-
Posts
-
A paedophile convicted of assualting and intending to rape an 11 year old girl is now back on the streets. This is despite his own admission that he is a danger to children and that he will strike again. Add this to his accounts of violent sexual fantasies and his referring to previous peadophile victims.
Apologies if this has been covered already, but I didn’t see it.
no doubt some judge who also likes little girls and boys thinks hes doing this creep a favour. there is no end to the rediculous ends this government will go to placate the perverts and thugs of this country by turning the victims into the bad guy and letting these scum go just proves how far away from reality these morons are. i personally hope that someone sees this man and deals some real justice out to him, i know for a fact i would have no qualms whatsoever of shooting him deadf, and at the rate its going id only get probation as all the womens jails are full of people who havent paid their tv lisences.. :twisted: :twisted: :twisted:
Apparently he’s supposed to be under 24 hour police protection – which paints the police out to be the bad guys for protecting him when they’re only doing their job and I doubt they even want to anyway. Also makes the police scapegoats should anything happen to him. I know a lot of cops and I know a lot of them don’t agree with how the legal system works or the fact that everything seems to be their fault.
It’s the fact that he’s admitted that he will reoffend, intending to use a knife, that makes the decision even more baffling though prosecutors had tried (and failed) to use his words against him.
It’s just another example for those who still have faith in the legal system that they are sadly deluded. If this was America he’d never see daylight again.
I’d love to know how our courts work, I really would. The police do their bit to build a case, the prosecutors do their bit to make sure it gets to court and from then on everthing seems to work in a different reality.
try the ol bin job cure. you simply remove the mans dustbin in the early wee hours of the night then throw said bin and all contents through the front window. after several tries you normally find the men will move. if not, keep at it till they do. as it may be construed as me advising you to do this but its what we here int lill villages do.
@sweetass wrote:
Somebody I know, who’s daughter is very very close to me …( obviously I dont want to say too much ) recently ‘ran away’ . Turns out she had befriended a 50 odd year old local man.who bought her clothes, gave her pocket money, and not only offered her work at ‘his’ factory . But also a bedroom iin his house . The girl in question has learning disabilities and is 12 years of age . As she only ever played in the green opposite her house, her parents thought she was safe. When she ran away for several hours, the police were informed that it was possible that she was at this mans house… they knocked on the door to be told by the other two males residing in the property, that no the girl wasn’t nor had ever been there. The police had no grounds to search so went away.. a cple of hours later they returned to the house to spot the girls rucksack in the hallway. This they then took and brought to her parents .. imagine the terror when the parents were asked not only if they recognised the rucksack, but also if they could supply the police with the most recent picture they had of their daughter ..They were also told that they were searching at tesco’s in LEIGHTON BUZZARD . Behind that tesco is a canal, they were told under no circumstances were they to go there…. terror ?? I would have been in pieces.. As the police left to blues and two’s it dowqn to Tesco’s the daughter turned up home .. the man had told her to go home through the back way as his friends had informed him that the police had been twice and found the rucksack.
Well .. not only had these three men lied to the police . They had also decked out a room for this child. The dominant peado had been asking questions as to whether she had started her periods ect ect ect;
The trained police officer is in no doubt as to the fact that this man was grooming this child, buying her things, making her feel that she owed him something… The officer is confident that the next step for this kid would be sexual abuse …… Now here’s the killer…. Even after all this.. the lies the men told, the comments made, the bedroom made for her..THEY ARE STILL UNSURE IF THEY CAN PROSECUTE DUE TO LACK OF EVIDENCE :shock: :shock: :twisted: :twisted:So even after all of this this dirty barstud is still free to walk the streets of LEIGHTON BUZZARD, to scope out other children, and who knows what else he will do..( He is a known knicker thief who has obviously moved on to bigger things)
SO IF YOU OR ANYONE YOU KNOW LIVES IN THE MEADOW WAY VICINITY OF LEIGHTON BUZZARD ..KEEP VIGILANT AS IT COULD BE YOUR CHILD NEXT :twisted: :twisted:
=
This country’s legal system & Policing procedures along with the CPS’s ability to prosecute gone mad and the system in total breakdown.
