It's Paedogeddon! (Is Paedophilia Increasing?)

[Leaferne]

Does anyone actually believe that paedophilla is more prevailent today than say one hundred years or more ago, or is it just that it is revealed more often?

On the United States frontier, down to the time of the Civil War, the young schoolmaster moving to town fresh out of normal school was not only permitted but EXPECTED to choose his bride from amongst his seventh and eighth grade girls.

At that time there was no such construct as adolescence; a girl in the 7th or 8th grade (which in Canada would be ages 11-13) would be considered a young adult, not a child. Marry young, pump out kids, die horribly of some post-partum complication by age 25. How much choice would those young brides have had if their parents thought well of the schoolmaster and wanted to get the girls out of the house?

Of course, you could argue that today the life period known as adolescence tends to stretch into the 20s and beyond, i.e. still economically dependent on parents, delaying of career and marriage, etc. However, rightly or wrongly, in today's mores, prepubescents are considered children, and western society believes that children should be protected from sexual encounters for which they are mentally, physically and emotionally unprepared.

On that note, I've heard a rumour (don't ask where) that Gary Glitter may be repatriated back to Britain this spring but can't find independent (or non-tabloid) confirmation. Anyone else heard this?

 

[OldTimeRadio]

At that time there was no such construct as adolescence; a girl in the 7th or 8th grade (which in Canada would be ages 11-13) would be considered a young adult, not a child. Marry young, pump out kids, die horribly of some post-partum complication by age 25. How much choice would those young brides have had if their parents thought well of the schoolmaster and wanted to get the girls out of the house?

Leaferne, I assure you that I wasn't defending the practice, merely pointing out that this was common and accepted "only yesterday." These people were our grandparents' grandparents.

What people don't realize today is that in 19th Century Maryland the age of female consent was SEVEN! Other States were horrified by this and eventually forced Maryland to rasie the age to NINE, "like the good Lord intended."

Within my own lifetime statutory rape was sexual contact with a child UNDER 12.

 

[Quake42]

At that time there was no such construct as adolescence; a girl in the 7th or 8th grade (which in Canada would be ages 11-13) would be considered a young adult, not a child.

I must confess I was a little surprised to read this.

In Victorian Britain most working class young people, at least, did not marry until well into their 20s or even later. Parents were keen to have the economic benefit of a house full of working adults for a few years before their children started families of their own. I don't recall middle and upper class people marrying much before their early 20s either.

Perhaps the "frontier" mentality in the US/Canada accounted for the difference? *shrug*

 

[Leaferne]

Possibly, but my main point was that I'm not sure a girl in 7th or 8th grade would be considered a 'child' the way she would be today.

 

[OldTimeRadio]

Perhaps the "frontier" mentality in the US/Canada accounted for the difference? *shrug*

That's certainly a large part of it. In a frontier hamlet of 500 or even a thousand inhabitants marriage choices were somewhat limited.

But remember that in England at the same time child prostitution was common and there seem to have been few legal consequences for using such services.

The only exception I can immediately bring to mind was the great journalist W. T. Stead who "bought" a girl child, NOT for sexual purposes but rather to rescue her from such a life. The Crown put him in prison for doing it.

 

[escargot]

Stead's great achievement was to bring the practice to public recognition, and he was fully prepared for prison. If he hadn't been tried and found guilty, the message from the authorities would have been that 'buying' children for prostitution was O.K.

Stead wore a prison uniform on the anniversary of his conviction for many years afterwards, and eventually died on the Titanic, having apparently foreseen his own death.

Edit - Search the Old Bailey records up to 1834. Sex offences against children were punished, often severely.

I find this site fascinating. 8)

 

[WhistlingJack]

Wanted paedophile is named on web

Wanted paedophile is named on web

A child sex offender on the run from South Yorkshire has become the sixth paedophile to have his details posted on a "most wanted" website.

Peter Wheatherley, 39, is also known to have connections in the North East and Manchester areas.

But police suspect he could be in Spain or elsewhere in Europe.

The government-funded website launched in November with the aim of tracing the most serious convicted child sex offenders in the UK who have vanished.

So far, four of the first five offenders whose details were posted on the Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre (CEOP) website have been located.

