Home  Forums |
|
|
|
|
Topic History of: Portsmouth Teacher found guilty of "historical "abuse.
Max. showing the last 5 posts - (Last post first)
|
giles2008 |
Think one of the most unpleasant aspects of this case was that the pupils at the school were led to believe that Mr Braid was "seriously ill" and therefore unable to continue at the school. |
|
BR |
I agree with Francis. For justice to work and be fair there has to be evidence.
Now I believe that a REAL PAEDO will continue to re-offend and therefore the POLICE should be able to catch them "red handed" if they want to. Historical abuse victims would then get retribution because their abuser would be jailed - albeit for a current victim.
If they are not abusers - and we are told the real Paedophiles have many tens of victims and continue til the day they die - then there will be no evidence against them. In UK justice this is being proved innocent. Of course there will be occasions when there are problems with this - but no-where near the number of bad cases brought currently.
I would say 9 out of 10 historical abuse cases are false allegations. Whereas current allegations are possibly 6 out of 10. Both are driven by financial reward or revenge. There are many very "sick" people out there wanting to take advantage of the justice system.
I would say most paedophiles are within the family unit and live and sleep under the same roof. Evidence shows this - therefore, historical allegations are quite often pointless because they can be created out of thin air by a family feud developing or a divorce or custody battle.
Teachers are being harassed constantly - with probably over 50% of teachers having to face at least one allegation during their career. This is the effect of PAEDO HYSTERIA in the media. Following Christmas Eastenders with PAEDO TONY we will see another wave of allegations - kids COPY TV. Waterloo Road recently shows us this ( kids drinking science methanol )
Teachers need better protection against allegations. Even if the general public has unlimited time - anyone working with children should be given a 5 year max and evidence against them - otherwise we will continue to see miscarriages of justice and suicides.
Many teachers are quite "sheltered" in their outlook because they have never worked in the real world. To be thrust into a Police investigation can be catastrophic for them - because they are suspended and by that happening they are already marked out as suspect.......e.g end of career.
I would repeat that no one should a ) Teach in a UK school or b) Help or volunteer to help kids under 16 in a UK school : until the Government protects the teachers and others against false allegations. IN addition one way of getting rid of CRB and LICENCE checks is to REFUSE to have a check. If everyone did this then schools would have no volunteers etc. and the Government would make no money out of kids and child protection. That is obscene in itself. |
|
JC |
Michael Howard did mess about with the law somewhat. He probably did make it easier for allegations of historical abuse to be pursued, but several men had already been convicted without any evidence following a string of trawling operations in residential care homes where police invited children to accuse members of staff. Invitations were accompanied by promises of money and no proof was required, well before Michael Howard became Home Secretary. He just added to an already existing problem. |
|
JK2006 |
I have very mixed feelings on this - the law was changed (by Home Secretary Michael Howard) with the best of intentions - to allow abused children with no evidence to get retribution. Surely nobody could want old abusers who took advantage of helpless, vulnerable children to escape being prosecuted? But the police and media, spotting a loophole which would enable increased convictions and headline stories, have misused the new law to persecute innocent people, as have certain individuals. The line was blurred and then crossed - I suspect first accidentally and then intentionally, allowing the very worst of crimes - false allegations - to flourish. |
|
Francis D |
The problem with cases of historical abuse is that they are almost impossible to prove or disprove. That they are brought to court so long after the date of the alleged event undermines the main principles of British Law. For any case to proceed there should be genuine evidence. To hold a trial where it is one person's word against another sets us back to before the days of King Alfred and re-introduces all the problems which prompted the burden of proof ruling.
I think there should be a statute of limitations apart from where there is clear and genuine evidence of guilt. |
|
|
|
