danny la rouge
More like *fanny* la rouge!
I’m not sure why you’re not getting this. But you’re not getting the ongoing nature of this.That's why he should be incinerated.
But that's punishment.
Not prevention.
I’m not sure why you’re not getting this. But you’re not getting the ongoing nature of this.That's why he should be incinerated.
But that's punishment.
Not prevention.
A win-win scenarioHe hasn't raped anyone though.
That's like trying to prevent Bahnhof Strasse from shagging goats, by giving me 10 years for speeding.
4. Create a sense of justice for victims. In my view the most important of the four.
I’m not sure why you’re not getting this. But you’re not getting the ongoing nature of this.
His offending.Of what?
His offending.
Child sexual exploitation isn’t a once-and-done crime. Not for the victims. And not for the offenders.
He’s an ongoing risk. And his crimes continue to have effects on those abused. They’re possibly still in coercive situations.
You’re going to want to talk to someone who has knowledge about rehabilitation of CSA offenders that I don’t have.So why not just lock him up for life?
Or kill him?
So why not just lock him up for life?
Or kill him?
You’re going to want to talk to someone who has knowledge about rehabilitation of CSA offenders that I don’t have.
Transportation.
You could lock him up in some penal colony for 5 years of hard labour - which serves the punishment, deterrence, and public protection elements of justice, but after that?
The inclination isn't going away. For public protection he'd have to be on the nonce list for life, and he'd have to be proactively monitored - location, people he meets, internet use/access - thats quite possibly going to be another 25 years after he gets out from breaking rocks.
Do we a) want to accept the cost of that, and b) want accept the risk that however diligent and comprehensive the monitoring programme, shit goes wrong?
The Norwegians own an island called Jan Mayan Land, it's uninhabited, between Greenland and the North Cape of Norway, and several hundred mile north of Iceland. I wonder if they'd like to sell it....
Or perhaps it's the rightie in you thinking it might be quite close to a thought crime.Obviously, I'd like to incinerate all of their bollocks summarily, but the leftie in me thinks this might be quite close to a thought crime.
Well quite, you don’t have to hold any particular ideological position to realise that the active offences resulting in Edwards’ conviction show that his behaviour was nothing like a thought crime. He was sentenced for acting upon his sexual attraction to children.Or perhaps it's the rightie in you thinking it might be quite close to a thought crime.
This is the main issue for me. Other nonces will not be deterred by the sentence. Had he been banged up for a few years other sick cunts might have desisted in the trading and storing of images.
It'd have got a nonce off the street, and sent a message that if you get caught noncing you'll do time. Instead it's sent the message that noncing is OK, and all you'll get is a slap on the wrist, because the judge is probably at it too.Not sure if sending Huw Edwards to prison would have done much good, he might have
learned new tricks off other paedophiles in prison. I'd imagine this won't be the last time he
appears in court.
It'd have got a nonce off the street, and sent a message that if you get caught noncing you'll do time. Instead it's sent the message that noncing is OK, and all you'll get is a slap on the wrist, because the judge is probably at it too.
5 - 10 years is my thinking. I can't see how anybody could think otherwiseIt wouldn't have made much difference "He only got 6 months; bet he'll be out in 3" would have rung out. The issue is the weak sentencing guidelines that are used to sentence those
guilty of the crime famous or otherwise. If I had my way the minimum sentence would be 5 years (no suspended sentences) alongside an unlimited fine.
Really sorry to hear about your experiences of abuse. Nobody should have to deal with that. Sadly it’s all too common. Thank you for sharing. I agree that it’s important that survivors are seen as people not just numbers, and certainly not just bit players in the story of a rich and powerful man.I am at an advanced age.
I am sure some others of both or all genders would agree with me.
My experience of being sexually attacked three times by strangers when a naive young boy under the age of eleven still remains with me over fifty years later.
The victims are an important part of this story, much more than the million words spoken by people about Edwards
5 - 10 years is my thinking. I can't see how anybody could think otherwise
He was generally considered to be a pompous git and not well-liked at the BBC, even before the revelations of his paedophilia.
There's no way back for him.
Thousands of workers in the BBC didn't get into Oxford, tbf.Only because he didn’t get into Oxford, though.