Vigilante justice - ex football coach

Greebo said:
I'm not saying forget them. Try the person and sentence them. But you can't then say that person isn't reformed and needs locking up for life (although in the case of murder just one can get you life anyway) when all their crimes are historical and before they were convicted for the the first crime.

Or are you saying that every person who commits more than one crime means that's it, jailed for life and no early release?

So a burglar who has burgled 20 houses gets life too? After he hasn't reformed after his fir burglar.y and kept doing and clearly he will never change.:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

I thought we were on about paedo's and murderers - most definitely lock them away for life on the first crime.
With burglars just keep increasing their sentence which they probably do anyway but extend the sentences.
 
If hes been convicted presumably around the same time for these new allegations, why didnt these people come forward 8-18 years ago?

Regardless, why they had to air this on public news rather than just let the police deal with it is beyond me, any case that hasnt even begun yet and the "evidence" is broadcast to the public should be instantly thrown out.
 
Last edited:
SexyGreyFox said:
I thought we were on about paedo's and murderers - most definitely lock them away for life on the first crime.
With burglars just keep increasing their sentence which they probably do anyway but extend the sentences.
Click to expand...

Well luckily we dont and havent had a government who believes the same as you.

Any other crimes you want adding to the "if found guilty, locked away for life" group?

What about rape?
Wife beating?
 
StriderX said:
If hes been convicted presumably around the same time for these new allegations, why didnt these people come forward 8-18 years ago?

Regardless, why they had to air this on public news rather than just let the police deal with it is beyond me, any case that hasnt even begun yet and the "evidence" is broadcast to the public should be instantly thrown out.
Click to expand...

That sort of what gets me. The chances that he will be successfully prosecuted for these crimes is next to nil.

Perhaps though they are coming forward to bring light to the issue and encourage other victims of other yet uncaught pedos to come forward and report the crimes?
 
I believe they're mostly coming forward as a form of catharsis, and as a way of helping others who have suffered the same abuse and the long term effects of such. Additionally, raising awareness of the issues, and perhaps also to give strength to those who might currently be suffering at the hands of others both within, and outside of football/sport.

I would actually suspect that prosecutions for the perpetrator are lower down the list of their reasons. It's quite possible that some of these guys' abuses are already among the crimes for which Bennell served time.
 
SexyGreyFox said:
I thought we were on about paedo's and murderers - most definitely lock them away for life on the first crime.
With burglars just keep increasing their sentence which they probably do anyway but extend the sentences.
Click to expand...

I thought you were all about the death penalty these days, now that you're an old, bitter and angry elderly adult whose maturity has changed his opinion?
 
Greebo said:
No he should stand trial but it doesnt mean in your case, its "oh he must have done it, lets go round and kill him"
Click to expand...

It certainly doesn't mean "let's go round and kill him", but that's not what I'm arguing.

Lots of misguided souls in the thread getting hot under the collar about this poor convicted child rapist being tarred 'in the media' for crimes he's [possibly] not been convicted of.

Some of these guys coming forward will have been victims of the crimes he was tried for, and admitted his guilt of - Andy Woodward was, for example. Some won't have revealed the abuse to police at the time, so their cases won't have been tried in court. Hard to understand people giving the benefit of the doubt to the convicted multiple child rapist over guys claiming to be victims, though.
 
cheesyboy said:
It certainly doesn't mean "let's go round and kill him", but that's not what I'm arguing.

Lots of misguided souls in the thread getting hot under the collar about this poor convicted child rapist being tarred 'in the media' for crimes he's [possibly] not been convicted of.

Some of these guys coming forward will have been victims of the crimes he was tried for, and admitted his guilt of - Andy Woodward was, for example. Some won't have revealed the abuse to police at the time, so their cases won't have been tried in court. Hard to understand people giving the benefit of the doubt to the convicted multiple child rapist over guys claiming to be victims, though.
Click to expand...

No, it is likely he's got more cases against him.

That isnt the problem though, it's just basic law and order to go through the process of justice instead of what's actually happened.

