Man commits suicide after paedophile sting.

Discussion in 'Law, Order and Defence' started by Welsh dragon, Feb 27, 2018.

  1. Welsh dragon

    Welsh dragon Senior Member Staff Member

    A man commited suicide after a paedophile sting by a group of vigilantes confronted him. His name and address were posted on facebook.

    His fiance'e and her daughter were living at the address posted. They had no idea what had happened and as a result of the disclosure of their address, they were afraid that they could be attacked.

    Was there any justification in posting the mans address on social media?
     
  2. Highlander

    Highlander Regular Member

    Yes.

    I have no sympathy for any who wish to pray on children.

    When you have been caught and found guilty of this crime, you should lose the right to anominity.

    As should be the case in the accusation in Rape.

    Equality in all rights, until your actions are found criminal.

    We protect the innocent, and there rights, the guilty must live with there crime, and the repercussions of there actions and the consequences of there crime.
     
  3. OP
    OP
    Welsh dragon

    Welsh dragon Senior Member Staff Member

    Ths innocent were not protected in this case. The mans girlfriend and her daughter were put at risk. How is that protecting those that should be protected.

    Vigilantes confronted him, not the police. No evidance has been forthcoming. He was tried and convicted and his name was plastered all over social media by people who decided his guilt without going through due justice.

    How would you have felt if it had been you and your family?
     
  4. classic33

    classic33 Well-Known Member

    No, for that last part.

    I've seen one family driven out due to their house being attacked. The only crime anyone in that house had committed was being guilty of living on a road with a similar name. Their actual address wasn't even on the road in question, but one of half a dozen older houses with their own "street name". Didn't stop the idiots who couldn't work the numbers out. The actual address, as reported in the press, was miles away. Similar in name only
     
    Welsh dragon likes this.
  5. OP
    OP
    Welsh dragon

    Welsh dragon Senior Member Staff Member

    Exactly. The police need to do more in cases like this, but when vigilantes become involved, all to often real investigations into what if anything happened are often non existant. Hearsay and Chinese wispers and rumours seem to be what they act on.
     
    classic33 likes this.
  6. classic33

    classic33 Well-Known Member

    In the piece I mentioned, it was a similar street name. The older houses having had an estate built round them and new roads put in for that estate.

    You know how numbers increase decrease as you walk along a street. The next ones "must follow that order", only in this case they didn't. For obvious reasons, if you thought about it, for a few seconds.
     
  7. Highlander

    Highlander Regular Member

    Were they attacked?
    No.
    So they weren't put at risk.
    If he was a pedohpile this supports the argument that it wasn't a first offence, I.e. Previous history of criminal action. The case where there is no previous history, he isn't a pedophile he hasn't been found guilty of a crime.
    I don't know the real or full circumstances so I'm unable to comment further.
     
  8. OP
    OP
    Welsh dragon

    Welsh dragon Senior Member Staff Member

    What an odd attitude to have. There are a lot of weird people around these days, and they COULD have been at risk that is enough.
     
    classic33 likes this.
  9. Big Andy

    Big Andy Well-Known Member Staff Member

    They were definitely put at risk, just because they were not attacked does not mean they were not at risk. Some nutter could quite easily have decided to pour petrol through the letter box and set fire to their home. Just because it didn't happen does not mean there is no risk a very illogical position to take. As daft as saying there is no risk of being hurt running across a busy motorway just because you managed to run across a busy motorway without getting hurt once.

    I have no sympathy at all for anyone who preys on the young, or anyone else for that matter and I think they should be very harshly dealt with by the authorities, however the modern phenomena of trial by social media is very disturbing, there is so much inaccurate information, outright lies and simply plain wrong information of the internet that it is most definitely not a suitable forum for any sort of fair trial.

    We do not have any information to go on in this case, no evidence he was a paedophile at all.
     
    classic33 and Welsh dragon like this.
  10. OP
    OP
    Welsh dragon

    Welsh dragon Senior Member Staff Member


    Exactly. No evidance he was a paedophile. These people decided he was guilty without due process, or evidance. You either have law, or you don't. This should have been a job for the police only to deal with.
     
    pubrunner, classic33 and Big Andy like this.
  11. classic33

    classic33 Well-Known Member

    The problem being that that at times, there are those that will use such an event as an opportunity to "even the score" with someone. They'll see it and take is a chance to get their own back on a person, start it and then step back, watching others doing the work.

    In the example I posted, it came down to a similar street name(New houses built round older ones and new access built.) The whole family suffered, the kids at school. The house "egged" and paint bombed on a constant basis. Ignorance started mob rule and carried it on. They ended up moving out in the middle of the night, under police escort.
     
    Welsh dragon likes this.
  12. classic33

    classic33 Well-Known Member

    Verbal assaults, unless you happen to be carrying a video camera/camera and audio recorder the words used will not have the same impact when written down. Comes down to the delivery of the words.

    As for no previous history of criminal activity being a valid indicator of a whether a person has committed any crime is nonsense. Nor does previous history dictate what their current criminal activity may be. Is it "begging" or demanding money with menaces, when you say no and are met with a mouthful of abuse?
     
  13. Highlander

    Highlander Regular Member

    Sticks and stones!

    Using your combined analogies, I am a man, I'm guilty of rape, I have never committed rape, nor would I ever contemplate raping anyone, but using your anologies, I am guilty, I have the equipment to commit the crime, so by default, I must be guilty.
    It's time some thought legally not emotionally on the subject.

    **Mod Note** Off topic content removed.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 29, 2018
  14. classic33

    classic33 Well-Known Member

    That's using your own logic, as you've used elsewhere.

    Vigilantes are not legal, nor is the action they take.
     
    Welsh dragon likes this.
  15. Big Andy

    Big Andy Well-Known Member Staff Member

    Even by your standards that post makes little sense.
    You are right about one thing though, you really should think about the subject of this thread from a legal viewpoint rather than emotional. Also looking from a realistic viewpoint will help.
     
    classic33 and Welsh dragon like this.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice