http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-42574651
He's sure about that? :bitchy:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-42574651
He's sure about that? :bitchy:
Disgraceful decision. This is a man who meticulously planned his crimes. He was given an indeterminate sentence and he should never be released. He was in a position of trust, which he repeatedly abused. He’ll only be 60 when he’s released, and I’m convinced he’ll reoffend.
Yup. He's a monster; he should be treated like one.Quote:
Originally Posted by lord bunberry
I hope as many of the other women he assaulted lay complaints against him, and that the police can charge him with further crimes and put him away for the rest of his life.
People like him should never be released.
Violence against women is something that disgusts me more than almost anything else I can think of. Society doesn't take it seriously enough and the judicial system is just a reflection of that.
https://inews.co.uk/opinion/comment/...mpression=true
Legal perspective
With guys like this, i just dont understand why we, as a society, should take the risk?
Even if there is a very small chance he will reoffend, it is too big a risk imo.
I know we aim for rehabilitation etc, not at the expense of ANY risk to the public.
A dangerous, calculating predator. Over 100 rapes and sexual assaults?! How on earth can he possibly be trusted to be let back out in society again?!
Disgusting decision and hell mend them if some other poor woman or girl is hurt by this monster.
TBH the whole tone of that article ticks me off. I'm sure that the law was observed in this case, and I am aware that lawyers can always find something somewhere in the statute books to justify all manner of injustice. This isn't a discussion topic in a law school class; this guy is a serial rapist and as such should be presumed dangerous until proven beyond doubt to be safe. Far too many of these offenders are released into the community only to re-offend - or in other words, to damage or destroy more lives of more women (and children).Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Grieves
One rape; five sexual assaults (what's the practical difference here if you're the woman on the receiving end?); one attempted sexual assault (not for want of trying, then); and twelve charges of drugging (what did the trial judge think he was up to, drugging them?). How convenient that one of the major after-effects of date-rape drugs like rohypnol is amnesia - that's why rapists use them. They don't tend to drug women and then not take things further.
Effectively he gets a sentence of 8 years - 10 with time served - which means the judge assessed each assault as deserving of less that a year in jail. That's preposterous, and a grave insult to all the women he assaulted.
He's going to be out soon, and we're supposed to believe that he's done the SO program and it's worked.
Although the bit in red underlined below does leave one wondering just how successful this program may have been ...
"Parole Board hearings are held in private and the full reasons for release decisions are not publicly available. Further information about Parole Board hearings in IPP cases is available here. The panel of three – often (although not always) chaired by a judge – will in appropriate cases also include a psychiatrist or psychologist, and the panel will have a dossier containing relevant materials about the prisoner and their progress. The panel can hear live evidence from offender managers, supervisors and psychiatrists, and there is scope also for victims to put forward their views. (Note - it appears that in this case the victims were not consulted.)
"As to exactly what happened in this case, we simply don’t know any more than the short statement above discloses. One presumes that Worboys will have completed a sex offender treatment programme, although as has been pointed out by barrister Matt Stanbury, it is unclear whether this will be the same programme that was scrapped by the government earlier this year after it was found to increase rather than reduce sexual offending.
"One presumes that there will have been highly persuasive evidence and strong recommendations by Worboys’ offender managers to convince the usually risk-averse Parole Board to direct his release, and there will be stringent restrictions on his movements with the threat of an immediate return to custody hanging over him at all times, but as to the details we are largely, and regrettably, in the dark."
https://inews.co.uk/opinion/comment/man-raped-hundreds-women-released-prison-9-years/amp/?__twitter_impression=true
("One presumes"? In other words "one does not know but one hopes that this might be the case". If the law 'presumes' that a serial rapist like John Worboys turns over a new leaf and becomes safe to be let out into the community on the basis of a doubtful rehabilitation program and the word of an expert's interview, then as the guy in Oliver Twist says, the law is an ass. The last sentence is comforting, though - if he does rape some other poor woman, and this time he doesn't drug her successfully so she remembers and can testify, and goes through the ordeal of doing so, he'll finally get the sentence he deserves right now. So it's all OK.)
"Parole Board chair 'confident Worboys will not re-offend' .... "
Ah well, that's good. Everything is rosy again.
FFS, you have to wonder where all this will end. A posthumous pardon for Hitler? :crazy:
A few years ago a girl I know was raped by a guy she had met on a night out. He was never convicted because the PF felt a conviction was difficult as she had willingly agreed to go back to his house, had kissed him earlier and the only other witness in the house said they had heard her crying but weren't aware of what actually went on. This girl wasn't a liar and she told a few of us what had occured and it sounded like a brutal ordeal.Quote:
Originally Posted by SouthsideHarp_Bhoy
About a year later the same guy was convicted of rape in similar circumstances and also convicted of 2 further sexual assaults where he had attacked women in the street. He was sentenced to 6 years in prison and was back on the streets in less than 4. Last year he was convicted of a further 3 sexual assaults.