The answer………
a person who tries in an unofficial way to prevent crime, or to catch and punish someone who has committed a crime, especially because they do not think that official organizations, such as the police, are controlling crime effectively
Begin’s with a V
@johnboy25 wrote:
I’d love to know how our courts work, I really would. The police do their bit to build a case, the prosecutors do their bit to make sure it gets to court and from then on everthing seems to work in a different reality.
The courts work on out of date laws ,,,,,, laws which won’t be changed, while there are peadophiles on the benches,,,,,,,is one!!
The police as you say, build a case, dependant on what that case may be,,,,,there are some circumstances they don’t. Their reasons? it’ll never get past the CPS, cos theyre the pple who decide whether it goes to court in the first place.
Cases like the one sweet spoke about should be cut and dried, but pricey lawyers, who no doubt are costing the taxpayer, find loophole after loophole,,,,,,,,why should they care, it’s not their world is it.
Sadly (you might think) the CPS will only authorise prosecution for a criminal offence (at the public’s cost – i.e. YOUR cost) if there is a REALISTIC chance of obtaining a conviction.
They won’t authorise a procecution if there is NO realistic chance of a conviction based on the available evidence – not hearsay – not what someone thinks might have happened – not somebody’s best guess – but hard provable evidence.
Unfortunately we live in a world where the Tabloid press are all too good at putting a selected part of a story to the public, enraging them – and thereby selling even more of their newspapers – without the need to have to prove the facts that they put before you.
Whilst Sweetass’s story (and Johnboy’s initial posting) are clearly terrible, based on the facts that they have set out, in reality when you have to PROVE those facts in a court of law, things are not as clear cut as they may seem.
As a for instance, proving ”intent” (i.e. what was actually on a person’s mind at the material time) is incredibly difficult to do. Whilst we may all say that a person was ‘obviously’ grooming etc etc actually proving it is something else. They will of course have a perfectly ‘innocent’ explanation for their actions and gullible juries aided by venal defence lawyers will always be able to introduce reasonable doubt.
Unless you are prepared to go back to a system of ‘rough justice’ or ‘kangaroo courts’ where the accused was given a mockery of a trial before being sentenced, we are stuck with the concept of innocent until PROVEN guilty.
If you have a problem with that issue – then remember back to the incident a while ago when the Sun ran a campaign (yes one of its many such campaigns) against ‘paedophiles’.
As one result of this whipping up of public outrage, a mob attacked a house (near Southampton as I recall) and set fire to it and nearly killed the occupant. They rejoiced in the fact that they had burnt out a paedophile, driven them out of their neighbourhood; protected their children; and good riddance etc etc. they were justified in their actions because the person was a public menace.
It turned out that the person was a Doctor – a Pediatrician….. not a paedophile … but hey, that’s rough justice for you.
Whilst Sweetass’s story (and Johnboy’s initial posting) are clearly terrible, based on the facts that they have set out, in reality when you have to PROVE those facts in a court of law, things are not as clear cut as they may seem.
Sadly that’s true PB, hence why we have so many people walking the street who even the kindest of all good samaritans wouldn’t spit on if they were on fire. But in this case, there’s a man (of sorts) who is happy to admit he’s a danger and that he intends to attack a child again and be sent down for life.
There are shoplifters here that get treated worse by the courts FFS!
Very reluctantly I have to agree with you Johnboy.
The problem is however, that a person can wander around telling everybody that he is looking for a child to attack, he can cheerfully admit that he fully intends to do it given half a chance ….. and yet in court (assuming that he was charged with an offence) he could deny ever having said the particular words ascribed to him.
He might even suggest that he might have said those words but he didn’t mean them in THAT particular way ….. or the witnesses were mistaken. Either way he would be acquitted.
I’m not saying that this is somehow right or fair …. just that this is the way the sytem works in reality – whatever the tabloid press has to say about it.
Get involved in this discussion! Log in or register now to have your say!