Police said Wheatherley had failed to comply with requirements under the Sexual Offences Act 2003.

He is known to use aliases and is said to be adept at changing his appearance.

Jim Gamble, chief executive of the centre, said: "Wheatherley is new to our site.

"I'd ask people to take a look at him and if they have suspicions about his whereabouts to report them directly to the local police force or anonymously to Crimestoppers."

Mr Gamble said the most wanted site had proved to be a "massively successful tool" for locating missing offenders.

"Recently this website prompted a public sighting which led to the arrest of Paul Francis Turner in Northern France", he said.

"He was our fourth convicted offender to be located since we launched the service in November.

"So our message is clear. Child sex offenders will be caught. There will be no hiding place.

"Children everywhere need to be protected from this horrific crime and we will do all we can to meet that objective."

Story from BBC NEWS:

Published: 2006/12/29 11:10:03 GMT

© BBC MMVI

 

[OldTimeRadio]

The only problem I have with the current laws against pedophiles is that in many - and perhaps even most - American jurisdictions, first-time offenders are now forced to register as "HABITUAL Offenders."

Yes, I'm fully aware of how high recividism rates are with such offenders, so perhaps this is how it has to be - but it still strikes me as rather Kafkaesque.

 

[escargot]

Came across this quote today in a journal article about elder abuse.
The bit I've put in bold is what I thought most interesting. :shock:

People find it hard to understand why anyone would want to abuse an old person, but someone suffering some mental and physical frailty is the perfect victim: they can't defend themselves, they can't get away, and if they're able to communicate they're probably not believed. What more could any abuser want? It's not about sex, it's about power. There are even pages on paedophile websites encouraging men finding it hard to access children to gain employment at care homes. They say the sex is just as good and there's far less risk of getting caught. (Ginny Jenkin, director of Action for Elder Abuse, quoted in Hill, The Guardian 25th February 2001)

 

[OldTimeRadio]

Came across this quote today in a journal article about elder abuse. The bit I've put in bold is what I thought most interesting. :shock:

People find it hard to understand why anyone would want to abuse an old person, but someone suffering some mental and physical frailty is the perfect victim: they can't defend themselves, they can't get away, and if they're able to communicate they're probably not believed. What more could any abuser want? It's not about sex, it's about power. There are even pages on paedophile websites encouraging men finding it hard to access children to gain employment at care homes. They say the sex is just as good and there's far less risk of getting caught. (Ginny Jenkin, director of Action for Elder Abuse, quoted in Hill, The Guardian 25th February 2001)

If the elderly resident is physically impaired but NOT mentally deficient. and gives permission, this is probably not even illegal.

But my understanding is that pedophiles prefer the undeveloped or semi-developed children. Or is it that like other rapists, they simply demand power over a helpless victim?

 

[escargot]

It's about power.

The point about the elderly victim of abuse is that it doesn't matter if the abuser has the victim's signature in triplicate, written in blood: the abuser is in a position of power over the victim. So it can never be an equal relationship.

In this position, an elderly person is in the same position as a child would be: isolated from help, dependent on carers, unlikely to be believed, and so on. The latest research shows that this is indeed the case.

 

[Beakmoo]

It's about power.

The point about the elderly victim of abuse is that it doesn't matter if the abuser has the victim's signature in triplicate, written in blood: the abuser is in a position of power over the victim. So it can never be an equal relationship.

In this position, an elderly person is in the same position as a child would be: isolated from help, dependent on carers, unlikely to be believed, and so on. The latest research shows that this is indeed the case.

You have to be careful following that particular line of thought. It wasn't long ago that many disabled people were routinely thought of as asexual and for all practical purposes forced into a life of celibacy.

 

[OldTimeRadio]

Where precisely is it chiselled into stone that a woman of 80, in good mental and physical health, whether or not in extended care, is to be totally denied sex, regardless of her own personal desires on the subject?

I know of a government-owned apartment building which caters exclusively to wheelchair-bound inhabitants. Originally the occupants were denied the right to have any overnight guests, especially of the opposite sex.

That hit the courts, and you can guess which side won. It WASN'T the "these people are in wheelchairs, so they're no longer fully human" side.