Some people can't or won't be rehabilitated.
It's only when it affects people that you know, that the horror of this sort of experience becomes clear.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pretty Boy
Prolific sexual offenders like John Worboys cannot be rehabilitated in my opinion and should see out the rest of their days in prison.
His impending release disgusts me and I feel for any female who lives in the community that he's to be released into. The authorities can put any restriction on him that they want, it won't give any protection to any poor woman or girl if he decides to attack them. I understand that he would be recalled straight back to prison if he does reoffend but it would destroy that person's life if he does attack someone else.
All because they are "confident" he won't reoffend.
Men like him are masters of deceit and manipulation, who's to say he hasn't used such tactics to convince these people he should be released.
This wasn't just a one off crime he committed, it's a very long series of attacks that were all pre-planned and calculated. I'm sorry but this man cannot be trusted. I pray to God that some other poor woman doesn't fall victim to him but I really fear they will.
There was a guy on the radio today saying it was very easy to convince the parole board that he was a changed man. The parole board hearings are private and this guy was basically saying as long as he says the right things he will be able to convince the board.Quote:
Originally Posted by 21.05.2016
The guy was also in no doubt that he would go on to commit more sexual assaults and rapes.
This monster being released and the danger to the female public is one thing, but the message it sends out to any wannabe rapists is very worrying.
The message to rapists is already worrying. The rapist who is charged, convicted and jailed is the unlucky one in the current system.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hibrandenburg
Correct. Only 6% of rape allegations lead to a conviction.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pretty Boy
The stats are so scary. Rape cases can be so complex and it often comes down to "one persons word against another".Quote:
Originally Posted by lord bunberry
Absolutely and that’s why we have governments trying and failing to bring in legislation to try and help the situation, but in general it makes things worse. The only solution to this is education of young men, and if I’m being honest I think it is starting to improve a bit. When I was young I didn’t have female friends and the same applied to to most of the girls I knew. Refreshingly those attitudes seem to be changing. We’re a long way from equality, but I do think things are heading in the right direction.
I dare say the Parole Board live in leafy parts of the Home Counties and seldom require the services of a late night cab.
It is a difficult thing to prove in a court of law though.Quote:
Originally Posted by 21.05.2016
If you have one person saying they didn't consent to sex and another person saying that they did, unless there's a witness to this alleged crime, it is very difficult to prove that a crime has taken place when the conviction ultimately hinges on whether or not both people consented to sexual intercourse. It is always the job of the prosecution to prove that a crime did take place, rather than the defence's job to prove that it didn't.
It's not like attempted murder or assault or other crimes which involve violence where it's not going to be a question of whether the victim was a willing participant or not.
I can understand why the conviction rates are so low when it comes to rape although I obviously have a massive amount of sympathy with the women who are subjected to such a terrifying ordeal. Experiencing something so horrific must be bad enough in itself, to then have plucked up the courage to report it to the police and then find your attacker getting away with it must be almost as bad as the attack itself.
The guys a monster and shouldn't see daylight.
As regards to past comments on this thread, what about women who falsely accuse ? Their supposed attacker is put through the ringer and no recourse.
Whataboutery. Obviously it's a bad thing. I haven't seen the figures but I'm willing to bet false allegations are a very small proportion of genuine cases, which are always under reported anyway.Quote:
Originally Posted by stoneyburn hibs
Agree - the benefit of of the doubt should always favour the public, not the offender.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pretty Boy
That sound horriffic for your pal, and future behaviour would seem to weigh in on her side of the story.
However as discussed above, it is a very difficult thing to prove. Im not sure how that can change, where one person's word is the only main evidence, its pretty hard to remove any reasonable doubt, particuarly in date rape cases.
It isn’t possible to change the law around rape cases as it’s almost always going to be one persons word against another’s. What needs to change is people’s attitude towards members of the opposite sex. That and the police and the courts dramatically improving their procedures in rape allegations.Quote:
Originally Posted by SouthsideHarp_Bhoy
I find it absolutely disgusting that a woman’s previous sexual history is allowed to be used as evidence against her, while a mans sexual history is considered irrelevant, that and the fact that a man can choose to defend himself and cross examine the victim. In the future people will look back at this with disbelief.
It would appear that Worboys has found god and he's forgiven him. Just wondering if this has played a role in the parole board's decision?
Quite controversial, but if ever chemical castration was required it is for men like him.
Do you and others on here have access to ANY of the information before the Parole Board?Quote:
Originally Posted by lord bunberry
You’re all attacking people who have all the relevant information for their confidence in a decision, and yet with zero information you are all 100% confident the decision is wrong!
