having "Joe Bloggs was investigated for child abuse" on some system even if it is unfounded?

The problem with the human race is, in the case of sexual crimes, they believe there to be "no smoke without fire" which is not always true....
 
Richie said:
Slightly different. If someone is not convicted of an offence then they have no record to be wiped.

There are other measures in place which show if someone has had allegations against them however I am on the fence with these. Sure, in the case of Huntley it may have prevented him from getting a job as a school janitor but what about malicious or unfounded allegations, both of which the police are obliged to investigate and report on? Should these people have their prospective careers ruined by having "Joe Bloggs was investigated for child abuse" on some system even if it is unfounded?

The problem with the human race is, in the case of sexual crimes, they believe there to be "no smoke without fire" which is not always true....
Click to expand...


But that's what the PND is there for and force intelligence systems. They can't just go off one thing where it was an investigation, and the likelihood is that whichever police force investigated it would record that, and they clearly won't have found anything so therefore didn't arrest him and may possibly record it as malicious. The PND, as far as I'm aware, only shares intelligence on things people have physically been arrested for. I'm not 100% sure on that one though.

But I can see the point, mistakes happen and it can have a massive impact on people's lives. Like blokes who get accused of rape and then it comes out 10 years down the line they didn't do it - that's messed your life up for good really. I think in those cases your record does get wiped.
 
Totality said:
And this is why I think people who serve their time in prison should have their record wiped. If they have served their time, it is meant to show they are rehabilitated. By forcing them to declare it, people will never employ them and its a complete circle. It basically says if you do something bad you're screwed even if you have changed. No wonder there are so many repeat offenders with your attitude.
Click to expand...


If an offense can justify a person being removed from the public for the public's safety then that has to be permanently recorded for future reference.
I think the template we have for our justice system is a very good one, the way it is interpreted and delivered is poor at times.

The one area i think there is room to move on is the the offenses of minors up to the age of 16, single offenses committed that do not incur a custodial sentence can be expunged when your 21, if you commit any more offenses on top of your first you loose any possibility of your record being expunged.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom