CLICK FOR FULL PAGE


The 'Sarah's law' parent alert scheme being trialled may be expanded. The scheme alerts parents against people on the sex offenders list who might come into contact with children. Sounds good? Home Secretary Alan Johnson thinks so.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8477310.stm

I have a couple of thoughts:

1. First of all, how on earth are convicted paedophiles allowed to come into contact with children? Isn't the bureaucratic bullplop vetting system that strangles genuine volunteers supposed to stop this?

2. Serial sex offenders are going to offend again and again. Lock up a two times offender for good. No buts, just do it. If the first conviction isn't enough to put the willies up an offender then another won't either. Lock them up and throw away the key. Then Sarah's law won't be needed.
It's a strange law because depending how carefully it is handled it seems to allow you to check up on anyone. Your Mother-In-law perhaps?

As for the 2 strikes and you're out I've always thought that should apply to any crime. I'm imagining a judge saying "this is the 14th time you've been before me. Do you REALLY promise this time not to abuse/burgle/mug/shoplift"
Doesn't everyone who comes into contact with children have to be vetted anyway. My work wanted us to do voluntary work in a school (I didn't actually do it in the end ) and we would have had to have had criminal checks even to be there unpaid for a hour while the teacher was there with us.

Or do they mean anyone who just breathes the same air so any parent can ask for criminal checks on all the neighbours and people who stand at the bus stop near their house and anyone they feel like noseying on on the grounds that they could meet their children one day.

I agree that they need to stay locked up. It is very sad and people who commit such crimes have had horrible lives to drive them to be who they are. But to stop the rot they have to be locked up or it will keep happening over and over again to each generation.
I have found two items about this that I think are interesting.

From The Times

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article7000688.ece

The pilot project has been operating in four areas — Warwickshire, Hampshire, Cleveland and Cambridgeshire — for more than a year. It is believed that at least 24 children were found to be at risk from convicted sex attackers.


And a cross-reference from Eccles BBC link

In the first six months of the trial, which started in September 2008, more than 150 parents made inquiries. Of those, 10 were given relevant information.


So information isn't going to be 'on tap', and it doesn't look as if there are going to be huge numbers of requests if the pilot is any guide.   The population covered by these 4 areas is:-

Cambridgeshire 700,000
Cleveland 550,000
Hampshire 1,800,000
Warwickshire 530,000

ie 3.6 million

So 150 parents requesting information in 6 months out of 3.6 million people doesn't suggest to me that SUBLs are all that keen to snoop on the SUBLs next door.

Incidentally, the 24 childen were at risk from 'convicted sex attackers' who may or may not have been paedophiles.

Now we will see wot happen with the national rollout of the scheme.



Hosted by Arvixe