Friday, August 5, 2011

Political Correctness Run Amuck

As the following story shows, our U.K. cousins across the pond are ahead of us in political correctness (although I fear we are catching up fast).

Father fined 1,000 pounds and found guilty of harassment for warning families about a paedophile
A father who warned another parent about a convicted paedophile has been fined £1,000 and found guilty of harassing the sex offender.

He was horrified to find his ex-wife’s new husband – stepfather to his daughter, 11 – had served three jail terms for sex crimes.

One of the stepfather’s sentences was for molesting two 12-year-old girls as they slept at his house.

A court heard the father raised the alarm after discovering four of his daughter’s friends had been invited to the family home for a sleepover to celebrate her birthday.

When he showed the mother  of one girl a newspaper clipping revealing the stepfather’s convictions, all the parents stopped their children going to the sleepover.

Following that action, as well as repeated phone calls to the home of his ex-wife and her husband, the father was arrested and convicted of harassment at Worcester Magistrates Court and fined £1,000.

The father told the court he spoke out because he would have ‘felt responsible’ if one of the children at the sleepover had been harmed.

He added: ‘My decision was to speak up to one of the parents and leave it up to their discretion.

‘I was concerned for her daughter as I always have been for my own. My daughter is open to quite considerable harm in my eyes.’

A judge heard how the defendant’s ex-wife began a relationship with the convicted paedophile in 2007 and is now married to him.

The defendant said he initially socialised with his ex-wife and her new partner, but relations soured when he learned of the man’s past.
No shit!!! If that had been my ex-wife and my daughter, relations would have been more than soured. They would have been terminated - with extreme prejudice.
The stepfather was convicted of attempted rape in 1980 as a teenager. He was convicted of the same offence in 1988 and was jailed again in 1996 for molesting the two girls.

Prosecutor Owen Beale ... said of the fact the defendant’s daughter was under the same roof as a convicted sex offender: ‘The authorities were not concerned that there was a risk because they left her there.’
"The authorities were not concerned..." Of course not. It wasn't their kid. And they are protected from the consequences of their action or inaction by sovereign immunity.

"... that there was a risk because they left her there." Give me a friggin' break. The sicko is a three-times convicted sex offender and child molester, and the 11 year old girl was not at risk?!? Why not - was the guy castrated? Or in a chastity cage? Those are about the only two conditions I can think of where the girl would not be at risk.
District Judge Mark Layton described the case as ‘hugely difficult’ but said the charges against the father had been proved. He must pay £775 costs and a £15 victim surcharge, and banned from contact with the stepfather.
As the Brits say, "The law is an ass."


Old NFO said...

Oh damn...

Anonymous said...

The Brits and the Irish have a curious way of manipulating the law in order to make the criminal the victim.

In Ireland convicted sex-offenders names or locations cannot be made public, unless their victim(s) agree to allow the disclosure of ALL names including that of the victims.

So in many cases the sex-offenders are free to roam the streets with impunity and without the knowledge of the general public.

Anonymous said...

TJ -

I agree with OldNFO - "oh damn..."