Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Lost Prophets...

the drugs were probably a factor but i don't think drugs can make a person into a paedophile if they're not already. It's more lilely that he had noncey urges to begin with and the drugs helped him be less inhibited about it.
I agree. Not sure about the women though. I suspect that was all about wanting to please him. I suspect he played them off against one another - X is allowing me to do Y; I think she's the woman for me, etc. They are both quite young. I am wondering if they had babies to order for him to defile :(
 
I agree. Not sure about the women though. I suspect that was all about wanting to please him. I suspect he played them off against one another - X is allowing me to do Y; I think she's the woman for me, etc. They are both quite young. I am wondering if they had babies to order for him to defile :(

being young isn't an excuse.
 
No, of course it isn't. But it tips the balance of power that little bit further when the bloke is not far off your dad's age

to rape a baby tho? really?

im not saying you're wrong, but i know that i would have run a mile if anyone suggested anything close to that and i was talking to people much older than me on urban75 for ages
 
The problem is that this has only been the case in the last decade, and even then is predicated on a fairly generic form of therapy that may only skim the surface of the offender's psychopathology. There's an unfortunate effect in such programmes, as in inmate programmes, where offenders deduce what the therapist wants to hear, and then present the therapist with a version of that. Without programmes that lean heavily toward one-on-one therapy, I'm not convinced that such solutions do much more than teach offenders to hide better.

I hear that completely. I'm not completely familiar with the contents but having done some DV perp groupwork I can imagine there are types of offenders who the programmes works for and others who it doesn't.

A kid I work with was assessed for the Northumbria program and they rejected him for the reason that he would probably learn more from the course and other offenders rather than address his own offending. As he still has to complete a court directed program he has to do individual work. The option remains open to return to court if he doesn't engage properly.

I work with younger offenders generally and seem to see more sex offenders than I realised exisited in our cohort. A lot of lads who've come from homes where domestic violence, parental drug abuse and open access to porn seem to be major contributing factors.
 
to rape a baby tho? really?

im not saying you're wrong, but i know that i would have run a mile if anyone suggested anything close to that and i was talking to people much older than me on urban75 for ages
Well no, of course not! I'm not saying that all younger people are sheep at all. But I can't imagine you would have become obsessed with a pop star either. When my sister was in the throes of her anorexia, she was convinced that she had a spiritual connection with a particular singer and that he was giving her messages through his songs. She'd never met him and (as far as I know) he isn't an evil person. But if she had met him and he had been a truly evil man, I don't know what she would have done to 'prove' her love. I'm 99% sure she wouldn't have done anything like this but there's immense power in that relationship
Jesus H Christ on a bike. :(:(:(:(

I don't fancy their chances in a women's prison, either.

I'm only speculating - just trying to get my head round how you can 'give' a much wanted baby to someone like this. This seemed to make more sense to me as a way of disassociating.

They won't last 5 minutes in prison. Neither will he
 
fair enough and yeah i did some stupid fucking things when i was young. i just cant imagine how depraved you must be to do this. i cant imagine what goes through someones head to think that is all right. i mean wtf.
 
to rape a baby tho? really?

im not saying you're wrong, but i know that i would have run a mile if anyone suggested anything close to that and i was talking to people much older than me on urban75 for ages

Yeah but we didn't write your favourite emo whining shite that you bought into.
 
fair enough and yeah i did some stupid fucking things when i was young. i just cant imagine how depraved you must be to do this. i cant imagine what goes through someones head to think that is all right. i mean wtf.
I can't either. I think I'm trying to find a way to make it understandable. It does my head in tbh - I can't think about these babies or Peter Connelly or Aftab Khan or Khyra Ishaq without feeling so sick I can't sleep. It's incomprehensible
 
I can't even begin to get my head round giving your baby to someone to hurt- it's a massive cliche I know, but I'd kill anyone who wanted to do that to Mantito, let alone actually did. I think that's a normal human reaction- it is truly unimaginable how anyone gets like that man or those women. However, I hope there are psychiatrists or psychologists or somebody out there who aren't completely convulsed with repulsion and can try and work out what happened to make them like that, to prevent it happening to others.
 
I can't either. I think I'm trying to find a way to make it understandable. It does my head in tbh - I can't think about these babies or Peter Connelly or Aftab Khan or Khyra Ishaq without feeling so sick I can't sleep. It's incomprehensible

It's the women that wreck my head. I don't mean it in a sexist way just by virtue of them being the children's parents. It's one thing trying to comprehend abuse to a baby but another level when it's someone's own child crying that they're not just doing sod all about, but contributing to their pain. Doesn't compute.
 
they didnt do only that did they? didnt they do it themselves over skype etc?

i cant understand it. how the fuck do people get like this, over a period of months, they were even texting each other about it, wtf.

how do they find each other anyway? its not like most people would react well if you told them you were a paedophile. how did he know he would get that sort of response?
 
As regards the mothers, I think it was in the Vanessa George case where it was presented as a bloke who'd manipulated the two women but one of them at least was found to be actively interested in sex with children.
 
