Every Criminals details to be put on a web site open to everyone.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Wed Apr 29, 2009 4:33 pm

Is your neighbour a convict? Every criminal's sentence to be posted on website to show justice is being done | Mail Online

I'm a criminal and every-one knows it. I'm not bothered by this plan myself although having my address on a website is an invasion of privacy.

This is madness. We do not need this, we need tougher sentencing and more police on the streets to tackle crime.

I can see this leading to vigilantee attacks on more serious offenders and we have to remember that the families including the children of the offender are not criminals and could be open to bullying at school and all manner of nasty reprecussions.

Are they going to name and shame the crooks MP's and Police Officers as well?

scholle-kid · Post by **scholle-kid** » Wed Apr 29, 2009 9:53 pm

That's just wrong.

If a person has been caught , convicted and done the time, paid the fine or whatever the courts said that person needed to do to atone and haven't been habitual or repeat offenders what is all their private or personal info on a public website gonna do but cause hassles for them and families ?

Why not put criminals on the run from the law or repeat offenders ,, ??

but then if I lived over there since i have been in front of a judge twice and convicted twice (the last time more than 20 years ago) i would have a spot on that web site , so maybe I'm just a bit jaded about the subject.

Bill Sikes · Post by **Bill Sikes** » Thu Apr 30, 2009 2:04 am

I do not like this proposal in the least. I am not "soft" on criminals - I think sentencing is woefully short for many things - but I do regard privacy, and possible safety regard for people who've been convicted but and won't re-offend, as a very big concern.

I very much hope that this proposal does not go through.

mikeinie · Post by **mikeinie** » Thu Apr 30, 2009 2:36 am

That is insane! How can on one hand the law be against vigilantism and yet then hand out the names and addressed of convicted criminals???

And what about this: people will have a say on the sentences? And there would be a ‘citizens panel voting on projects’?? Is the justice system becoming a reality tv show?

Hey... that is an idea for a new justice system, state the person and crime on line, let the charged be able to post a blog in their defense, then for £1.00 per vote, let the public vote if the person should be guilty or not. If guilty, have another vote at £2.00 per vote on the sentence.

(all proceeds from the votes will be donated to bailing out the failed banking system..)

Snowfire · Post by **Snowfire** » Thu Apr 30, 2009 3:30 am

Another stroke of genius brought to us courtesy of the Frontal Lobotomy Party. Can Brown stoop any lower ? Can this Government do any worse ? Well yes they can. They're not done yet.

Its like watching kids spoiling up as much as they can before their last day at school. Lets see how much we can **** people off before we leave office. You watch ! Brown will kick the bins over and leave the taps running before he leaves No 10

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Thu Apr 30, 2009 3:36 am

So a convicted person is marked for life, is that it? No forgiveness, no chance to start over? This is wrong in so many ways! Why not tattoo their offense across the foreheadIt's cheaper and the information would be easier to access. :yh_loser

I've said this many times when they do the same to people convicted of sex crimes. If they are still a danger to society, why in hell are they out of jail?? If they're not, leave them alone!

:mad: It's giving every crime a life sentence punishment.

Snowfire · Post by **Snowfire** » Thu Apr 30, 2009 3:39 am

Accountable;1181783 wrote: So a convicted person is marked for life, is that it? No forgiveness, no chance to start over? This is wrong in so many ways! Why not tattoo their offense across the foreheadIt's cheaper and the information would be easier to access. :yh_loser

I've said this many times when they do the same to people convicted of sex crimes. If they are still a danger to society, why in hell are they out of jail?? If they're not, leave them alone!

:mad: It's giving every crime a life sentence punishment.

Precisely

kazalala · Post by **kazalala** » Thu Apr 30, 2009 3:56 am

I read your Link which says every Criminals SENTENCE to be posted on website to show justice is done.

