Paedophiles named and shamed online

Vigelanteism is the action that people take when they consider that theose in a position of authority are failing them. Sure, that website should not be available to view, but neither should some person feel it is necessary to create it in the first place. It should be a website created by the authjorities with up to date information that has been varified. In that way, we would know who the known P****'s are and where they are.

To me it would seem to be common sense to have that information available so that we can protect our kids. If some kiddy-fiddler touched either of my kids I would do time, to me that isn't right. Why should I be punished for any retribution I meter out on someone who has harmed my child to satisfy their need for sexual gratification?

But common sense isn't very common in todays society, is it? We live in some sort of perverse society where the authorities think that paedophiles should be protected from right thinking, responsible parents who wish to protect their children from being the object of some other persons physical desires.

Sit back, close your eyes and imagine someone touching up a child you know personally. With that image in your mind can you really say that these sick perverts deserve any sort of protection?
 
sheddy said:
With that image in your mind can you really say that these sick perverts deserve any sort of protection?
Click to expand...

Everyone, every single human being deserves the full protection of the law, that you have a web site naming people who have not been convicted of any crime is a crime in itself and the perpetrator should be held to account.

Scenario... You have an argument with a neighbour, said neighbour is a vindictive type and has you arrested claiming you interfered with their child. You are not guilty, you know you are not guilty, you enter a plea of not guilty and eventually you will be found not guilty, but meantime your name and details appear on that website as a paedophile....
 
Your scenario is quite accurate for a guy I know. His next door neighbours 14y/o daughter made unfounded accusations about him because he had done something to upset her. He was arrested, held, released on bail through lack of evidence, beaten up in the street and eventually the girl admitted that it was a complete fabrication on her part. He and his family had to move to the other end of the country in order that they could live a normal life afterwards.

Another friend got convicted and put on the sex offenders register for having sex with an underage girl. He was 20, she was 15. He met her in a nighclub (over 18's), she lied about her age and he dumped her as soon as he discovered the lie. She went to the police as revenge for dumping her.

Two scenario's in which that website is extremely dangerous.

But my point was that the authorities should already have a resource such as that in place. It is our children who deserve the protection, not the P****'s. It is the children to whom the authorities owe protection. Until that happens there will always be those amoungst us who will do what they can to protect the innocents.
 
Keith W said:
The paedophiles listed on the website have all been convicted,
Click to expand...


I think I have already stated there is a name registered on that site based only on a rumour. :bang: Please do not defend this website.
 
sheddy said:
But my point was that the authorities should already have a resource such as that in place. It is our children who deserve the protection, not the P****'s. It is the children to whom the authorities owe protection. Until that happens there will always be those amoungst us who will do what they can to protect the innocents.
Click to expand...

And there is. The Sex Offenders Register, where every local police station has photographs of said offender and they are notified of any address change or leaving the country. Head teachers, doctors, youth leaders, sports club managers and others, including landlords, are notified of the existence of a local sex offender on a confidential basis. So there is a resource for the authorities to protect our children but not the general public. I have lost family members on both sides of vigilantism, either to death or jail and I would hate for a child to lose their father to jail for a case of mistaken identity.
 
But do you trust the authorities to do the job they are entrusted to do?
 
sheddy said:
But do you trust the authorities to do the job they are entrusted to do?
Click to expand...

Well then thats another debate point. From only my experience yes I trust the law but I know that they are not infallible. But then do I trust the multitude of thugs in my neighbourhood with an internet connection and a temper?
 
whitewash said:
but the question should really be do you trust joe public to do it for them?
Click to expand...

Joe Public is a dangerous beast, especially when mob rule takes over. Yet I see action as better than inaction.

Something needs doing to rid society of the pond life and I'm not just referring to the P****'s. The authorities aren't going to instigate it such is the way they operate. The authorities method of punishment is inappropriate and has been for years. Personally, I am in favour of corporal and capital punishment and I believe that appropriate corporal punishment at an early age is the correct method. It teaches that actions have consequences and that there is a level of behaviour that is acceptable within a well ordered society.
 
sheddy said:
Personally, I am in favour of corporal and capital punishment
Click to expand...

Please explain how you compensate someone wrongly convicted after they have been executed by the state.

Had the death penalty not been abolished for murder in 1965, do you think the Birmingham six and the Guilford four would have received life sentences or the death penalty?

Given that they were all eventually freed after nearly 20 years in prison as it was discovered that the convictions were unsafe due to fabricated evidence, would executing them have been a good idea?

I do not want to live in country where the state has the power to kill its own citizens.
 
I really do sympathise with those people saying that we have a right to know where paedophiles are in our society . . . but that website is not the way to do it for all the reasons above.

What I think we actually have a right to, is for us and our children to be safe in our own homes and communities.
And I certainly wouldn't feel safe in a country where it was acceptable for rumours and scaremongering to empower the public to take their own action against individuals.