As regards the mothers, I think it was in the Vanessa George case where it was presented as a bloke who'd manipulated the two women but one of them at least was found to be actively interested in sex with children.

I don't think Vanessa George was abusing her own child. No consolation, of course, but there is a difference re: maternal/paternal instincts.
 
I hear that completely. I'm not completely familiar with the contents but having done some DV perp groupwork I can imagine there are types of offenders who the programmes works for and others who it doesn't.

A kid I work with was assessed for the Northumbria program and they rejected him for the reason that he would probably learn more from the course and other offenders rather than address his own offending. As he still has to complete a court directed program he has to do individual work. The option remains open to return to court if he doesn't engage properly.

I work with younger offenders generally and seem to see more sex offenders than I realised exisited in our cohort. A lot of lads who've come from homes where domestic violence, parental drug abuse and open access to porn seem to be major contributing factors.

Unfortunately it's a "commonplace" (supported by an unfortunately-large pile of evidence) with regard to the psychology of abuse that a majority of violent offenders (whether that be sexual violence, non-sexual physical violence or emotional violence) commit their first violent crime during their early to mid-teens, and will be more likely than not (around 60/40 IIRC) to have either seen or experienced such violence in their own family, or to have been the victim of physical and emotional neglect.
This was the case before easy access to porn too, though, hence my taking Cameron's witterings about reducing crime through internet censoring with a shovelful of salt! :)
 
to rape a baby tho? really?

im not saying you're wrong, but i know that i would have run a mile if anyone suggested anything close to that and i was talking to people much older than me on urban75 for ages

Thing is, you were mostly talking with people who saw you and treated you as an equal, whereas Watkins sought out people where the balance of power in any relationship would lie with him - where he could mould those people to his will. BVasically he groomed those mothers for abuse, and then used every trick in the book to make sure of their complicity in his crimes.
 
ViolentPanda I have always known the gist of what you explain in 353, but it was when I first read about the Bulger murder in real detail, a few years ago, that it was really brought home to me. Venables and Thompson's wickedness can't be fully justified by the environment they grew up in (other kids in similar circumstances don't turn out to be killers), but after reading what their lives were like, it wasn't that much of a surprise that they turned out to be so twisted.
 
No, of course it isn't. But it tips the balance of power that little bit further when the bloke is not far off your dad's age

Especially when you grow up surrounded by a culture of near-deification of celebs etc, where you (as a fan or whatever) are placed in a totally-uneven relationship with that person - where you may effectively believe they're "better" than you because of their fame; wiser than you because of their age etc. :(
 
but even if you are, how do you get it to come up in a conversation?

if you told the majority of people you were a paedophile 99% of them would be disgusted. and you might even be lucky to be alive. He must have been able to tell they would be responsive or interested in paedophilia before he said it, or that they were weak and impressionable enough to go along with it.

Thing is, you were mostly talking with people who saw you and treated you as an equal, whereas Watkins sought out people where the balance of power in any relationship would lie with him - where he could mould those people to his will. BVasically he groomed those mothers for abuse, and then used every trick in the book to make sure of their complicity in his crimes.
 
ViolentPanda I have always known the gist of what you expalin in 353, but it was when I first read about the Bulger murder in real details, a few years ago, that it was really brought home to me. Venables and Thompson's wickedness can't be fully justified by the environment they grew up in (other kids in similar circumstances don't turn out to be killers), but after reading what their lives were like, it wasn't that much of a surprise that they turned out to be so twisted.

I had some rip-roaring arguments about the case when it happened, usually with the sort of people who said "I was bullied at school/disciplined physically at home, and it never did me any harm".
What people advancing those arguments don't "get" is that for a small minority of people, the bullying, the beatings and/or the neglect within the family can be unremitting, and that such unremitting phsyical and emotional violence may (not "will") pre-dispose some victims to perpetuate that violence on others. Even then, there generally needs to be a "trigger" for that behaviour, and unfortunately for teenage boys, the most usual trigger is pack behaviour of the "I dare you" sort.
 
but even if you are, how do you get it to come up in a conversation?

if you told the majority of people you were a paedophile 99% of them would be disgusted. and you might even be lucky to be alive. He must have been able to tell they would be responsive or interested in paedophilia before he said it, or that they were weak and impressionable enough to go along with it.

From what I can garner from this and other cases, the offender doesn't generally introduce the subject until the victim and victim's family is well and truly "under the thumb". In Watkins' case it seems that he started relationships with these young women when they weren't fully emotionally-developed, and then introduced drugs into the equation. he was in a position of dominance, and then enhanced that position through the giving (and quite possibly the withholding) of drugs, followed by talking the young women into molesting their own children (who knows, perhaps for a "dare" or a "laugh"? :( ). Once he had that to hold over them, convincing them to let him molest their children would have been far simpler than simply walking up to them and saying "I'm a paedo, let me fuck your kiddies".
 
It's also worth remembering that he is someone who by all accounts had a very large number of sexual partners, this pair may have been the most vulnerable he had met, or the ones who shared his deviant tastes.
 
Back
Top Bottom