Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Pervs' Horror Hiding Act 2013
24 views
Skip to first unread message
Nigel Oldfield
Mar 24, 2012, 10:07:22 AM3/24/12
to
Ken Clarke: Let pervs hide horrors
He'll give child sex offenders clean slate
'No idea' ... Ken Clarke
EXCLUSIVE
By KEVIN SCHOFIELD, Political Correspondent
Published: Today at 01:55
THOUSANDS of child sex beasts will be able to hide their horrific crimes
under plans
The soft-touch Justice Secretary wants to change the Rehabilitation of
Offenders Act to let more serious criminals wipe the slate clean.
Anyone jailed for between 30 months and four years will have their
offences struck from their criminal record after seven years.
Those currently jailed for more than 30 months have it on their record
until they die.
It means they have to alert potential employers when they apply for a job.
Figures seen by The Sun show if Mr Clarke's measures had been in place
between 2000 and 2010, 3,794 child sex beasts would have been able to
take advantage of it.
It would also have helped 11,684 violent criminals and nearly 1,000
other sex attackers.
Labour, who uncovered the figures, have vowed to fight the controversial
change.
Shadow justice minister Andy Slaughter said: "It is proportionate that
once non-violent offenders have served their time and kept on the
straight and narrow for a few years, they should be redeemed in the eyes
of the law and society.
Campaign ... The Sun
"But Ken Clarke has continually shown he has no idea about public safety
and how to deal with dangerous offenders."
Campaigners last night voiced their concerns at the reforms.
Jim Maddan, chairman of the Neighbourhood and Home Watch Network, said:
"Everybody has the right to have a fresh start.
"But there comes a time when the public needs protecting, particularly
when they have committed these types of offences. It would be wrong for
employers not to know about who they are employing, particularly if a
job gives access to people's homes."
A Ministry of Justice spokesman insisted public protection was "top
priority".
He added: "Anyone applying to work with children and vulnerable people
will always have to declare any convictions.
"Anyone who receives more than four years will have to reveal their
record to employers.Other offenders will have to declare their record
for up to seven years after their sentence ends."
k.sch...@the-sun.co.uk
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/politics/4215486/Ken-Clarke-Let-pervs-hide-their-horrors.html
I do not think I need to annotate this one, Mr S does at sterling job at
being a knob.
"Figures seen by The Sun show if Mr Clarke's measures had been in place
between 2000 and 2010, 3,794 child sex beasts would have been able to
take advantage of it.
It would also have helped 11,684 violent criminals and nearly 1,000
other sex attackers."
What, get a job, less prejudice and more equality ? Do you think this is
a bad thing, Mr Schofield?
"Labour, who uncovered the figures, have vowed to fight the
controversial change."
Which is why you will never get my vote, again (although, by your
previous and present actions, you do not care what 'I' think or how 'I'
live).
WM
He'll give child sex offenders clean slate
'No idea' ... Ken Clarke
EXCLUSIVE
By KEVIN SCHOFIELD, Political Correspondent
Published: Today at 01:55
THOUSANDS of child sex beasts will be able to hide their horrific crimes
under plans
The soft-touch Justice Secretary wants to change the Rehabilitation of
Offenders Act to let more serious criminals wipe the slate clean.
Anyone jailed for between 30 months and four years will have their
offences struck from their criminal record after seven years.
Those currently jailed for more than 30 months have it on their record
until they die.
It means they have to alert potential employers when they apply for a job.
Figures seen by The Sun show if Mr Clarke's measures had been in place
between 2000 and 2010, 3,794 child sex beasts would have been able to
take advantage of it.
It would also have helped 11,684 violent criminals and nearly 1,000
other sex attackers.
Labour, who uncovered the figures, have vowed to fight the controversial
change.
Shadow justice minister Andy Slaughter said: "It is proportionate that
once non-violent offenders have served their time and kept on the
straight and narrow for a few years, they should be redeemed in the eyes
of the law and society.
Campaign ... The Sun
"But Ken Clarke has continually shown he has no idea about public safety
and how to deal with dangerous offenders."
Campaigners last night voiced their concerns at the reforms.
Jim Maddan, chairman of the Neighbourhood and Home Watch Network, said:
"Everybody has the right to have a fresh start.
"But there comes a time when the public needs protecting, particularly
when they have committed these types of offences. It would be wrong for
employers not to know about who they are employing, particularly if a
job gives access to people's homes."
A Ministry of Justice spokesman insisted public protection was "top
priority".
He added: "Anyone applying to work with children and vulnerable people
will always have to declare any convictions.
"Anyone who receives more than four years will have to reveal their
record to employers.Other offenders will have to declare their record
for up to seven years after their sentence ends."
k.sch...@the-sun.co.uk
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/politics/4215486/Ken-Clarke-Let-pervs-hide-their-horrors.html
I do not think I need to annotate this one, Mr S does at sterling job at
being a knob.
"Figures seen by The Sun show if Mr Clarke's measures had been in place
between 2000 and 2010, 3,794 child sex beasts would have been able to
take advantage of it.
It would also have helped 11,684 violent criminals and nearly 1,000
other sex attackers."
What, get a job, less prejudice and more equality ? Do you think this is
a bad thing, Mr Schofield?
"Labour, who uncovered the figures, have vowed to fight the
controversial change."
Which is why you will never get my vote, again (although, by your
previous and present actions, you do not care what 'I' think or how 'I'
live).
WM
Nigel Oldfield
Mar 24, 2012, 10:13:32 AM3/24/12
to
On 24/03/2012 14:07, Nigel Oldfield wrote:
> What, get a job, less prejudice and more equality ? Do you think this is
> a bad thing, Mr Schofield?
> WM
> What, get a job, less prejudice and more equality ? Do you think this is
> a bad thing, Mr Schofield?
Reality, here...
Rehabilitation of Offenders (Amendment) Bill [HL] 2010-12
http://services.parliament.uk/bills/2010-12/rehabilitationofoffendersamendmenthl.html
Rehabilitation of Offenders Bill: second reading
Rehabilitation of Offenders Bill: second reading
Rehabilitation of Offenders (Amendment) Bill [HL]
Second Reading
11.42 am
Moved By Lord Dholakia
http://www.parliament.uk/business/news/2011/january/rehabilitation-of-offenders-amendment-bill-second-reading/
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld201011/ldhansrd/text/110121-0001.htm#11012142000397
WM
Nigel Oldfield
Mar 24, 2012, 10:24:54 AM3/24/12
to
On 24/03/2012 14:13, Nigel Oldfield wrote:
> On 24/03/2012 14:07, Nigel Oldfield wrote:
>
>> What, get a job, less prejudice and more equality ? Do you think this is
>> a bad thing, Mr Schofield?
*****
> On 24/03/2012 14:07, Nigel Oldfield wrote:
>
>> What, get a job, less prejudice and more equality ? Do you think this is
>> a bad thing, Mr Schofield?
Mail Delivery System MAILER...@mail2.newsint.co.uk
14:18 (5 minutes ago)
to me
The following message to <k.sch...@the-sun.co.uk> was undeliverable.
The reason for the problem:
5.1.1 - Bad destination email address 'reject'
Final-Recipient: rfc822;k.sch...@the-sun.co.uk
Action: failed
Status: 5.0.0 (permanent failure)
Diagnostic-Code: smtp; 5.1.1 - Bad destination email address 'reject'
(delivery attempts: 0)
****
Now who is hiding, Kevin?
WM
0 new messages