I'm left wondering what the definition of public protection is, and what qualifies a person to serve in such a role. An aquaintance of mine was given a four year sentence 14 years ago but is on the sex offenders register for life even though that undermines the Judge's order that his licence would expire in 1998. I shall call him Fred (not his real name). His new public protection police officer wanted to meet him and so he asked if I would attend as he is now a very nervous man and lives in constant fear of the police, never knowing what new measures will be introduced.

This police officer alarmed me greatly. He launched into a series of deeply personal questions about Fred's sexual history and wanted to know such things as how many times a day he masturbated, etc. He seemed to have an obsession about sexual behaviour which went beyond professional interest. He then got onto how Fred clearly fitted the profile of a sex offender due to his being a loner and living with his parents. Actually he has been forced into this lifestyle by his conviction. Before that he was very outgoing and had his own accomodation. Since leaving his prison he has been denied housing and employment. His current 'shell' was not of his own making.

After the police officer had left, Fred told me how in his two and half years sharing a prison wing with sex offenders he had never met anyone so overly obsessed with the subject as this officer. Fred had clearly been un-nerved by the meeting and I had been left wondering who the real pervert was. I felt dirty after the encounter.

I do not know whether Fred was guilty or not. I do know he has given up on life. He told me that it's as if he'd been murdered by his accuser with the approval of the State. He claims he was not guilty. The police respond by claiming that everyone says that. I prefer to rely on facts, and there were very few of those in Fred's case.

This morning I had a phone call to say that Fred had attempted suicide after hearing of yet more restrictions being introduced by the Home Secretary. It must be a very difficult existence, knowing that the powers to be can 'stick the boot in' at will and you have no protection under the law - because they just change the law to suit their aims.

The more I learn about the situation, the more comparisons I see with Germany's policies against the Jews. Systematic dehumanisation of a section of the populace. But those who pursue such a policy will always deny the comparisons, because those who do evil will always find ways to justify it in their own minds.

In my work as a clinical psychologist I often see clients who have a history of sexual abuse either against them, on another person(s) or both. The Home Secretary should actually spend some time with these people rather than just barking out proclamations and orders. Tarring people with a brush as a "sex offender" is too vague. People do lie. I have clients who lives have been ruined by young girls fantasising. 2 of them even had their convictions completely overturned but their lives are still ruined. There is no grey area. You're either an offender or you're not. Whether it's a falsely accused teacher or a paedophile who targets small children and abuses them.

How many fall foul of the law that one week says a boy can be molested by a paedophile and the next week he can be sent to war ?

The current media panic is politically motivated. To make Paedophiles subject to worse treatment than murderers shows that "Terrorism and Sex Offenders" - both crimes based on no hard evidence - are being used as a Political Weapon against many people in the UK.

I believe that as in the East End Islamic Duo - the Police will act using this two pronged attack to undermine democracy and freedom in the UK.

For too long the silent majority in the UK has allowed our freedoms to be erroded. I just hope it is not too late for us all to fight back and stop the UK becoming a total Police State.

In a local paper in North London last week a 41 Year Old man with no criminal record committed suicide because of Police Harassment - he was accused of a sex crime at Waterloo Station ( something which the Police dropped the day after he died due to no evidence )

This is much more common than people think. The reason Police are not available to fight crime is not because of resources they are chasing ordinary people around who have been identified as suiting their political purpose.

Stories like the above are just the tip of the iceberg. There are loads of websites which list such stories ( They never make the Government controlled media) they are growing and people are too frightened to admit that the Police are chasing them on terrorism or sex offence accusations. In many cases it is the Police who are "making up" the allegations !!!!!!! You just could not make it up.

I feel for Fred-I know someone in a similar situation here in Australia where the law largely follows UK law and unfortunately-moral panic does likewise.

I believe a serial predator could require some sort of monitoring but this label of "sex offendor" ( all inclusive of a sexual murderer or someone who pees against a wall and is charged with "exposure") goes against all the concepts of fairness.

It is no different than the Nazis making people wear a yellow star ( or pink triangle for gays and others for Roma or political "criminals") and it's a prelude to finding scapegoats and identifying people.

And I can see no possible reason for this catergory..if people are convicted of a crime they have a record..why does it not end there ?.

Ironically you could murder 2 children or adults and if it isn't sex related you could walk free from jail eventually ,completely unfetted.

In NSW we have a new Attorney General from the hard right on a repulsive "law and order" campaign ( we jokingly say "poor Laura Norder is being rolled out again".

He has removed so many catergories of those allowed bail that jails are bursting at the seams and prison officers are now threatening to strike as their necessary overtime has been cut.

He claims "crime has been reduced" by this -an utterly reprehensible thing to claim-he is a former barrister and should know better-as he is proclaiming everyone charged is guilty before trial !.

His famous statement on his tenure was "all sex offendors are grubs !"..another digraceful statement fron a Minister of the Crown. I approached him recently at a social funtion-I am a notorious button-holer of dreadful MPs and said "in my experience it is actually politicians that I find to be grubs". The look on his face..if he could have found a charge I'm sure he would have had me banged up.

According to my acquaintance-who still has 2 years left as a "sex offendor" ( and why he no longer is one after that is a mystery ?)..he was recently informed that there were a few new provisions he had to adhere to as part of his status. However on legal advice he informed the officer handling his case ( and apparently in NSW at least-the officers are especially chosen to be non abrasive ) that he had signed a "contract" as to his "sex offendor" status and as that was legally binding-it could not be changed by either party. He has heard nothing since.

Therefore I assume that the UK authorities have left themselves with an open-ended way of adding penalties ( for that is what it is).

It is disgraceful but it's worse in the USA where it's endemic and there are now about 14000 children under the age of 18 who will carry this title for life.

It's quite obscene in my view.

Francis D wrote:

This police officer alarmed me greatly. He launched into a series of deeply personal questions about Fred's sexual history and wanted to know such things as how many times a day he masturbated, etc.

Policemen have to get their kicks too - they can't spend ALL day looking at the videos they have confiscated, can they ?

WHY do you think certain people are attracted to this kind of work ?

My personal experience is that my brother in law was raped by a Senior Policeman in the home counties when a child. He has suffered greatly.

Because of this I have researched the way in which REAL "Paedophiles" have infiltrated the Police ( particularly in the Home Counties and Met ) and used their "privelege" to shut up those they abuse. I have countless examples. One case went to court but the witnesses ended up in hospital so the trial was abandoned.

If you read any book by pyschological writers they show that the stereotypical Paedophile looks to work in jobs where they get close to children - the main one would be residential care but the second job would be working in the Police where you can also manipulate the system to your advantage. Even better joining a Child Abuse team gives you the chance to pretend LOL to be a Paedophile in chat rooms and look at thousands of child abuse photos......the thought turns my stomach and I cant believe anyone would want to do that job.

Exploitation of children is very wrong - as is exploitation of OAPS and anyone. The media is going mad at the moment - supposedly GLITTER is now flying to HONG KONG - he is being chased all around the World by the UK Media led by a person I now consider to be as near a Nazi as I have even seen in British Politics - Ms J Smith.

How have we ended up with a Nazi style party in power in the UK ? I have Islamic friends who are terribly depressed by life in the UK - they are lovely people who feel totally demonised. I despair when I read of people committing suicide because of the Police harassment of their lives in the UK.

All DECENT people must not give up though - we must stand up to evil.

I'm not sure how the UK authorities get away with imposing extra penalties beyond those ordered by a judge. The ECHR declared it illegal to add to a sentence without a proper judicial hearing. I agree that there is also a matter of the signed contract, which is what any licence, including the sex offenders register, is. It appears that the British government and police feel they can ignore established rules and procedure so long as the NotW and it's readers nod approval.

The register seems to be an excuse to keep adding to sentences, and to keep kicking people once they are down. If it has any effect on behaviour it is probably more likely to drive people back into crime than help rehabilitate them. To ensure habitual criminals do not offend would require 24hr monitoring, and there are not enough officers to perform that task. As the re-offending rate for sex offenders is less than 5% we must conclude that very few are habitual. Before the invention of the register their details were kept on police files anyway. The register has made little difference, other than to grant the authorities power to act in ways which would normally be unlawful.

"I'm not sure how the UK authorities get away with imposing extra penalties beyond those ordered by a judge."

And I'm not sure they WILL get away with it. Blunkett attempted legal retro-fits several times only to have the law Lords kick his ideas into touch. This strikes me as a headline grabbing attempt by the Home Secretary to divert attention from the PMs return to work, the upcoming Glenrothes by election and the ongoing mess that the Government face. After all, who wouldn't, in this media-frenzy environment, wish to do as much damage to Gadd as humanly {or at least constitutionally} possible? Ms Smith is simply the latest in a long line of Home Secretaries having to look tough in order to give some creedence to a vaccuous government with neither a record of competence to point to nor a future to contemplate.

In The Know wrote:

WHY do you think certain people are attracted to this kind of work ?

I've always questioned that. Most psychologists are mentally ill themselves, most counselors needs counseling etc.

What would make someone want to specialise in child abuse ? The same reasons that make somebody want to run a boys choir I assume.