It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

British man who must give police 24 hours' notice of sex threatens hunger strike

page: 2
11
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 1 2016 @ 10:40 AM
link   
a reply to: SprocketUK

Yes but it falls down when the people who exercise and authorise these kind of measures are just as corrupt if not more than they people they seek to hold dominion over. I'm totally against any of it.

One girl says he raped her, you get monitored. 15-20 historical allegations on an otherwise normal joe blogs, they turn you over to the men and women of those families. Giving the state (not that it was given) more power doesn't solve the problem or protect us.
edit on 1 7 16 by auraofblack because: (no reason given)




posted on Jul, 1 2016 @ 10:43 AM
link   
a reply to: Nexttimemaybe

We have national laws, not county ones and those cases have been up and down the country, as far south as Oxford and London.



posted on Jul, 1 2016 @ 10:45 AM
link   
a reply to: auraofblack

Vigilante justice? Fair enough.

If anyone I'm related to says someone did something like that then I'd probably not even bother the cops with it in the first place.



posted on Jul, 1 2016 @ 10:49 AM
link   
a reply to: auraofblack

That's why we need more information to be certain about the case.

The subtext of the article indicates that it's adult women who are being protected...over 16s at least. That then infers allegations and possibly charges without quite enough evidence to convict.

I get what you're saying about false charges by the police and it's always a possibility. However I'd like to think that due process and a lot of persuasive evidence was involved for this guy to be put on what amounts to a 'risk register.'

The fact that he's gone public doesn't help either. Many a serial rapist has pled their innocence and so have a few killers too. Then again, he might feel like he has no choice but to go public if he's truly innocent.

Like I said earlier, I'm definitely torn. I personally know of two separate cases where the accused was 100% guilty of rape and the victims withdrew for very good reasons. I can't say more than that and only mention them to lend an insight as to why I hold this perspective.



posted on Jul, 1 2016 @ 11:12 AM
link   
a reply to: SprocketUK

I hear what your saying. Current punishments under our justice system are ineffective and only seem to be used in a way that undermines the justice system as a whole. I know for a fact that this isn't used against sex offenders who are due to be released and still pose a threat....... Think about that.

IF your convicted, you're sent to prison where someone will council you on why you turned into a nonce, your invited to make up excuses, so they can think they understand the root of the problem before turning you loose, back into society.

If your not convicted, they can effectively make it a legal requirement for you to insinuate to every person your likely to have sex with that you are a nonce, even though its likely proven in a court of law that you're not...... Seems like they have the responses and method of dealing with this are mixed up.

Excuse me, now I have a rape planned at 5 and I don't want to miss my appointment, with all the immigrants getting these appointments these days its murder to get one. Typical UK muppet stuff.

Problem: making sure no rapist or sex offender get away with their crimes.
UK Government solution: Make em make appointments first.

They probably even draft in NHS appointment managers that have been sacked from the NHS for under performance to run the whole scheme.



posted on Jul, 1 2016 @ 11:15 AM
link   
Well, to the OP. This man (who cannot be named for legal reasons) has clearly done something that required the Court to impose this restriction. Probably saved him from prison. The interim sexual risk order is actually meant to protect the public. He's also prevented from certain internet activities...

What's wrong with that?


The order entitles the court to prohibit the defendant from doing anything described in it. The minimum duration of an order is two years. The order is intended as a preventative measure to protect the public in the UK, or children or vulnerable adults abroad, from harm.


Source opens in a PDF



posted on Jul, 1 2016 @ 11:19 AM
link   
What a draconian law. If they were to convict him of this "crime" and he went to prison.......does the same law apply to him while he's locked up? I mean I can hear him now....." Well their gonna be a gang rape of me in the shower hour...Do I have to get everybody's names? LOL



posted on Jul, 1 2016 @ 11:27 AM
link   
a reply to: Kandinsky

I'm not torn. If laws and process of the laws protected us then acts like this wouldn't even see the light day. People in this country and many others IMO need to stop looking at the governments to serve them properly when their response is only ever to impose more loss of freedoms(which they grant)

It comes down to responsibility. How many times do think a dock has been filled with relatives of the victims to these crimes? Do you think that a Husband who now has to pick up the pieces of his wife after someone raped her thinks a jail sentence is enough? What about the Father and Mother of some poor child that has been groomed?

I don't think the state should be responsible, because it can't, its not capable. If it oversteps the mark, which is often the case the people then become slaves and lives are ruined and in such way as in this case that actually makes a mockery of the whole system of the law.

How many re offenders do you think you'd get in a society where the people carry out the punishment?



posted on Jul, 1 2016 @ 11:38 AM
link   
a reply to: auraofblack

Well I'm not a supporter of vigilante justice. False allegations can lead to lynchings just as easily as genuine ones.