 

[Leaferne]

Oof, scargy, I wish I hadn't read that. My 78-year old mum is in a home with Alzheimers, and while I have a good feeling about the place, one can't help but wonder what goes on in even the best facilities sometimes.

 

[escargot]

Leafy, the way to be sure your mother is OK is to do all things you do already. I know that you are in touch with the home and are interested in her welfare. You do 'stick up' for her rights. She is thus not isolated and vulnerable.

As for older/disabled people's rights to sex - in the UK, these rights are recognised. Staff are trained in enabling clients to fulfil their rights.
For example, it would have been my job if the need arose on my shift to collect a female 'escort' for an elderly male client and drive her back afterwards.
In another care home, it was explained to me that I may be needed to 'assist' severely disabled clients who wished to have sex by physically positioning them.

The important thing here was each client's need, which they may legally exercise just like anyone else.

However, staff having sexual relationships with clients is a different matter. They get the sack.

 

[OldTimeRadio]

Makes sense to me.

For what that's worth.

 

[OneWingedBird]

Offender expert jailed over porn

A Home Office expert who helped set up a blacklist of violent sex offenders has been jailed for 14 months after admitting child pornography charges.

Vincent Barron, 49, from Bishop Auckland, County Durham, e-mailed 10 images of youngsters aged between five and 12 to a man in Kirkcaldy, Fife.

At the time, Barron was seconded to the Home Office to help set up the Violent and Sex Offenders Register.

Barron was also placed on the Sex Offenders Register for 10 years.

Indecent photographs

At Kirkcaldy Sheriff Court, Sheriff William Holligan told Barron a custodial sentence was the only option due to the gravity of the offence.

Barron, a former probation officer, had earlier admitted distributing or showing indecent photographs of children between May and August 2005.

The court heard that at the time of his offending he had been suffering from work-related stress, had been drinking more and was depressed.

Barron was interviewed by police when evidence linking him to the images was found by officers examining the other man's computer as part of a separate investigation.


Mr Barron still finds his behaviour quite inexplicable, even with the benefit of hindsight
Solicitor Ewen Roy
Barron could not explain why he had knowingly received and sent the images.

Solicitor Ewen Roy, defending, said: "Mr Barron still finds his behaviour quite inexplicable, even with the benefit of hindsight."

"He is entirely the author of his own misfortune," said Mr Roy.

"His actions have, in effect, ruined the life that he once had in terms of relationships with family members and friends and in terms of the loss of his career which he spent two decades building up."

The solicitor said Barron was particularly ashamed of the distress he had caused his wife, who continued to support him.

The court heard a psychiatric report placed Barron at a high risk of re-offending as internet offending could be quite a powerful addiction.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/edi ... 292431.stm

 

[OldTimeRadio]

The damned stuff seems to be addictive, highly so, although I don't pretend to have any good idea why.

There was another British case three or four years ago. A hand-picked group of especially "mature" (!) police detectives were selected to investigate child pornography, including purchasing it via both snail mail and the Internet.

Alas, after the investigation was over several of the officers involved continued to collect and trade the illegal material until they themselves were apprehended.

 

[Anonymous]

There was an article in yesterdays Sun about a bus driver who was jailed for molesting a girl 3 times.... and then got his old job back on the buses.

This link http://www.thesun.co.uk/article/0,,2-2007030783,00.html is a follow up story today which has a link to yesterdays story.

To this day the victim gets on buses that he still drives.

....

While I was typing this up the imcompetence of the authorities reminded me of a case on americas dumbest criminals where the police raided a house 4 times in 2 years, each time finding drugs and guns, the police could not work out why the criminals just didn't move.

 

[OldTimeRadio]

At least one SUN reader seems to believe that the molesting bus driver is being singled out for persecution by the paper. He's served his time and shouild be allowed to get on with his life.

I think such an attitude entirely misses the point.

Of course we should help ex-convicts gain legitimate employment. But if the perp's been convicted of, say, bank robbery the one job we don't give him is bank teller.

 

[Anonymous]

The SUN are always singling people out, I think they are very cruel at times.

But they don't care about singling out 1% of the people as long as the other 99% buy the paper and line their pockets.

