I am all for making less use of imprisonment and imposing community sentences. However, if the name of the game is public protection I have to wonder if the judge got it wrong in this case. A 38 year old man who used his position "as a ministerial servant in the Jehovah's Witnesses" for 14 years to sexually abuse children, including an 18 month old baby, has been spared jail because it was claimed that he had now undergone therapy and he knew what he had done was wrong. Surely, he knew that beforehand when he was actually abusing the children?
Is this judge fit to judge cases in court?
UPDATE: Guardian story here.
5 comments:
In my opinion the judge in this case must himself be a peedo as he appears to "understand" this fellow's crime and apparrent "desire" to undergo therapy.
I would have the judge investigated and his PC taken away for examination, it could shed a lot of light on the reasons for his decision.
Sorry, "apparent", and also "paedo"
typos abound.
How does one "use his position "as a ministerial servant in the for 14 years to sexually abuse children"?
The position does not lend itself to that activity.
The problem is that parents are not supervising their children.
well then anonymous, based on your comment...
you know nothing of the jehovah's witnesses lifestyle
If a paedo can get away with being seen as being rehabilitated and avoid a jail sentence then how can a social worker fabricate lies about the parenting ability of an innocent mother stating that they are emotionally, physically or sexually abusing them without any evidence? Remove the child or baby, but never face a jail sentence. Something very wrong here.
Post a Comment