It seems to be more about showing what sentences are dfished out for specific crimes, and does'nt in fact say that they will post the addresses of peope, but does further down mention that the public can go to the courts and hear peoples names and addresses if they so wish, so this is a way of making information more accessible to the pubic

But the Government will argue that courts are open to the public, and that names and addresses are freely available. Ministers will say all they are doing is making the information more readily available to the public.
Its slighhtly vague i think and could still mean they do intend to post addresses

Anyway im not saying i agree with it even if they post addresses or not.

and what about this bit as well,,, as if we are going to have a say:rolleyes:

A Government source said: 'This is further significant step in our determination to ensure the justice system works for the people it serves, and that they have a say in how justice is done, and can see it being done.'

:yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Thu Apr 30, 2009 7:00 am

It's bad enough having the public being given access to a court case or trial. There were some right shananagans at my trial as people i have never seen in my life were turning up in the public gallery. At one time there was an arguement with security because i had family that had travelled hundreds of miles and couldn't get in the court as the seats were taken up by strangers who wern't there to see me, just to see the famous lawyer in action. The court told me there was nothing they could do as it was a first cime, first served basis for public gallerys. Over the four days, my family had to be there at 08.30 in the morning just to make sure they got in. I was livid. Although i had massive support and the RBL there every day, i must say i resented these strangers because it was my life they were gawking at. When my husband had to give evidence about the yob who threatened to kill our dog..... he broke down in tears and i was so pissed off that there were some strangers in there gawking at him.

Some people will go along to trials like they did public hangings and rubber necking at car accidents.

This is a ridiculous gimmick by the Labour party. As i said earlier, we need tougher sentencing and more police to see justice being done not stupid gimmicks like this. What is this going to achieve? I can see lawyers jumping on this as a breach of human rights. Even if the criminals address is not put on the website, you can easilly find an address on the electoral register.

When i was a little kid, there were some kids in the village who's father was in prison for murder and i remember how those kids were bullied and treated like lepers. This is just plain stupid.

Lon · Post by **Lon** » Thu Apr 30, 2009 7:16 am

Would you all feel the same if the individual had multiple arrests and convictions for CHILD MOLESTATION?

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Thu Apr 30, 2009 7:23 am

Lon;1181837 wrote: Would you all feel the same if the individual had multiple arrests and convictions for CHILD MOLESTATION? We do have something like that here already Lon called 'Sarah's Law'. I can understand that as children may be at risk but is it fair to do this to some-one who may have have made a stupid mistake and wants to atone?

The big arguement over my arrest was that i was seen to take the law into my own hands after we had begged police for help for years. Some-one like me is the last thing the police want, yet this stupid gimmick could lead to vigilantee's which is the very thing the government and police do not want.

Bill Sikes · Post by **Bill Sikes** » Thu Apr 30, 2009 7:44 am

Lon;1181837 wrote: Would you all feel the same if the individual had multiple arrests and convictions for CHILD MOLESTATION?

I am unsure why that is considered worse than murder, attempted murder, indecent assaults, rape, wounding with intent, GBH, aggravated burglary, etc.

Lon · Post by **Lon** » Thu Apr 30, 2009 8:07 am

oscar;1181840 wrote: We do have something like that here already Lon called 'Sarah's Law'. I can understand that as children may be at risk but is it fair to do this to some-one who may have have made a stupid mistake and wants to atone?

The big arguement over my arrest was that i was seen to take the law into my own hands after we had begged police for help for years. Some-one like me is the last thing the police want, yet this stupid gimmick could lead to vigilantee's which is the very thing the government and police do not want.

A crime is a crime. Why distiguish a convicted child molestor from any other crime in so far as listing the address. Could not the child molestor have made a stupid mistake and want to atone? How do I know that you would not take the law into your own hands again and do me or others harm.:-3

Snowfire · Post by **Snowfire** » Thu Apr 30, 2009 8:27 am

Lon;1181837 wrote: Would you all feel the same if the individual had multiple arrests and convictions for CHILD MOLESTATION?

