Clare's law

amigafan2003 said:
No, not at all.

All a served sentence shows is that a person has served the specified sentence for the crime they were convicted of. Whether they are still a danger to the public is not a factor taken into account
Click to expand...

Kind of the point I was trying to bring across ironically but failed at. So we have a justice system knowingly letting dangerous people out into public whilst at the same time informing people that potentially safe people have a criminal background.
 
Hyburnate said:
Can you make a Freedom of Information request to the NHS and get your records and send them to me, I might bump into you in the future, best to be safe! It's not a good idea :rolleyes: here's hoping the leaving the EU flops (which it wont) and they step in and shake the protection of privacy in the Home Secretary's face.
Click to expand...

I don't think personal information is available under the freedom of information act...
 
Dis86 said:
So,

After a trial in limited areas of England and Wales this law has been rolled out to cover the whole of England and Wales.

For those who don't know anything about it its official title is 'The Domestic Abuse Disclosure Scheme'.
It basically gives anyone the right to ask whether an individual in a close relationship with someone else has a history of domestic abuse.

Now on the face of it that sounds like a reasonable idea but...I can see some problems.

The first is that the very fact this law is necessary shows that the justice system in this country is flawed. If there is a need to disclose that someone is a potentially violent individual stemming from a background of violence then why by the sweet and holy jebus are they out in society?! If you have to warn people about them then they aren't ******* safe to have out in public!

The second leads on from this, that according to our justice system if they are out in public they are deemed to be safe and reformed etc. So then what right does anyone have to go dragging up their history? They have served their time/punishment and are free. Should everyone be judged on their past mistakes? In which case why is it only for domestic violence that they're judged?
We're not informed if someone's partner is a rapist. Or our accountant is a convicted fraudster. Hell, last time I checked we in this country go to some lengths just to try to protect some criminals identity!
This could end up having negative repercussions on someone's whole life. This is someone, I repeat, that has served their time already.

Third, person A is in a relationship with person B. Person C puts a request in and finds out person B was previously abusive. Person C tells person A or, person A is informed themselves by the police. Person A decides person C shouldn't have stuck their nose in and ends up growing closer to B. Perhaps moving in with, or away with B. Person A then becomes trapped by B.

What are all you lovely people thinking about this law?
Click to expand...

I don't have a problem with it for these reasons tbh. Yes you're right that our justice system is broken but at least case the establishment is acknowledging that and putting an elastoplast on it.

One problem I did wonder about though is what happens if there's a case of mistaken identity - wonder if anyone will be able to get recourse. I doubt it.
 
It sounds essentially like a blacklist that is only for men and it is blacklist for men who are abusive to women when in a relationship. That sounds very sexist to me, they should create a list for women who have gone psycho on their boy friends and later on their husbands who have had half of their possessions and their children taken from them and are ordered to pay the woman a salary. Then men could know if a women had previously gone psycho in a relationship before having children with them, leading to less broken families. We could also have a list of abusive girl friends psychological and physical, those crazy controlling women. They deserve a list as well?

It would be ok if they only blacklisted real abuse cases but instead it will be run by feminists who think that even raising your hand to a woman is considered abuse and enough to get on to the list.
 
According to radio 4, police won't just blanket respond to all requests. They said they would review it case by case. Sounds like a load more paperwork for the fuzz.
 
Burnsy2023 said:
I'll stop you right there. The scheme is the same for both men and women and available to both.
Click to expand...

ahh good!


Im kinda swinging more towards agreeing with this law really.

Based on my father being a violent person which caused my mum great misery until she finally left him, I would not want another woman to go through what he put my mum and the rest of the family through.
 
Burnsy2023 said:
Let's also remember that convictions may come up on checks that aren't spent ;) And it's not just convictions that come up either. It's notoriously difficult to get prosecutions for DV which is why the Police spend so much time trying.
Click to expand...

Do you mean not being able to find enough evidence to have any chance regardless of how good the prosecution legal team is or do you mean the legal budget of the prosecution is so low that justice can only be afforded when cases are ironclad i.e. CPS won't prosecute if it isn't 80% chance of winning?
 
Remember this also brings up an y accusations/allegations that were not charged/no evidence etc

so basically this is Carte blanche for a woman to make a false allegation against you (possibly with out you ever knowing if the police believe there's not enough evidence to investigate/the relationship has ended) and that forever more any of your future partners could check and find that supposedly you abused a past partner.

and you'd have no way of ever removing this from your record, as you can never prove it false as you'll never stand trial for it.
 
Tefal said:
Remember this also brings up an y accusations/allegations that were not charged/no evidence etc

so basically this is Carte blanche for a woman to make a false allegation against you (possibly with out you ever knowing if the police believe there's not enough evidence to investigate/the relationship has ended) and that forever more any of your future partners could check and find that supposedly you abused a past partner.

and you'd have no way of ever removing this from your record, as you can never prove it false as you'll never stand trial for it.
Click to expand...

In that case, every man in Britain will recieve a strike against his name and soon it will become a total waste of time.
 
Burnsy2023 said:
I'll stop you right there. The scheme is the same for both men and women and available to both.
Click to expand...
Shhhh!, don't let that get in the way of groen & his hatred for those all seeing & all powerful communist feminist fascists! (which exist in his head alone).
 
Tefal said:
Remember this also brings up an y accusations/allegations that were not charged/no evidence etc

so basically this is Carte blanche for a woman to make a false allegation against you (possibly with out you ever knowing if the police believe there's not enough evidence to investigate/the relationship has ended) and that forever more any of your future partners could check and find that supposedly you abused a past partner.

and you'd have no way of ever removing this from your record, as you can never prove it false as you'll never stand trial for it.
Click to expand...

It's cool, you just have to make it to age 100 and your record will be weeded.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom