The Beached Whale Child Sex Abuser

Discussion in 'Current Affairs' started by asst_dep_to_dep_asst, Dec 16, 2009.

Welcome to the Navy Net aka Rum Ration

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial RN website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. I know there are old threads on this, but the thought that this horrendous specimen has even the hope of release in 7 years proves that British law has been irrevocably diluted.

    I'm with the mother who said that the taxpayer should not have to be paying to keep Ms George and her accomplices alive. Just hope that there is a harpoonist waiting for her when she is next seen in public.

    No doubt there will be those on here that still think that paedophilia is an illness......
     
  2. Even if it is an illness they can still fcuk off and be 'cured' with being shot in the back of the head.
     
  3. It IS an illness.
    Should be treated by euthanasia.

    2BM
     
  4. One must not forget that one has neighbours who are thick cnuts who canna read or write except when filling out the claim forms who believe that a pediatric and a pediatrician are also child molesters.

    What a FUBAR world we are living in!!!! Nephew running in the school sport's no cameras allowed. The swimming gala no cameras allowed. Pantomine no cameras allowed. Local school brings along the local newspaper cameraman who takes the school choir pictures which you can now buy from the local newspaper office. Because no cameras allowed. Bollocks!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
     
  5. My bold.

    They nearly always are in a position of trust. Fathers, uncles, scout leaders, catholic priests – you name it. It’s exactly why the CRB came into being; not to deal with the 'casual' or opportunistic, but those who are systematic and life-long abusers.

    I think what's shocked people more is that it's a woman abusing her position of trust. That's not supposed to happen.

    Though I've seen and heard a few articles since that suggest it's not that unusual after all.
     
  6. I think this case blows holes in quite a few assumptions such as

    CBR checks will stop abuse, well clearly they don't and never will. At best they give a wholly misplaced indication that we are doing something when quite clearly we are not doing anything but stopping good honest decent people working with children.

    Women cannot abuse children, once again this is clearly not true, and probably has never been so.

    That abusers can be profiled and identified before they start abusing. Well that is of course complete rubbish. I think we need to spend much more effort on identifying abuse early and creating an evironment where abuse is not easy. Now these will not be easy, cannot be achieved at no cost with silly draconian laws.

    Lets face it the hand gun ban has not stopped hand guns being used to kill people just as CRB checks due no stop child abuse.
     
  7. Seadog

    Seadog War Hero Moderator

    Some of whom post on Rum Ration ( not you ).

    Some deletions. Pointless ranting.
     
  8. All a CRB proves is that the person has never been caught or convicted
     
  9. CRB..!!!

    BRING BACK HANGING!!
     
  10. Wow some one noticed that, the problem is that all government, local government and schools etc seem to think it is the main method of protecting kids
     
  11. All CRB checks do is lull people into a false sense of security.Whatever systems are put in place,draconian or otherwise,the determined abuser will sidestep them.The other problem with the system is that any of us could go to the Police and voice suspicions about someone out of malicious spite and blight their chances of working with children on the basis of no evidence whatsoever.
     
  12. People working anywhere close to "vulnerable persons", which includes everybody receiving medical care, as well as children are now routinely CRB checked, at £40+ a pop. Those moving between jobs in the NHS are checked by their "new" employer i.e. the next Trust for which they work, despite the fact that there is an extant check, sometimes only a few months old, held within the same organisation i.e. the NHS.

    Vanessa George was cleared by a CRB check, proving that the CRB check is useless.

    The Criminal Records Bureau is an utter waste of time and money. If the NHS did not have to fork out the millions it has to pay annually for this spurious nonsense, more could be targetted on patient care.
     
  13. I don’t think the CRB is a complete waste of money, but it’s also not the panacea it’s touted as.

    The idea behind it is that a paedophile who has already been convicted is put off from trying to inveigle their way back into contact with children by other means, as for every job they apply for there is a fresh check, which also stops the possibility of forgeries.

    For those of us who have no convictions, warnings, or had chats without coffee with the local constabulary, it’s all a bit of a pain. Especially when it holds job applications up. I’ve had to complete two in the space of three months; one with my employer, one for voluntary work. Both applications were stopped dead until the CRB had been processed, much to the irritation of my employer particularly.

    The new system due to start next November (I think) is IMHO a step way too far, with people who have regular contact with children (regular being stated as once a week) requiring a check. The catchment for that is huge. You drive your neighbours’ kids to football with your own? You’ll need a check. Are you an electrician who has a contract with the local council? You’ll need a check. Are you the local bobby who discusses crime with children in assembly? Yep, you also will need a check.

    Funny thing though – amongst all the talk about protecting children I’ve yet to hear one voice in authority suggest it’s made a difference, or present any evidence to that effect.
     
  14. Well I do think the CRB as it is currently run is a waste of time and effort. If we created a register of people who meet the CRB standards just nlike there is for teachers doctors etc which people paid an annual fee to remain listed then these multiple checks would dissappear and the problems experience with multiple jobs, moving jobs eyts would be eased.

    The reality though is the system is unlikely to prevent anothe Soham or Dunblane (just line banning handguns will not stop another Dunblane) and will certainly not prevent another fat slag or other scool/nursery type abuse, nor will it have any effect on infamily abuse (which is still I understand the most common).

    One of the bigger problems is the time the abuse goes on for before detection/reporting and perhaps we would do a greater service to those affected by addressing this problem rather than making life spectacularly difficult for the innocent.
     
  15. I agree, the CRB would be absolutely no protection against another Soham or Dunblane, which were random acts carried out by sick people. Detection before-hand would of course have been what was needed, though I’m not sure how that could be achieved.

    Detection and protection shouldn’t be mutually exclusive anyway.

    No, what I particularly dislike about the CRB and its forthcoming replacement, apart from the bureaucracy, is the assumption that I’m a paedophile unless I’m certified normal. That all people who may come into contact with children are guilty until proven innocent. Including parents. That’s a direction I’m not happy with society going in and, I think, will only lead to suspicion and paranoia.
     
  16. Detection and protection are not mutally exclusive, the better the detection the more protection there is as it stops some serial abuse.

    I agree the CRB thing is a headline grabbing activity which makes the government look as if they are doing something and gives them some one else to blaim when things go tits up again. The concept of CRB checks is not daft, as it is known that some convicted persons do try to get employment in target rich environments but in general they are a smaller problem than the 'new' offenders like the fat slag, and in family offenders.
     
  17. It's much more likely that those "target-rich environments" would be better served by having to weed out the likely perps in their application and interview processes, rather than being given the ready-made get out clause of a negative CRB check. Too much of our public and health-care service is now predicated on achieving nonsensical targets, rather than provision of quality services, including the identification and management of potential abuse. The CRB is unwieldy, expensive and impractical and just plain doesn't work.
     
  18. Now you may think that this reaction is a bit extreme but statistics do show that whenever the death penalty is carried out they never re-offend….

    …..
     
  19. ........and some even get a Posthumus Pardon, don't they?

    Cap Pun: Simples.
     
  20. Can I suggest you read some of my other posts on this subject before selectively criticising a very small part taking it out of context.
     

Share This Page