My answer to your question Lon would be the same as Acc's. If the Child molester was a threat to the public then he should be locked away. He shouldnt be free

Accountable;1181783 wrote: So a convicted person is marked for life, is that it? No forgiveness, no chance to start over? This is wrong in so many ways! Why not tattoo their offense across the foreheadIt's cheaper and the information would be easier to access. :yh_loser

I've said this many times when they do the same to people convicted of sex crimes. If they are still a danger to society, why in hell are they out of jail?? If they're not, leave them alone!

:mad: It's giving every crime a life sentence punishment.

kazalala · Post by **kazalala** » Thu Apr 30, 2009 8:32 am

oscar;1181835 wrote: It's bad enough having the public being given access to a court case or trial. There were some right shananagans at my trial as people i have never seen in my life were turning up in the public gallery. At one time there was an arguement with security because i had family that had travelled hundreds of miles and couldn't get in the court as the seats were taken up by strangers who wern't there to see me, just to see the famous lawyer in action. The court told me there was nothing they could do as it was a first cime, first served basis for public gallerys. Over the four days, my family had to be there at 08.30 in the morning just to make sure they got in. I was livid. Although i had massive support and the RBL there every day, i must say i resented these strangers because it was my life they were gawking at. When my husband had to give evidence about the yob who threatened to kill our dog..... he broke down in tears and i was so pissed off that there were some strangers in there gawking at him.

Some people will go along to trials like they did public hangings and rubber necking at car accidents.

This is a ridiculous gimmick by the Labour party. As i said earlier, we need tougher sentencing and more police to see justice being done not stupid gimmicks like this. What is this going to achieve? I can see lawyers jumping on this as a breach of human rights. Even if the criminals address is not put on the website, you can easilly find an address on the electoral register.

When i was a little kid, there were some kids in the village who's father was in prison for murder and i remember how those kids were bullied and treated like lepers. This is just plain stupid.

I have often wondered about those people who go to court cases just it seems for the fun of it??? it must be like a hobby for some people... we sure do live in different worlds sometimes

Bill Sikes · Post by **Bill Sikes** » Thu Apr 30, 2009 8:49 am

kazalala;1181873 wrote: I have often wondered about those people who go to court cases just it seems for the fun of it??? thinking:

It could be interesting (if a little slow) and shows you what the enforcement of the law in court is actually like, as opposed to procedures seen on TV. If you have a day free, pop along to your County Court and see what the've got on.

kazalala · Post by **kazalala** » Thu Apr 30, 2009 9:05 am

Bill Sikes;1181889 wrote: It could be interesting (if a little slow) and shows you what the enforcement of the law in court is actually like, as opposed to procedures seen on TV. If you have a day free, pop along to your County Court and see what the've got on.

I suppose it would be interesting to see how it works,,, if i could get over the feeling of being a bit of a rubber necker

-3

fuzzywuzzy · Post by **fuzzywuzzy** » Thu Apr 30, 2009 11:59 am

Ummm Oscar strangers are supposed to be allowed in court. That's why it's called a public gallery. Law and justice, is not only to be done, but it is also supposed to be "seen" to be done. Every single citizen in your country is allowed in that court room. when Pete was prosecuting there was always a stream of reporters, law students, those interested in justice and law for future jobs, those training for those jobs, even high school students. People who had up and coming trials who had never stepped foot in a court and were acustomizing themselves with the process. You also have people who are also waiting to be heard . Remember you turn up to court and it's a big waiting game and people fill in time by sitting in other court rooms........That's just how it is.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Thu Apr 30, 2009 12:17 pm

kazalala;1181873 wrote: I have often wondered about those people who go to court cases just it seems for the fun of it??? it must be like a hobby for some people... we sure do live in different worlds sometimes

