I don't think anyone gets "convicted of paedophilia" - that's just a mental disorder some people have not a crime in itself. People get convicted of crimes relating to it. Presumably those who have say dodgy pictures but haven't actually molested anyone could be convicted and serve a few months while also being described as paedophiles.
That was kinda my (badly made) point - with no context it's a bit hard to comment; however, I still stand by statement that "someone like that" wouldn't be allowed to join Freemasonry with an unspent conviction in that category or they would speedily be asked to resign if they were already a member at the time of the conviction.
Convicted of:
- Four counts of indecent assault on three girls, all under the age of 14 at the time.
- Inciting one of his victims to commit an act of gross indecency.
Sentenced to:
- 12 months for
the licking and biting and touching the girls’ legs.
- 18 months for
getting a girl to remove her trousers.
- 30 months for
touching a girl under her jeans.
The sentences were served concurrently, so basically 30 months. Dunno how much of a difference that makes?
After his conviction for these offences he was also due to face trial for six counts of making indecent photos of children. But the jury was dismissed in relation to this.
I don't think anyone gets "convicted of paedophilia" - that's just a mental disorder some people have not a crime in itself. People get convicted of crimes relating to it.
Very true. However, the nature of the term 'convicted paedophile' does strongly infer that they not only did something that got them convicted, but what they did was directly related to that condition.
While it might be technically correct, a "convicted murderer" is unlikely to have been convicted of theft and just happens to be a yet-to-be-caught, murderer...
Presumably those who have say dodgy pictures but haven't actually molested anyone could be convicted and serve a few months while also being described as paedophiles.
While it may not affect the subject(s) of the images if taken in a public place, for example, it can indeed still be acting on the 'phillia' in an illegal fashion... and as above, the bloke was also up for six counts of making dodgy pictures, separate to any other offences.
Again, I can only comment of what I've seen of him and his Mason-Mates since his release, but the impression they're collectively presenting is that he's still involved with the group.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