A small mob wanted to set fire to a paediatricians in Wales a few years ago. They couldn't read properly and thought the good doctor's brass business plate on the door said 'paedophile.'

We're not in Afghanistan are we? Or rural India with 'witch' burnings.

The legal system can always be improved, I agree with that. The only way to improve vigilante justice is introduce a court and that ultimately leads straight back to a legal system, right?



posted on Jul, 1 2016 @ 11:40 AM
link   
a reply to: auraofblackOh, you mean like the guy earlier this week that was groomed by a 15 year old girl who he thought was over 20 years old.
And of course the 15 old girl was a member of a self appointed anti- paedophile group so when they met him they kicked him to death. Is that the form of justice you're on about. An innocent man dead because he believed he was meeting a woman over 20 years old but met a self appointed judge, jury and executioner.



posted on Jul, 1 2016 @ 11:43 AM
link   
a reply to: paraphi

First line in and to reasons for qualifying for this order; If someone is convicted or cautioned for the offence.

If a policeman cautions you on an offence which is qualifying, they can slap this on you for 2 years. You can then apply to the magistrates who in the UK amount to a bunch of nosey busybodies with no legal training who are advised by the clark of the court what is legal and what is not.

It says they can apply this to convicted sexual offenders, but I know this isn't happening for a fact. If you keep your head down in jail and comply, you get a pass. If you don't, I'm unsure if they provide a new appointment book and pen.

If this protected people, then there wouldn't be so many sexual offences would there? The more I read it the more it looks like a tool of subjugation .



posted on Jul, 1 2016 @ 11:44 AM
link   
I would call the cops each morning to tell them I plan on having sex that day....



posted on Jul, 1 2016 @ 11:45 AM
link   
a reply to: trollz

The modern day British Police have to be the most backward inbred bunch of establishment tools that ever graced western law enforcement,it's no surprise if you have an IQ higher than a gold fish you won't get in,these clowns would arrest a ham sandwich if the local Judge gave out an arrest warrant.



posted on Jul, 1 2016 @ 11:46 AM
link   
a reply to: trollz

Twice I read "planned", what if unplanned?



posted on Jul, 1 2016 @ 11:55 AM
link   
a reply to: crayzeed

NO absolutely not. Anyone and all involved should be subjected to the same fate. The punishments should be so severe and so removed from the law that it makes people with these compulsions stop and think before they do it. Not Mob law, mob punishment.

I did state in a previous post that accusers should be dealt with exactly the same if found to be lying. We live now in a society where they have the capability to effectively monitor anyone they want, they do it anyhow. I don't know of the case in particular you are referring to but I assume that the matter was gotten down to when the technology of the offenders was queried and found to tell the story? No punishment but one chosen by the deceased loved ones is even close to being justice in a case like this.

Retain a system of law, simplified to make it offence to violate any persons free will concerning their sexual boundaries and personal liberties. Impose a system which allows for those found guilty under a common sense application of those laws, to then be turned over to the victim or victims family so they can decide and impose punishment, if they can't impose punishment they may delegate.
edit on 1 7 16 by auraofblack because: because I'm still learning how to write in my own language



posted on Jul, 1 2016 @ 12:08 PM
link   
a reply to: Kandinsky

Not vigilante Justice, the mob is stupid. Vigilante Punishment is where its at.



posted on Jul, 1 2016 @ 12:13 PM
link   
I have a question.

Let's suppose this man met a willing woman one evening and, not wanting to miss his opportunity, 'spent some time with her'.

If he keeps quiet about it, how are the police ever to know what occurred?

Women who have one night stands are hardly likely to walk into a police station the next day to try and find out if their 'beau' ought to have given them - the police - notice of likely sexual activity.

Sadly, the only way this man's actions are likely to come to police attention is if he does actually rape someone and they complain and can identify him. Unless he is under constant surveillance?
edit on 1-7-2016 by berenike because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 1 2016 @ 12:20 PM
link   
a reply to: berenike

Don't quote me on this but I think that if someone who has kids or suspects somethings not right, they can actually go and check with police about your status. I'm sure this order would apply after the fact if it later become known that you had went against the order. Not to mention, going against it and hoping they kept quiet would leave you very very open to being blackmailed.
edit on 1 7 16 by auraofblack because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 1 2016 @ 12:35 PM
link   
a reply to: auraofblack

I suppose one could look at it that the order protects him as much as much as it protects potential victims.


edit on 1-7-2016 by berenike because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 1 2016 @ 01:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: Xtrozero
I would call the cops each morning to tell them I plan on having sex that day....


and give them the name of the prime ministers wife....



new topics

top topics



 
11
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join