At times, during the four days, it was a farce not knowing who was who. The press don't walk around with a big badge either so you have no idea who they are but they were going up to anybody and everybody asking questions because i was barred from even speaking to them. I suppose with me, it was inevitable due to the famous lawyer.... people wanted to see hyim. At least one woman had the decency to approach me before we started to explain she was a law student and would i mind if she watched the lawyer and took notes. It didn't bother me too much to be honest but if your child was murdered say and strangers were in there just to hear the gory details.... that's when i find it sick,,,,,when they turn up at famous murder trials. At the same time as my trial.....the trial had just finished for Gary Newlove. I won't go into details as to how i know but i do know that his wife Helen and girls had to fight every day with strangers to get in the public gallery and caused them immense distress. Now that is wrong.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Thu Apr 30, 2009 12:47 pm

Lon;1181859 wrote: A crime is a crime. Why distiguish a convicted child molestor from any other crime in so far as listing the address. Could not the child molestor have made a stupid mistake and want to atone? How do I know that you would not take the law into your own hands again and do me or others harm.:-3
Who did anyone any harm? There is a difference with our countries for one Lon. You can have a criminal record here for putting the wrong bin out or not being able to pay your council tax. Just from a few counties, the Lib Dems produced figures recently that showed we have over 1,000 police officers in service with criminal records some for assault.

There is a world of difference between some-one who had never come before the police before trying to stop a war memorial being vandalised when they have caught them in the act and some-one who goes out to deliberately harm or steal. If you think i'm a dangerous criminal that the public should be warned about because i grabbed the clothing of some scroat defacing our property to hold him until the police got there, then please think that only where i live, folk think different. I admit i threw his mates bike across the road and frankly if you'd seen what they had done to a memorial for our war dead, you'd be very tempted to do the same.

fuzzywuzzy · Post by **fuzzywuzzy** » Thu Apr 30, 2009 12:56 pm

oscar;1181982 wrote: At It didn't bother me too much to be honest but if your child was murdered say and strangers were in there just to hear the gory details.... that's when i find it sick,,,,,when they turn up at famous murder trials. At the same time as my trial.....the trial had just finished for Gary Newlove. I won't go into details as to how i know but i do know that his wife Helen and girls had to fight every day with strangers to get in the public gallery and caused them immense distress. Now that is wrong.

And that's when your barrister asks for a closed court. and it is usually granted. Everyone including press and family members have to leave, Only those directly related to the proceedings are allowed to be present.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Thu Apr 30, 2009 12:59 pm

fuzzywuzzy;1182014 wrote: And that's when your barrister asks for a closed court. and it is usually granted. Everyone including press and family members have to leave, Only those directly related to the proceedings are allowed to be present. I wish !! I was to be tried by magistrates but they dismissed them and brought in the District Judge. The only reason was they were so frightened of the famous lawyer and his reputation.

Still..... the tea bar did a roaring trade during my trial :yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl

kazalala · Post by **kazalala** » Fri May 01, 2009 3:50 am

oscar;1181982 wrote: At times, during the four days, it was a farce not knowing who was who. The press don't walk around with a big badge either so you have no idea who they are but they were going up to anybody and everybody asking questions because i was barred from even speaking to them. I suppose with me, it was inevitable due to the famous lawyer.... people wanted to see hyim. At least one woman had the decency to approach me before we started to explain she was a law student and would i mind if she watched the lawyer and took notes. It didn't bother me too much to be honest but if your child was murdered say and strangers were in there just to hear the gory details.... that's when i find it sick,,,,,when they turn up at famous murder trials. At the same time as my trial.....the trial had just finished for Gary Newlove. I won't go into details as to how i know but i do know that his wife Helen and girls had to fight every day with strangers to get in the public gallery and caused them immense distress. Now that is wrong.

I would think they could at least make sure the persons immediate family are allowed in first, i dont thin that would be too hard a task.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Fri May 01, 2009 6:59 am

kazalala;1182243 wrote:

I would think they could at least make sure the persons immediate family are allowed in first, i dont thin that would be too hard a task.We tried everything.....we even asked if just 10 seats could be reserved and they said no. A lot of the war vets couldn't get in and ended up sitting outside in reception for hours.