Give Police 24hr Notice of Sex.

Was he cleared because he'd accept the condition though?

Also, he should just find "men" instead, problem solved.

Nevermind, this is ridiculous ****.

BBC said:
Sexual risk orders were introduced in England and Wales in March last year and can be applied to any individual who the police believe poses a risk of sexual harm, even if they have never been convicted of a crime.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
doofer said:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-york-north-yorkshire-35385227

This just beggars belief that a Court could impose this on someone who has been Cleared of an Offence. Let alone the Privacy implications regarding divulgement of Third Party Details to the Police, why would any woman want her own personal details handed over to the Police, what exactly have they done? Ridiculous.
Click to expand...

Just saw this also, i did not think something like that could happen, like you say, privacy etc.
 
The fact that the order was extended by 4 months by a magistrate really does indicate that there is much more to this story than reported.
 
how does the office Christmas party work - does he just put in a request to HR for the details of every female below the age of 35 because he fully intends to take one of them back yet being the Christmas party it is a bit of a lottery
 
StriderX said:
Was he cleared because he'd accept the condition though?

Also, he should just find "men" instead, problem solved.

Nevermind, this is ridiculous ****.
Click to expand...

BBC said:
Sexual risk orders were introduced in England and Wales in March last year and can be applied to any individual who the police believe poses a risk of sexual harm, even if they have never been convicted of a crime.
Click to expand...

We are going into the the realm of 'Pre-Meditated Thought Crime' by the looks of it. Scary days.
 
Arazi said:
Yes there has got to be, something doesn't add up.
Click to expand...

More than likely guilty but couldn't be proved beyond reasonable doubt so gave him the best slap on the wrist they could. Still find it a rather odd concept though unless prosecution for rape if awful in this country so that's why this was introduced although does look like the identity is kept confidential at least.
 
Burnsy2023 said:
The fact that the order was extended by 4 months by a magistrate really does indicate that there is much more to this story than reported.
Click to expand...

Without a doubt but it's still a horrendous precedent. Subject to legal restrictions when you're not guilty of a crime?
 
Burnsy2023 said:
The fact that the order was extended by 4 months by a magistrate really does indicate that there is much more to this story than reported.
Click to expand...

Although this probably is the case, it's the same **** as some of the terrorist legislation, should be thrown out. Unless found guilty stat should have no rights to ask you to do anything like this.
 
Saying that actually, how many times have we seen someone get off with something on a technicality? If this gives an option to apply a modicum of justice to them then perhaps it's not a bad thing.
Man this one has me confused.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom