I thought I was as left wing as they come but I disagree that serious sex offenders and paedophiles should ever have the chance to appeal against their lifetime registration. The victim of these crimes is often premeditatedly and selfishly handed a life sentence. What happened to the 6 year old girl mentioned in the story will most likely never leave her. She will have been emotionally and physically traumatised for the rest of her life, as are most rape and in particular child abuse victims. They can't just forget about it and start a new life after 15 years.

I agree that paedophiles are the demons in the press, the media whips itself into a frenzy about them. They need help, professional treatment, and many do deserve sympathy having often been abused themselves. But they should have to live with the consequences of what they have done. Their victims have to every day of their lives. An exception should be made for underage rapists, as children can not be expected to fully understand the enormity and consequences of the hideous act they are comitting. Adults do, and they do it anyway. I don't agree with eye for an eye, but having their name on a list, missing a few holidays and not being allowed to play rugby is hardly poetic justice.

Hey Buckskin, you don't know ANYTHING about him OR his victim. How arrogant are you???

So, Claire, you DO support the RIGHT to petition to be taken off the registry then? Because ONLY a court has the capacity to determine seriousness. Or maybe YOU have the capacity? Or maybe, seriousness is something that can change over time? There has to be standard for removal. If a person meets the standard, they are removed.

I am going to make a comment about how the government is responding to the court's decision.

They say they will make the bar, "the highest possible" and make the POLICE the final say and not make it appealable.

That is a ridiculous statement to be sure. If they have the police make the decision and they make arbitrary decisions, OR decide BEFORE a person applies that ALL people who apply will be denied THAT is, by nature, appealable. You can't deny someone access to a court of law. The police will have to have a STANDARD to follow in order to release someone from the registry, or to keep them on. The M.P.'s and other members of government are making ridiculous statements.

@buckskins
Well I've read lots of your comments on the NS blogs and can say, unequivocally, that I wouldn't want you within 100 miles of wherever I happen to be. Fortunately, it's unlikely.
Hal says he's a 'former offender' - that's all you know, but you figure you've got him sussed, right? But as Rudy101 points out, you don't actually know anything about the person at all.
But we've got lots of evidence about you, all supplied by you yourself.

I would be fascinated to know whether Buckskins would welcome living less than a hundred miles from him, the two fourteen year old girls in Fort Myers, Florida, who stripped an eleven year old mentally retarded boy naked and posted the tape on you tube for all to see, and this, in a state I am led to believe has one of the most toughest laws against sex offenders in the US, yet the police dismissed it as a prank and no charges were brought. The reason I highlight this case, as I myself suffered something very similar to this at school in England in the 1970s and I am quite sure my tormentors, (and I still live with the humiliation of it, so am thus victim) then and now, would not remotely regard themselves as sex offenders, (I would remind them, that they were), in fact are probably married now, with families of their own and have similar views to Buckskins on how they should be dealt with by society. The reason, I mention this, is we will never have, a truly informed debate on the very sensitive issue of child sex offending and pass sensible measures to, hopefully eradicate it, while the Bucksins of this world spew out their crude simplistic views and the politicians both in this country and America respond with knee jerk measures to appease them. Britain and America are interesting, because it appears, it is only in these two couontries, where there is such hysteria over this issue, it is not to be found in Europe and not one European country to my knowledge, has a sex offenders register and are the instances of child sexual abuse, that much higher, as a result?, I would doubt it, somehow.

John Global you really dont have a clue either. breeching the register conditions can result in 5 years in jail. They can invade homes and inform the public if they feel necessary.

Also aren't you aware that there are massive data storage center that just collect as much informtion as possible. All the details are indexed, processed automatically and then stored for future reference without you every having committed any offence. Is that right? check out information awareness office, DArpa, inqtel

Its a bit like the terrorism act being used to justify otherwise illegal searches or shut down free parties, or messing with protesters

Everything is given and taken. So when they give they also takeaway. Its also great idea for government job creation.

Why did this get through the courts. My best guess is that the probation service can't handle the burden. They have to get these people off the register or they weren't going to be effective for any of them. It comes down to the money and the globalist have been looting again no one has any money to spare. prison and probation facing staffing CUTS.

