Child Molester at Work

[BuzzardsWife]

Originally Posted by photon

That's like saying alcoholics always fall off the wagon. A lot do but not all do.

sorry but you're wrong

[Antithesis]

How is he wrong? Sorry - but a drive-by post contributes nothing to the discussion.

Are you contending his comparison between this situation and an alcoholic? (both mental illnesses)

Or are you saying that all alcoholics fall off the wagon?

[McMack]

Originally Posted by Antithesis

How is he wrong? Sorry - but a drive-by post contributes nothing to the discussion.

Are you contending his comparison between this situation and an alcoholic? (both mental illnesses)

Or are you saying that all alcoholics fall off the wagon?

Sexual abuse is not a mental illness, it is a crime.

[The Goon]

If he volunteers to be Santa at the company Christmas party, politely decline.

Seriously - this is a tough issue. I like to believe that rehabilitation works, and in theory I'm behind giving someone a second chance, but I would certainly be uneasy in his presence.

[Racki]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

Oh please. The man did his time, why not give him a chance? Perhaps the experience has changed him for the better. Traditional Ale, you seem to be assuming this man is a serial child molester and cannot be rehabilitated.

He may have made a big mistake in life, but it's just as bad to judge without giving a chance, as hard as it may seem.

The rate of recidivism is higher for child molesters than it is for alcoholics and junkies. They generally (almost always) re-offend regardless of therapy and/or councelling.

It's a fact, I'm not throwing darts here, it's a fact. The percentages are very high that he will do this again.

[Antithesis]

Originally Posted by McMack

Sexual abuse is not a mental illness, it is a crime.

Sigh. I know that - I'm not stupid. Sexual abuse is a result of mental illness.

[Traditional_Ale]

Originally Posted by Antithesis

Sigh. I know that - I'm not stupid. Sexual abuse is a result of mental illness.

And quite often, mental illness is a result of sexual abuse.

Cycle of abuse.

[ken0042]

Originally Posted by jolinar of malkshor

It is a total joke. I have been watching that MSNBC serious about catching adult internet stalkers on children. In Georgia, they caught 5 guys showing up to the house to meet a 13 year old with intentions to have sex. All of them were found guilty and received no less than 4 years in jail.

4 YEARS. They didn't touch or have sex and they got 4 YEARS. This guy puts his hands down the pants of a child and gets jack squat.

PEOPLE, our justice system is a JOKE.

I can't believe I have to be the one to tell you this, but you are comparing apples to oranges with respect to the evidence that was likely available. With cyber stalking and a sting you have a air tight case about what the person was planning on doing. In the OP's coworker's case it was likely a 1st time offender's word against that of a 5 year old, and a plea bargain was likely reached.

So in this case we have a 57 year old "first time offender." I have that in quotes because I believe one of the following is most likely true:
- If he is a sick SOB this likely isn't his first time; more like the first time he has been caught or the 1st time charges have stuck.
- He could be innocent, or this subject of somebody trying to get back at him.

So if he is innocent, better to have a light sentance. If he is a person who has fallen through the cracks time and again, at least now he has that conviction on his record, and he will either try and stop his behavoir so it doen't land him into trouble, or if he does get caught again it no longer becomes a "he said- she said" type of thing.

A neighbour of a friend was charged with doing the same thing, but in that case the wife walked in and caught him in the act. That guy did receive several years for what he did.

[Antithesis]

Originally Posted by Traditional_Ale

And quite often, mental illness is a result of sexual abuse.

Cycle of abuse.

Yep, it's definitely a very unfortunate situation. Very interesting that for the large part, this very touchy subject has been handled in a mature manner.

[Fozzie_DeBear]

Originally Posted by Antithesis

Sigh. I know that - I'm not stupid. Sexual abuse is a result of mental illness.

I'm no expert...sexual abuse is criminal, morally abhorrable etc.

Some say that pedophelia more of a sexual orientation (like straight, gay etc.)...the major difference being that fullfilling your pedophelic desires is unacceptable as it creates a victim...

Being a person attracted to kids may be genetic in the same way that being straight/gay is...but acting on it in a way that creates a victim is criminal

So in support of Buzzards Wife...chances are very high that the desire to re-offend will be high...you can probably never remove the desire from the person (save for biological 'fixes' like castration) but you would have to prevent them ever taking any action in the future.

I'm just not sure that calling it a mental illness is accurate...can you treat someone not to be gay/straight

Its splitting hairs though...anyone who abuses kids should be punished/treated/controlled in the most serious manner the state allows

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by Fozzie_DeBear

I'm no expert...sexual abuse is criminal, morally abhorrable etc. but I don't think it is an illness.

Some say that pedophelia more of a sexual orientation (like straight, gay etc.)...the major difference being that fullfilling your pedophelic desires is unacceptable as it creates a victim...

Being a person attracted to kids may be genetic in the same way that being straight/gay is...but acting on it in a way that creates a victim is criminal

I'm just not sure that calling it a mental illness is accurate...can you treat someone not to be gay/straight

Its splitting hairs though

One of the nightmare scenarios that I've heard about is that someday somehow, a judge might be convinced of the above, that Pedophelia is a sexual orientation. I'm actually amazed that some defendant hasn't challenged this as a point of defense. I mean, it wasn't that long ago that sodomy and a gay life style were part of the criminal code.

I mean most of these warped individuals (pedo's) would be content with their condition being classed as a mental illness as it helps them avoid prison, gets them house arrest, or lighter punishment. But there's going to be someone that makes that leap of condition, then all bets are off.

[Antithesis]

I see where you're coming from, fozzie, and I'm no expert in the field either. I guess what I was trying to get at is, in my opinion, no sane, balanced individual is going to sexually abuse anyone, let alone a child. I think when you get right down to it, sexual abuse of children has more to do with power/dominance than sexual gratification, whereas a homosexual relationship is obviously based on something different from the pedophillic 'relationship'.