Wait until after he's in prison to discuss it if it is indeed a new set of cases, i mean i realise it's a whole different world for men getting raped and so its difficult to talk about because society deems them weak or something. But that still does not excuse a witch hunt.
 
cheesyboy said:
It certainly doesn't mean "let's go round and kill him", but that's not what I'm arguing.

Lots of misguided souls in the thread getting hot under the collar about this poor convicted child rapist being tarred 'in the media' for crimes he's [possibly] not been convicted of.

Some of these guys coming forward will have been victims of the crimes he was tried for, and admitted his guilt of - Andy Woodward was, for example. Some won't have revealed the abuse to police at the time, so their cases won't have been tried in court. Hard to understand people giving the benefit of the doubt to the convicted multiple child rapist over guys claiming to be victims, though.
Click to expand...

So most of the crimes he has been found guilty off and served his sentence so we are people on here saying vigilante justice is fine and he deserves a good kicking?

I am always one for believing if you have served you time, for every crime, then thats it. end of story unless you reoffence.

Thats how our justice system works. Yes some people may argue the sentencing is too short (personally i think 2 years for his first offence was) but vote in a government or write to your MP.

Its not up to the public to dole out punishments just because they think our law is too soft on some crimes.
 
StriderX said:
No, it is likely he's got more cases against him.

That isnt the problem though, it's just basic law and order to go through the process of justice instead of what's actually happened.

Wait until after he's in prison to discuss it if it is indeed a new set of cases, i mean i realise it's a whole different world for men getting raped and so its difficult to talk about because society deems them weak or something. But that still does not excuse a witch hunt.
Click to expand...

So these poor guys who've lived with the fallout of severe childhood sexual abuse should be denied the catharsis of sharing their experiences, and bringing attention to an area of potential harm for current youths, so that a convicted child rapist can be allowed to live in peace until such evidence of 30 year old crimes can be brought to court?

And what of those for who the crimes against them have already resulted in conviction? Should Andy Woodward have been left as a lone voice in the media because his case was tried?
 
Greebo said:
So most of the crimes he has been found guilty off and served his sentence so we are people on here saying vigilante justice is fine and he deserves a good kicking?

I am always one for believing if you have served you time, for every crime, then thats it. end of story unless you reoffence.

Thats how our justice system works. Yes some people may argue the sentencing is too short (personally i think 2 years for his first offence was) but vote in a government or write to your MP.

Its not up to the public to dole out punishments just because they think our law is too soft on some crimes.
Click to expand...

Where have I agreed with the principle of vigilantism?

My belief is that the publication of these victims' stories is important both for them, and in a wider sense for avoiding future child sexual abuse incidences. Neither of those things are helped by continuing silence.

If it means a convicted child rapist gets his past convictions splashed over the media then so be it. His feelings are much less important than are theirs.
 
Greebo said:
So most of the crimes he has been found guilty off and served his sentence so we are people on here saying vigilante justice is fine and he deserves a good kicking?

I am always one for believing if you have served you time, for every crime, then thats it. end of story unless you reoffence.

Thats how our justice system works. Yes some people may argue the sentencing is too short (personally i think 2 years for his first offence was) but vote in a government or write to your MP.

Its not up to the public to dole out punishments just because they think our law is too soft on some crimes.
Click to expand...

So you would quite happily live next door to a known predatory peadophile if you had young children 'because he's served his sentence'?
 
cheesyboy said:
So these poor guys who've lived with the fallout of severe childhood sexual abuse should be denied the catharsis of sharing their experiences, and bringing attention to an area of potential harm for current youths, so that a convicted child rapist can be allowed to live in peace until such evidence of 30 year old crimes can be brought to court?

And what of those for who the crimes against them have already resulted in conviction? Should Andy Woodward have been left as a lone voice in the media because his case was tried?
Click to expand...

No they can but on the back of that you then cant decide he must be guilty and go round and beat him up or approve of people who so.
 
cheesyboy said:
Where have I agreed with the principle of vigilantism?

My belief is that the publication of these victims' stories is important both for them, and in a wider sense for avoiding future child sexual abuse incidences. Neither of those things are helped by continuing silence.

If it means a convicted child rapist gets his past convictions splashed over the media then so be it. His feelings are much less important than are theirs.
Click to expand...

Several people on here have though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom