How on earth can a law like this be enforced ?
What circumstances could possibly cause such an order being issued ?
Court says man must tell police if he is going to have sex
An interim sexual risk order
An interim sexual risk order
I thought I knew more than this until I opened my mouth
An interim sexual risk order
I never know that far ahead, and I'm married.
The home of the soul is the Open Road.
- DH Lawrence
- DH Lawrence
An interim sexual risk order
I saw the story on FaceBook, and the best comment I saw was to keep phoning the Police, that way they'll get so peed off, thinking he's getting more than they are that they'll leave him alone.
An interim sexual risk order
That's a good idea, FourPart. What a ridiculous situation though. As Lars says, who the heck knows what they will be doing in the next 24 hours ? Supposing a fella gets an urge to bed the girlfriend and they are nearly at her flat- she has no phone, and he has no phone. What can he do then ?
How the heck can police watch this guy 24/7 anyway ? Has somebody invented a dong tag ?
Soon everybody will have to report to police before they have a crap or a pee, just in case they're not really going to have a crap or a pee, but are taking somebody in the loo with them to have sex !! Gawd what a pathetic bloody country this is becoming.
This country is becoming a dictatorship. Joking apart, all this sort of thing is getting very sinister don't you think. Somebody is found not guilty of a crime, THEN HE OR SHE IS NOT GUILTY !!!! So what was the point of this man appealing against a conviction, getting the conviction thrown out, but finding that he is not actually free of any bother ! WHERE IS THE JUSTICE ???
This godforsaken country !!!!! I will definitely get passports for my family. I shall have to save up to do it, but I feel the need to get away from this pending dictatorship. You think I joke ?
How the heck can police watch this guy 24/7 anyway ? Has somebody invented a dong tag ?
Soon everybody will have to report to police before they have a crap or a pee, just in case they're not really going to have a crap or a pee, but are taking somebody in the loo with them to have sex !! Gawd what a pathetic bloody country this is becoming.
This country is becoming a dictatorship. Joking apart, all this sort of thing is getting very sinister don't you think. Somebody is found not guilty of a crime, THEN HE OR SHE IS NOT GUILTY !!!! So what was the point of this man appealing against a conviction, getting the conviction thrown out, but finding that he is not actually free of any bother ! WHERE IS THE JUSTICE ???
This godforsaken country !!!!! I will definitely get passports for my family. I shall have to save up to do it, but I feel the need to get away from this pending dictatorship. You think I joke ?
I'm a Saga-lout, growing old disgracefully
An interim sexual risk order
He was acquitted of raping a woman at a retrial in 2015 after claiming that the alleged victim had consented. An interim sexual risk order was granted by magistrates in Northallerton, in North Yorkshire, in December and extended for four months by a court in York.
Not enough information to deciode - perhaps this ws one of several allegations made against him that we don't know about. It's not just muslims thatb think a woman smiling at them is an inc=vitation for sex. On the other hand is this not the same force that ignored allegations about grooming in bradford
Not enough information to deciode - perhaps this ws one of several allegations made against him that we don't know about. It's not just muslims thatb think a woman smiling at them is an inc=vitation for sex. On the other hand is this not the same force that ignored allegations about grooming in bradford
An interim sexual risk order
G#Gill;1491917 wrote: You think I joke ?Not in the least, but I do wonder where on earth you think you might be granted sanctuary. In which country do you hope to become domiciled, and why do you think they'll say yes to your application?
You do, of course, thanks to Britain's present membership of the European Union, already have the right to live in any of the member countries. But I take it you've excluded Europe, as the cause of your troubles rather than the solution.
You do, of course, thanks to Britain's present membership of the European Union, already have the right to live in any of the member countries. But I take it you've excluded Europe, as the cause of your troubles rather than the solution.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
-
Betty Boop
- Posts: 16988
- Joined: Sun Mar 27, 2005 1:17 pm
- Location: The end of the World
An interim sexual risk order
I see it as this guy must have several accusations placed against him already and for whatever reasons the women involved never got to court. At first sight I though what a strange law but after thinking on it I guess such a law is required for people that are strongly suspected of being serial offenders.
An interim sexual risk order
It is illogical.
It is like asking a bank robber to inform police about their next job.
I thought it might be someone with HIV, but without filling in the gaps it sounds ridiculous, the person with the order is unknown so why not let us all know......why ?
It is like asking a bank robber to inform police about their next job.
I thought it might be someone with HIV, but without filling in the gaps it sounds ridiculous, the person with the order is unknown so why not let us all know......why ?
I thought I knew more than this until I opened my mouth
An interim sexual risk order
Of course, there is the other side of things. If he was acquitted, then he is technically Innocent. Therefore, surely the court can have no reign over what an innocent man does. The article says that it was at the request of the Police. AFTER he was found innocent, and that this current order is until they can extend the order another 2 years, or possibly indefinitely. Yes, if he had been convicted, then there might be some sense to it. You can see the sense in not allowing a convicted child molester access to children ever again, even after having served his time, but is there really any difference to placing the same order on someone because somebody said they LOOKED like they might be a child molester?
If the verdict had been Guilty & given a Conditional Discharge, that would have been an entirely different matter, but this man was clearly Acquitted.
If the verdict had been Guilty & given a Conditional Discharge, that would have been an entirely different matter, but this man was clearly Acquitted.
An interim sexual risk order
"The civil order was introduced in English and Welsh law last year and can be handed down by magistrates at the request of police where it is believed that a person who has not been convicted of a sexual crime nevertheless poses a risk to someone else."
This is insane! The man was ACQUITTED! Does this man not have the right to "the pursuit of happiness"? Oh, maybe that doesn't apply in Great Britain. LOL! I'm joking . But really, what is he supposed to do if he's out on the town, meets a willing female but has to say, "Hold on, what's your name, address, telephone #, and anything else that the police may want, and I need to notify them, then we wait 24 hours, okay honey?"
Gill, you can come to California, I'll hide you in my house. Of course we'll have to worry about the hundreds of thousands of illegal aliens that are coming in to this country. Some of them may be sex offenders too, but we can shoot them or club them to death and then have to prove that they deserved the "deadly force" that we used to defend ourselves.
This is insane! The man was ACQUITTED! Does this man not have the right to "the pursuit of happiness"? Oh, maybe that doesn't apply in Great Britain. LOL! I'm joking . But really, what is he supposed to do if he's out on the town, meets a willing female but has to say, "Hold on, what's your name, address, telephone #, and anything else that the police may want, and I need to notify them, then we wait 24 hours, okay honey?"
Gill, you can come to California, I'll hide you in my house. Of course we'll have to worry about the hundreds of thousands of illegal aliens that are coming in to this country. Some of them may be sex offenders too, but we can shoot them or club them to death and then have to prove that they deserved the "deadly force" that we used to defend ourselves.
An interim sexual risk order
He was acquitted of raping a woman at a retrial in 2015 after claiming that the alleged victim had consented
There's not enough information you don't know why the conviction was overturned or what else the police found on his computer. It's an interim order not permanent he does have a right to appeal. Rape cases are notoriously difficult to presecute.
There's not enough information you don't know why the conviction was overturned or what else the police found on his computer. It's an interim order not permanent he does have a right to appeal. Rape cases are notoriously difficult to presecute.
An interim sexual risk order
gmc;1491998 wrote: There's not enough information you don't know why the conviction was overturned or what else the police found on his computer. It's an interim order not permanent he does have a right to appeal. Rape cases are notoriously difficult to presecute.
But you do know that he was found Not Guilty. In the UK that equates to Innocent.
But you do know that he was found Not Guilty. In the UK that equates to Innocent.
An interim sexual risk order
gmc;1491998 wrote: There's not enough information you don't know why the conviction was overturned or what else the police found on his computer. It's an interim order not permanent he does have a right to appeal. Rape cases are notoriously difficult to presecute.
The interim period is only until the Police can appeal to extend it - potentially indefinitely. If he had been convicted, all well and good, but he was found NOT GUILTY - ACQUITTED. If it had been in Scotland, at least there would have been a 3rd option - Guilty, Not Guilty or Not Proven, but the fact remains that under English Law he is INNOCENT and no-one should have the power to tell an INNOCENT man how to live his life. Allowing such enforcement is tantamount to a dictatorship, as it overrides the human rights of Justice.
The interim period is only until the Police can appeal to extend it - potentially indefinitely. If he had been convicted, all well and good, but he was found NOT GUILTY - ACQUITTED. If it had been in Scotland, at least there would have been a 3rd option - Guilty, Not Guilty or Not Proven, but the fact remains that under English Law he is INNOCENT and no-one should have the power to tell an INNOCENT man how to live his life. Allowing such enforcement is tantamount to a dictatorship, as it overrides the human rights of Justice.
An interim sexual risk order
Bryn Mawr;1492003 wrote: But you do know that he was found Not Guilty. In the UK that equates to Innocent.
After a re-trial so why was he cinvicted the first time.
If it had been in Scotland, at least there would have been a 3rd option - Guilty, Not Guilty or Not Proven, but the fact remains that under English Law he is INNOCENT and no-one should have the power to tell an INNOCENT man how to live his life. Allowing such enforcement is tantamount to a dictatorship, as it overrides the human rights of Justice.
They're talking about doing away with it but it's actually more logical than a simple innocent or guilty since the point of a prosecution is to prove somebody was guilty of something so the verdict was simply did they oprove the facts of the case. The ablilty of a jury to return an innocent verdict or not guilty in defiance of the facts is part of a struggle against state oppression both here and in the states. In rape cases where there is not enough evidence to convict someone but the jury don't disbelieve the witness it's doesn't leave anyone with the presumption that the woman was lying.
After a re-trial so why was he cinvicted the first time.
If it had been in Scotland, at least there would have been a 3rd option - Guilty, Not Guilty or Not Proven, but the fact remains that under English Law he is INNOCENT and no-one should have the power to tell an INNOCENT man how to live his life. Allowing such enforcement is tantamount to a dictatorship, as it overrides the human rights of Justice.
They're talking about doing away with it but it's actually more logical than a simple innocent or guilty since the point of a prosecution is to prove somebody was guilty of something so the verdict was simply did they oprove the facts of the case. The ablilty of a jury to return an innocent verdict or not guilty in defiance of the facts is part of a struggle against state oppression both here and in the states. In rape cases where there is not enough evidence to convict someone but the jury don't disbelieve the witness it's doesn't leave anyone with the presumption that the woman was lying.
An interim sexual risk order
gmc;1492019 wrote: After a re-trial so why was he cinvicted the first time.
A retrial can happen for a number of reasons, and mostly it is because a previous trial had to be abandoned before a verdict was reached because of a point of protocol. For instance, if it were to be discovered at some point during the trial that one of the jurors was related in some way to the plaintiff or the defendant. Obviously the trial could not be continued, so the jury would have to be dismissed & a new (re)trial set up. If it had been a case of having already been convicted, then the term used would more likely be an appeal.
A retrial can happen for a number of reasons, and mostly it is because a previous trial had to be abandoned before a verdict was reached because of a point of protocol. For instance, if it were to be discovered at some point during the trial that one of the jurors was related in some way to the plaintiff or the defendant. Obviously the trial could not be continued, so the jury would have to be dismissed & a new (re)trial set up. If it had been a case of having already been convicted, then the term used would more likely be an appeal.