 

[escargot]

I'm wondering how this character managed to get his old job back, as he is presumably on the Sex Offenders' Register and so shouldn't have been able to work in a position where he had contact with children.

Doesn't reflect well on Stagecoach, does it.
I reckon the local schools will be looking around for a different bus company when the present contracts run out.

 

[OldTimeRadio]

The SUN are always singling people out, I think they are very cruel at times.

But they don't care about singling out 1% of the people as long as the other 99% buy the paper and line their pockets.

But is breaking the news that a bus driver who molested a child passenger is still employed in the same profession and continuing to transport children "cruel" or a journalistic duty?

 

[Leaferne]

If he managed his previous offenses on or through the job, then yes, the media have a duty to report on it when he gets put right back where he was. Strong union or what?!

 

[OldTimeRadio]

Strong union or what?!

It's worth noting that his fellow bus drivers seem to have been greatly upset by him being re-hired.

 

[Anonymous]

The SUN are always singling people out, I think they are very cruel at times.

But they don't care about singling out 1% of the people as long as the other 99% buy the paper and line their pockets.

But is breaking the news that a bus driver who molested a child passenger is still employed in the same profession and continuing to transport children "cruel" or a journalistic duty?

My criticism of the sun singling people out was not based on this individual case, but my general experience of reading the paper over the years. They know the word 'paedophile' in a headline sells papers.

I was intruiged by a comment oldtimeradio made a few days ago about child porn stuff (in some cases) being highly addictive to seemingly ordinary people and the story about the cops who became addicted when it was their job to find the stuff on the net. Here's a similar story in todays daily mirror
link.

My local pub buys daily newspapers and most nights I go through them all over a couple of beers (beats spending 2 hours in w h smiths), yesterdays mirror had a story about a womans heartbreak on how she grassed up her husband for looking at kid porn and how she was releived to put him in jail, he had access to her kids and his but never laid a finger on them, I think to some extent, she just dreamed of identifying a paedophile and selling her story to the papers thinking it would make her a hero and get loads of sympathy.

On the front of this mornings london metro a similar man was not jailed because of john reids advice not to jail petty criminals.


edited by TheQuixote: fixed big link

 

[Pietro_Mercurios]

... I think to some extent, she just dreamed of identifying a paedophile and selling her story to the papers thinking it would make her a hero and get loads of sympathy.

...

You think too much.

 

[OldTimeRadio]

Speaking of the Devil Dept.

Speaking of the Devil Dept.:

The news broke here in Cincinnati just this afternoon that a Northern Kentucky (Boone County, where the Cincinnati Airport's located) schoolbus driver has been having an affair with a 15-year-old high school girl.

The police learned of the illicit relationship because the girl began bragging about it to her classmates.

oops.

 

[Leaferne]

My local pub buys daily newspapers and most nights I go through them all over a couple of beers (beats spending 2 hours in w h smiths), yesterdays mirror had a story about a womans heartbreak on how she grassed up her husband for looking at kid porn and how she was releived to put him in jail, he had access to her kids and his but never laid a finger on them, I think to some extent, she just dreamed of identifying a paedophile and selling her story to the papers thinking it would make her a hero and get loads of sympathy.

She wouldn't necessarily get loads of sympathy; the community may well look askance at her and wonder if she was involved herself. Daft, yes, but a lot of people think like that. Also, would a fleeting bit of glory in the local rag be worth losing one's husband, disrupting the family, enduring the resulting publicity, etc.? Are you saying she shouldn't have turned him in?

On the front of this mornings london metro a similar man was not jailed because of john reids advice not to jail petty criminals.

Is pedophilia considered a petty crime in Britain then? You make it sound like it's on a par with shoplifting or making too much noise coming home from the pub.

 

[OneWingedBird]

Is pedophilia considered a petty crime in Britain then? You make it sound like it's on a par with shoplifting or making too much noise coming home from the pub.

our jails are over capacity, reid says that only the most serious and persistent offenders must be jailed, and an idiot judge, apparently, doesn't consider being busted for kiddie porn to be serious...

...and now the whole thing's been spun out by the tabloids to suggest that this is what happens if we send fewer people to jail, rather than flagging it up as a case of a moronic judge