[Fozzie_DeBear]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

But there's going to be someone that makes that leap of condition, then all bets are off.

I doubt it...essentially being a pedo may be a condition that is not illegal...but acting on it should always be criminal.

As lax as Canadian justice may be I don't think that will never change

[SeeGeeWhy]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

One of the nightmare scenarios that I've heard about is that someday somehow, a judge might be convinced of the above, that Pedophelia is a sexual orientation. I'm actually amazed that some defendant hasn't challenged this as a point of defense. I mean, it wasn't that long ago that sodomy and a gay life style were part of the criminal code.

I mean most of these warped individuals (pedo's) would be content with their condition being classed as a mental illness as it helps them avoid prison, gets them house arrest, or lighter punishment. But there's going to be someone that makes that leap of condition, then all bets are off.

Isn't that what NAMBLA is out to achieve?

[jolinar of malkshor]

Originally Posted by ken0042

I can't believe I have to be the one to tell you this, but you are comparing apples to oranges with respect to the evidence that was likely available. With cyber stalking and a sting you have a air tight case about what the person was planning on doing. In the OP's coworker's case it was likely a 1st time offender's word against that of a 5 year old, and a plea bargain was likely reached.

Apples to Oranges? Maybe, in the fact that touching the kid is MUCH more serious than soliciting for sex. Evidence does NOT determine the sentence. You are either guilty or NOT guilty. You aren't a little guilty because there is a not as much evidence as there might be in another case.

So what, a plea bargain was reached? That only tells you that the guy most likely did it or the prosecutor was either to busy to deal with it/ to lazy to deal with it/ or to apathetic to deal with because if he did go to trial he probably wouldn't get much more of a sentence.

So if he is innocent, better to have a light sentance. If he is a person who has fallen through the cracks time and again, at least now he has that conviction on his record, and he will either try and stop his behavoir so it doen't land him into trouble, or if he does get caught again it no longer becomes a "he said- she said" type of thing.

If he is innocent, then don't plead guilty. If he didn't plead guilty and was found guilty, then that is what our court system if for. Are we to start questioning every guilty determination now because there is that 5% chance out of the beyond a reasonable doubt that he may be innocent?

[photon]

Originally Posted by BuzzardsWife

sorry but you're wrong

Thanks, your contribution will be given the consideration it is due.

[photon]

Originally Posted by Fozzie_DeBear

Some say that pedophelia more of a sexual orientation (like straight, gay etc.)...the major difference being that fullfilling your pedophelic desires is unacceptable as it creates a victim...

For some of them I think this is likely accurate; for whatever reason they have an attraction that can never be fulfilled, or if it is fulfilled it results in harm to whatever it is you love, yourself, society, etc.. Imagine being attracted to women but NEVER ONCE being able to do anything about it. Already that creates a strain on the psyche that must cause all kinds of problems.

But just as there are hetrosexuals who get all the gratification they need through conventional means, there are hetrosexuals who can only get gratification through violent means like rape. Same thing for pedophiles, some are violent, some aren't.

So in support of Buzzards Wife...chances are very high that the desire to re-offend will be high...you can probably never remove the desire from the person (save for biological 'fixes' like castration) but you would have to prevent them ever taking any action in the future.

The re offending rate is something like over 75% so yes it is high, but not impossible. Does anyone follow up with those that don't re-offend to find out how they do it?

I think they do the biological fix already where they do chemical castration as terms of parole, and the repeat offense rate is much lower. Lower the testosterone and lower the aggressiveness and sexual desire. It's an extreme measure, but might be one of those cases where it's worth it. If I were on the other side, I'd want something to help me stop hurting people.

[Daradon]

Originally Posted by photon

It's an extreme measure, but might be one of those cases where it's worth it. If I were on the other side, I'd want something to help me stop hurting people.

I have read about cases like that. I can think of several people that have asked for chemical AND even physical castration. The only problem is, for every pedophile that agrees that their actions are unfair to the children, there are many more that think there is no problem with it or WORSE it's good for them or part of a necessary education of sorts.

It's a sad situation for sure. It does seem to be for the most part a natural trait/attraction set that you can't really relearn. Course, even without violence, it still abuse. Kids by definition aren't sexual creatures. That's what being a kid is about. Pre sex hormones, urges, and abilities.

[photon]

We put people in jail, take away their freedom, as a consequence for crime. Chemical castration is only taking away part of their freedom, though presumably permanently.

I'm can't see a downside to it, though I'm sure the ACLU or someone could point it out to me

[Iowa_Flames_Fan]

For me the whole "is it a sexual orientation" question is a non-starter. Maybe it is. Maybe pedophiles are born to want children sexually. But I don't really care. If two men or two women want to have sex with each other, and both are capable of giving consent, then nobody gets hurt.

A child, on the other hand, cannot consent to a sex act. Pedophilia ALWAYS hurts children. Hurting children is not okay. Whether it's being "sick" or being "sexually oriented" that way is completely irrelevant. It would be like saying serial killers have a "murderous orientation." It doesn't--and shouldn't matter in the eyes of the law. What matters is the actions people take and the consequences of those actions on others. Comparing pedophilia to homosexuality is therefore completely specious in my view.

Can it be treated? Can these people be rehabilitated? I have no idea--no personal basis on which to make a judgement. On one hand, I can see the logic in allowing offenders who've served their time and been released to integrate themselves into society. On the other hand, I'm a parent--and I expect the legal system to help me to protect my daughter from monsters like this by at least keeping them away from playgrounds and schools and places where children congregate. I guess you could say I'm of two minds...