Alex - the answer is 18!

Bob - its people like you who are playing politics (or human rights) with the truly vulnerable, on whose side you should be...instead you are on the side of the powerful, the perpetrator of the sex crime: shameful.

Claire and John Global are correct, and righteous...some sex crimes are truly unforgivable, and the rape of a 6 year old is one of them...

Yo -

Q: how can you be sure that a boy of 11 who is sick and disturbed enough to rape another boy, aged just 6, has "changed" now he is 18..?

A: You cant be sure - everyone knows that most sex crime is not only criminal but also addictive, and just like a drug addict, you will always be a paedophile once you have crossed the line and actually carried out such a horrific crime.

It is sensible that offenders such as him, and the adults, should be on the sex offenders register for life with no appeal...

And did you know, Yo, that most sex offenders especially paedophiles have committed over 200 offences BEFORE they ever get convicted of ONE offence?

And given the uniquely devastating nature of rape, paedophile abuse, sex crime in general, and the life long vicious effects these crimes have on their victims, you must never put the offender's human rights before that of the (future, possibly) victim...

http://sexoffenderissues.blogspot.com

Yes, this is good, and when you eradicate some rights of a few, the rights of the majority will be eradicated in time.

People in office took oaths to defend their country's laws and human/civil rights, and they need to start doing so, and put personal feelings and emotions aside.

What is next? Firing up the ovens?

Well, I am going to make some comments on America's system. They passed a registry and included anyone they wanted and could go back as far as they wanted (as far as 1970 in Texas) and required them to register. But registration is only the beginning. In America it is ALL about public notification. People are being run out of neighborhoods, forced into homelessness, stripped of all legal protections and the regulations keep coming on.

For example, residency restrictions. They are VERY popular. But they have been shown NOT to do ANYTHING, through studies. Then there are loitering restrictions, where a registrant can't go to a park, beach, or ANYWHERE (which in many cases is everywhere) children MIGHT be or COULD be. There are no appeals and registration time is constantly INCREASING and NEVER any appeal or challenge. Romeo & Juliets? Lifetime registration for the Romeo.

America has 5 times the number, per capita, of sex offenders on a registry. It puts the community to panic AND has been shown to do NOTHING (like reduce recidivism).

Now to compare to England's system. There is no public notification. There is the carrot and stick approach with this court ruling. A registrant has MUCH to lose by not following the rules. Also, a registrant restrictions aren't one style fits all approach, like America's.

America is on a much more serious course when it takes those it deems dangerous and forces them to the streets and does not allow ANYONE to have ANY interest in ANY registry law. The laws can be overwhelming, even for people whose crimes were very remote in time and long before the registry. In Louisiana they force a registrant to sign 7 pages of laws that carry up to 20 years of prison time for not complying. In Michigan, they don't allow anyone on a registry (even misdameanors), to work 1,000 feet from almost everywhere. In San Francisco, 84% of all paroled sex offenders are FORCED to live on the streets by LAW (California alone has 100,000 lifetime registrants).

Kudos for England for taking the pragmatic approach that WILL make your community safer while protecting the RIGHTS of the individual AND the community.

I think we need to be clear that we are doing a real dis-service to victims by continuing down this route of "zero forgiveness." The system has shut down on sex offenders. If a potential sex offender is having thoughts, for example, of engaging in illegal sexual activity with a child then where do they turn ? There is no advice for this and no system for this. What are we doing to prevent sex crimes ? Nothing. And the leopard changing its spots argument is nonsense. Sex Offences have a recidivism rate of 23 per cent as opposed to say burglary which is around 52 per cent. The reason is because burglary is a crime determined by an individual's socio-economic environment which is a very difficult thing to change whereas sexual criminal behaviour is generally a crime spawned in somebody's psychopathology which alternately is infinitely treatable. Yet as soon as we talk about preventing offences or treating offenders then the cry goes up.."But what about the victims ?" These need to be addressed in isolation with potential offenders having greater recourse to not feeling that they have nowhere to turn but an open system which praises those brave enough to face their demons and seek help.
If there is such a thing as "once a....always a" then we might as well give up on psychiatry and psychology as useless, despite them being the most important meta narratives to shape the 20th century.