What we need is a justice system that was properly equipped and able to deal with offenders in the most appropriate way to protect the public.

The fact is that the traditional recourse of punishment by locking them up for a period of time, counselling and then releasing them as "rehabilitated" doesn't work for many paedophiles.Their desires toward children are part of their genetic make-up and nothing will change that.

:shrug: I don't know what the answer is, but it's not what we're doing now and it's not setting up a vigilante website.
 
onomatopoeia said:
Please explain how you compensate someone wrongly convicted after they have been executed by the state.
Click to expand...
They can have all the compensation they want. All they have to do is fill in the appropriate form.

onomatopoeia said:
Had the death penalty not been abolished for murder in 1965, do you think the Birmingham six and the Guilford four would have received life sentences or the death penalty?

Given that they were all eventually freed after nearly 20 years in prison as it was discovered that the convictions were unsafe due to fabricated evidence, would executing them have been a good idea?
Click to expand...
That is what the appeal process is for .... exactly the same process that freed them. Seems that it works well, doesn't it?

onomatopoeia said:
I do not want to live in country where the state has the power to kill its own citizens.
Click to expand...
Then you had better emigrate elsewhere because the death penalty has recently been re-instated through our signing of the Lisbon Treaty.
 
sheddy said:
They can have all the compensation they want. All they have to do is fill in the appropriate form.
Click to expand...
They are too dead to fill in the form.

sheddy said:
That is what the appeal process is for .... exactly the same process that freed them. Seems that it works well, doesn't it?
Click to expand...

In the case of the Birmingham six the appeal process was exhausted, it took new evidence uncovered by World in Action more than 10 years later to bring about a second appeal (which also failed) and further new evidence to cause a third appeal 16 years after the original trial which was successful.

Now, in the ten years between the first and second appeals, would a death sentence have been carried out?

sheddy said:
Then you had better emigrate elsewhere because the death penalty has recently been re-instated through our signing of the Lisbon Treaty.
Click to expand...

No it hasn't. There is no crime on the UK statute book that carries a capital sentence. The last ones (treason and piracy) had that removed in 1998 prior to the UK becoming a signatory to the 6th protocol of the ECHR. In order to restore capital punishment the UK would have to withdraw from the Council of Europe (which is nothing to do with the EU).
 
Nearly forgot to add... the Birmingham 6, by their own admission, had allegiance to the IRA so who cares if they were banged up?
 
Worst example I've seen was when that bint Mags Haney was spouting on about a rumoured paedophile who was in the estate somewhere. She was seen on the TV shouting on about scum like that.
Funnily enough both her and most of her scummy brood got locked up for running the local drugs ring. Didn't hear her banging on about THAT sorta scum...
 
SarahLee said:
What I think we actually have a right to, is for us and our children to be safe in our own homes
Click to expand...

Statistical their own homes is the most unsafe for the children to be, as over 90% of child abuse is committed by family or close friends.
 
sheddy said:
Nearly forgot to add... the Birmingham 6, by their own admission, had allegiance to the IRA so who cares if they were banged up?
Click to expand...

Because there is a HUGE difference between having allegiance to the IRA and committing murder. Think of all the money that came from the USA in the 70s & 80s to fund the IRA, they had an allegiance to the IRA too.

sheddy said:
That is what the appeal process is for .... exactly the same process that freed them. Seems that it works well, doesn't it?
Click to expand...

Stefan Kiszko
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Sadly but understandably this is the type of consequence to be expected when the public perceive a wholesale failure in the justice system. Of course this sort of site should not be permitted, the repercussions could be horrendous, with innocent people being harrassed, injured or even murdered. The truth is that convicted paedophiles should not be released back into the community, they have no place there. I'm not advocating punishing or mistreating them and there is no reason why they should not enjoy a certain quality of life within a secure institution, but that institution should be their home for the remainder of their days.

It's a matter of protecting the public, in particular our children, and also protecting the offenders from the temptation to act again upon the perverted desire that is sadly an irrevocable part of their nature.
 
I suppose a site like that can be compared to capital punishment in a way. Yes, people who commit heinous crimes deserve to receive the most severe repercussions BUT, and it is a big but, as soon as 1 innocent person is caught by such punishment the whole principle falls down. Also, where do you draw the line? Do their families deserve to be punished as well? Should they get their windows put in and graffitti or abuse be scrawled over their walls just for being related? Should they be deemed guilty purely by association?
Unfortunately the great unwashed public (rentamob) do not have the braincells or information to make reasoned judgements. The react first and sod the consequences. A lot of innocent people have been persecuted by The Mob on nothing more than rumour or hearsay.
 
Last edited:
goldenlight said:
convicted paedophiles should not be released back into the community, they have no place there
Click to expand...