An indeterminate sentence just means that someone won’t be released until they are ready to be released. Rather than be released too early having done no rehabilitation work. Clearly this guy has completed the prescribed rehab successfully. Time will tell if the decision is right or wrong of course.
Unlikely. However, if he has a genuine involvement in church activities that occupy his time, then perhaps it will have had some bearing.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hibrandenburg
I think false accusations are much less commonplace than people think. Many accused are acquitted but this is more likely to be due to be because the conviction cannot be secured rather than a person deliberately lying about what happened.Quote:
Originally Posted by stoneyburn hibs
If we kept everyone in who posed ANY risk to the public we’d need prisons on every street in the land!Quote:
Originally Posted by SouthsideHarp_Bhoy
Clearly, but like any risk there are differing levels, how this guy has been classed obviously as very low to minimal seems beyond belief to most people.Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve-O
This guy should never be released. I don’t care how rehabilitated some people think he is. He’s probably one of the worst sex offenders this country has ever seen.Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve-O
Parole Board decisions here are essentially publicly available documents. It’d probably be useful if they were in the UK too so that the public could at least get an insight.Quote:
Originally Posted by Scouse Hibby
But, the public perception that the Board members are completely out of touch with reality is, I would suggest, most likely to be incorrect.
I don’t think that is true. IF all of the allegations had been proven, then you might be right, but you can’t detain people on the basis of accusations alone.Quote:
Originally Posted by lord bunberry
I also note he’s ‘only’ got 1 charge of rape, which was a surprise to me. What are the other offences?
Yeah fair point, but he wad already in situ, had a cell in the nonce wing, and we are choosing to let him out. Obviously you cant lock eveyone up, and many people who pose a risk will never act on it, but he has, repeatedly, and sex offending seems more of a mental disorder where people act on compulsion, as opposed to say some guy who is a bit of a bam if provoked with a drink in him in the pub who may lay one on somebody. So i think itnis unlikely he has been cured of his disorder.Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve-O
Im no criminologist though, and i appreciate that there may be oractical, and legal difficulties.
It is possible for sex offenders to learn to manage their impulses. That is really what the treatment is all about, rather than offering a ‘cure’ as such. Treat programmes do not deluded themselves into thinking men with high sex drives (to the point they’ll offend to get it) will suddenly lose interest in sex via counselling or the like. It’s about how to appropriately act on the drive etc etc.Quote:
Originally Posted by SouthsideHarp_Bhoy
The media will always report the heinous cases where people reoffend but they don’t report the many others who don’t reoffend on release. Reoffending rates for sexual offending are actually reasonably low I believe. Certainly much lower than the popular perception of every single one of them reoffending rapidly!
That's an interesting point, are there any statistics to show low reoffending rates from sex offenders?Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve-O
A study in 2004 that looked at circa 32000 cases found a reoffending rate of 13.7% for sexual offences and 36.9% for all offences over a 5 year period.Quote:
Originally Posted by Scouse Hibby
26% was the average reoffending rate in 2013.
You make a fair point. Its a good lesson as to why we shpuldnt engage in hyperbole based on media storms, something i try to avoid but i was guilty of here!Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve-O
👍Quote:
Originally Posted by Pretty Boy
Sexual assault and drugging women. Most of the women have no recollection of what happened as they were drugged.Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve-O
Cheers. As I said, pretty low rates overall.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pretty Boy
A low rate can still mean a large number of victims.Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve-O
Not saying there will be no further victims, just saying statistics suggest the large majority of sex offenders do not reoffend, contrary to popular belief. Obviously in an ideal world that rate would be 0% but I doubt that’s ever going to happen.Quote:
Originally Posted by lapsedhibee
Howz about housing him next door to where the parole board families live? :hmmm:
Good idea, they could then use him for the school run and picking up the women from nights out.Quote:
Originally Posted by snooky
Doesn’t really matter where he lives when his modus operandi is picking up women in a vehicle.Quote:
Originally Posted by snooky
Good point, maybe a driving ban would be relevant.Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve-O
Happens here - a condition to (a) not work in any kind of Taxi/private hire job and (b) not to drive any motor vehicle would likely be imposed.Quote:
Originally Posted by Scouse Hibby
The decision has just been overturned, head of parole board forced to resign.
Good, I hope he never gets out.Quote:
Originally Posted by hibsbollah
Good and good.Quote:
Originally Posted by hibsbollah
Or maybe the accused just isn't guilty as proven and judged?Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir David Gray
They will however have had their name splashed all over the papers and social network. It's insane that the accused aren't granted anonymity until proven guilty.
It is quite surprising to me from reading the BBC article on all this that the English parole board appears to be miles behind the NZ Parole Board in many ways.Quote:
Originally Posted by hibsbollah