Observer Posted October 28, 2004 Share Posted October 28, 2004 I see no problem at all with anything that occurs between consenting adults. I don't know what they did but can have a rough stab at guessing the general picture. In a way, I think it is a shame they were made examples of (if what I think it was, is actually what occurred). It would be looked on more harshly if it was homosexual activity, which is wrong in my opinion. Heterosexual couples can get up to all sorts in public places and although there are still the public decency laws in place that cover those acts, they would rarely be exercised - it would be laughed off that they were caught at it etc etc. However, they weren't imprisoned (you don't say if they were convicted?) and they are not on a sexual offenders register. Although it is unfortunate, it is not in the same league as 'assault', which by it's very nature implies an unwilling participant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Minnie Posted October 28, 2004 Author Share Posted October 28, 2004 But as you keep repeating - you don't see the difference between him being 16 and being 22 when it happened, and think that there is no relevant difference between a member of the public spotting him and the police making a statement with no prompting - so what is the point of arguing with someone so blinkered. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I see no one arguing, just having a discussion.........what forums are for really. Blinkered??? I think it's you who has the blinkers on. 16, 22, 52 years of age, who cares? He's a 22 year old man, an adult, presently preying on children. You point out where age is relevent in this topic and I'll gladly admit you're right. What really gets me is that some people think that if he's targeting an older teenager it somehow makes it not so serious! For the police to make a comment on this man, whether prompted or not, makes the incident one to be taken seriously. The paper states that this man has been approaching young boys, if this was not the case I'm pretty sure they wouldn't have been allowed to print it. Why on earth would the police be monitoring this man's movements if they didn't see him as a risk? Or do you think they are scaremongering and exaggerating also? Edit: Alex, I'm not sure if you have children yourself. If you haven't then I think you've got a bit of a nerve making light of this situation and implying that parents are completely over the top with their reactions. If you have then just sit back and think how you would feel if this man sexually assaulted your child. How would you feel if the police knew of this man's whereabouts and what he was up to but gave no warning to the general public. I for one would be bloody furious. I realise there may be nothing we can possibly do to stop this man re-offending but at least with the proper information we can make sure our children are as safe as possible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Old Git Posted October 28, 2004 Share Posted October 28, 2004 it is not in the same league as 'assault', which by it's very nature implies an unwilling participant. I don't think it necessarily does. Consentual sex with a 15 year old girl is rape, that suggests assualt to me. When it was totally illegal on the IOM to indulge in homesexual acts irrespective of age or consent that was also considered an assualt Is anal sex between man and wife still illegal? Being charged with buggery also suggests an assault The public indecency charge related to sex in a public place. I can't imagine heterosexual coupes being outed in the same way. Who here hasn't been involves in some sort of sexual act in a public place? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Observer Posted October 28, 2004 Share Posted October 28, 2004 The public indecency charge related to sex in a public place. I can't imagine heterosexual coupes being outed in the same way. Who here hasn't been involves in some sort of sexual act in a public place? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> That was my point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebees Posted October 28, 2004 Share Posted October 28, 2004 As the mother of 2 children my opinion is...so what? I always go to the park with my children, if I saw them talking to a stranger I would intervene. Personally I think it is scare mongering by the police. The lad was 16 when he offended? surely I am not the only person who thinks he was still a child himself at the time, and he probably only 'did it' with some 14 yearold slapper anyway - it happens. ATEoTD (in true Trisha style) your children are your responsibilty and whether there is a perv or not, should make no difference because you should be looking out for your children. Edit - Old Git, you shouldn't ask such questions......I'm blushing already! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Old Git Posted October 28, 2004 Share Posted October 28, 2004 The lad was 16 when he offended? We don't know what age he was when he did whatever it was he did. That was why I was asking questions Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Old Git Posted October 28, 2004 Share Posted October 28, 2004 That was my point. / me re reads post and agrees But would you agree that assualt doesn't always invole an unwilling particiant Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebees Posted October 28, 2004 Share Posted October 28, 2004 Well OG - he is still only 22 so he must have been 16-21 when it happened - to me, still a child. I agree about the assualt and unwilling thing too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Old Git Posted October 28, 2004 Share Posted October 28, 2004 he is still only 22 so he must have been 16-21 when it happened - to me, still a child. But aren't you only 12 yourself? Edit - I take it that the birthday in your profile isn't accurate? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpongeBobSquarePants Posted October 28, 2004 Share Posted October 28, 2004 The lad was 16 when he offended? surely I am not the only person who thinks he was still a child himself at the time, and he probably only 'did it' with some 14 yearold slapper anyway - it happens. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> If you read the article you'll see he indecently assaulted a boy not some 14 year old slapper as you so eloquently phrased it. I'm stunned that some of you think if the guy was only a teenager himself it was a little mishap he could be forgiven for. But what about now if he does it again and then again should we still put it down to the fact that he's only young and experimenting and not punish him? Have a 'Never mind, we're sure he'll grow out of it' attitude? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex Posted October 28, 2004 Share Posted October 28, 2004 See this guy got more of a sentence than the 22 year old we're talking about. Would you think he is at risk of reoffending and if he ventures into Nobles Park it is a cause for concern? Even when the courts have released him and stated he's not a risk? It's probably a very similar offence this guy committed - except for one detail - he assaulted a boy, not a girl. And that little detail is (IMO) the very reason everyone's knickers are in a twist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slim Posted October 28, 2004 Share Posted October 28, 2004 I don't think it's a coincidence that this has come about at the same time as the push to get legislation in (is it the criminal justice act?) to be able to sort it out. There's claims in tynwald that this sort of things occuring quite a lot, and all the police can do is move these people on. The chilling part of the story that I heard was that because our laws protecting kids are slacker here, that there are convicted paedo's moving over here to take advantage of a better environment. If this current story is a storm in a teacup or not, we should at least have the equivelant protection in law for our kids as they do on the mainland. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex Posted October 28, 2004 Share Posted October 28, 2004 I do agree with you Slim, and the Police should have better powers to move on convicted paedophiles from outside schools etc. However, it makes me wonder if this story is the best example they've got of why they need the law... Personally I'd never let (real) peadophiles out of prison, but that's another topic... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slim Posted October 28, 2004 Share Posted October 28, 2004 They can (apparently) move them on. They just can't stop them being there in the first place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Minnie Posted October 28, 2004 Author Share Posted October 28, 2004 Personally I'd never let (real) peadophiles out of prison, but that's another topic... <{POST_SNAPBACK}> But you're quite happy to have an adult, who is a convicted sex offender, prowling around parks preying on young boys. Yeah ok then. For me personally it's not the fact that it's a boy he's assaulted rather than a girl, if it had been a girl I'd still be just as worried if he was reportedly prowling round local parks approaching young girls. Perhaps people are making wild assumptions about the assault and letting their imaginations run wild, but all the more reason for us to be given more information. Why shouldn't we be told the nature of the attack, the circumstances surrounding the attack, the age of the victim etc? Ridiculous laws which prevent this information from coming out are probably the cause of over-reacting and people taking part in vigilante attacks. BTW the police have the power to move sex offenders away from schools etc but they cannot prevent them from returning. Edit: For people harping on about the fact that this person may only have been 16 when he committed the offence, I think that's highly unlikely. Was the sex offenders register on the Isle of Man 6/7 years ago? Also, if it wasn't a very serious, violent assault he would probably only be placed on the register for a couple of years if that, hence he probably wouldn't still be on it 6/7 years later. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.