That I agree with wholeheartedly, paedophilia is an illness but it is not something that can be 'cured' I think.
 
paulc said:
I think if they have been convicted in a court then its not so bad to mention them after all they have probably already been in the newspaper or on the radio but if they have not been convicted then thats dangerous
Click to expand...
What you're describing is essentially no different to what many police departments & courts in the USA already do. This sort of thing is all public record in the USA, along with any other convicted criminal activities. Nothing wrong with publishing that sort of information in my mind. They choose to live with the consequences of their actions the minute they do something deemed outside the norms of society and common decency.

Rumour, suspicion and hearsay are completely the WRONG reasons for listing somebody on a site such as this.
 
I agree with alot of what has been said in this thread...mainly that if people believed the justice system was working, then there would;

A) Be no need for this type of website to be launched in the first place
and
B) No risk of vigilantism

Out of curiosity, did any of you take to the streets over the weekend and hunt down your nearest paedophile? The reason I ask, I spoke to a friend over the weekend who said to me that he believes that the vigilante threat is nere non-existant...merely old wives tales created by the media to back-up their protection of paedophiles and perverts. Its a little bit "out there", smells of conspiracy theory, but curious all the same!
 
Markegee said:
Out of curiosity, did any of you take to the streets over the weekend and hunt down your nearest paedophile?
Click to expand...
I lived about a mile down the road from Ferris Bueller's arch nemesis for about 4 years. Not once could I work up the motivation to head down to his house and ask for an autograph, nor beat his head in with a baseball bat.

http://offender.fdle.state.fl.us/offender/flyer.do?personId=38561

Like I said, all public record over there. They even have E-Mail alerts that you can sign up to letting you know when a convicted sex offender has moved into your neighbourhood.

Markegee said:
he believes that the vigilante threat is nere non-existant
Click to expand...
For the most part I'm inclined to agree.
 
Last edited:
Just found this which makes a very interesting read, and perhaps backs up the idea of the vigilante threat being...well...baloney!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/4719364.stm

What you have to wonder is;

WHY, if the vigilante threat is really quite non-existant, are we being made to believe that it is a legitimate threat? Who / what organization is set to benefit from this?
 
Markegee said:
Who / what organization is set to benefit from this?
Click to expand...
Tabloids and the types of people who thought Section 44 was a good idea.
 
go onto myspace and look up RACPA.
rock against child pornography and abuse.

some of their facts will stun you .

theres a local lives near us, who all the local kids know is an old perv.
he is known , and therefore no threat to anyone.
he knows if he puts a foot out of line, he would be in a world of sh......
 
inaneredstripe said:
convicted offenders.
publish details.
if they are not convicted, its just a rumour mill, leading to trouble for possibly innocent people.
Click to expand...

Yip, there can only be a few of us that cannot think of someone regarded with suspicion (or worse) just because they were a bit different or a loner etc.
 
Markegee said:
Out of curiosity, did any of you take to the streets over the weekend and hunt down your nearest paedophile?
Click to expand...

No but the lads down my street did torch an immigrants house, I wonder what they, not to mention decent folk, would do about a known/rumoured sex offender. From my POV the threat would be very real.
 
I cannot understand why some people are naive enough to believe that P****'s should be protected from vigilante's when they are guilty of kiddy fiddling but parents shouldn't be able to protect their kids from P****'s.

Why do you think that kiddie fiddlers should be protected?

It seems common sense to me that these people should be exposed for what they are. If vigilante gangs then roam the streets then let the law deal with them in the same way that the law deals (or fails to deal) with the P****'s. Then we can start a new website telling the p****'s where the vigilante's live so that they can move elsewhere.

It's the kids who need protecting, not the perverts.
 
sheddy said:
I cannot understand why some people are naive enough to believe that P****'s should be protected from vigilante's
Click to expand...

That's not what's in question. The point is that this website is listing people who may or may not be paedophiles based upon rumour and hearsay from neighbours or co-workers who think they look a bit dodgy, with no convictions, history or basis of fact.
 
Thank you for pointing that out but I was aware of that. I thought the discussion had progressed to the rights and wrongs of vigilantism and it was in that vein I was posting.
 
sheddy said:
Why do you think that kiddie fiddlers should be protected?
.
Click to expand...

what an unbelievable comment to make :(

the problem is people who are only accused and not convicted being listed complete with photo and address...
 
Yes, and I agree that is wrong. What concerns me is the amount of people who see vigilante's as a bigger threat to society than the (convicted) P****'s.
 
Richard its not about being naive, its about being realistic. "Vigilantes" is a very loose term, it could refer to a bunch of decent folk who end up in jail away from their families for going one step too far.

This isnt about protecting paedophiles (I dont want to use the term you did), its about keeping within the law. If it were up to me I would have all sex offenders kept away from the public full stop or even let the victims deal with them, but as it stands they are being let into society and we have to respect the law and relevant authorities to deal with them. Websites like this are taking it into their own hands and publishing names which can jeopardise a lot of peoples safety (i.e, mistaken identity's, rumours or when the person on the website goes under the radar and we cannot monitor them). This website is dangerous.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top