Child rapist released...

[Taf]

A child rapist has been released after the UK's top judge said it would be "unlawful" to keep him locked up.

Jeffrey Charles Goodwyn, 48, was given an indeterminate sentence in 2012 for indecently assaulting a seven-year-old girl eight or more years earlier.

He already had a previous conviction for raping a nine-year-old child.

NSPCC Wales head of service Des Mannion said: "It is extremely frightening that a child rapist described as 'very dangerous' and unrepentant has been released back in to the community due to what seems like a legal technicality surrounding the timing of the offence."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-s...wales-30396520

Even the judge says he is very dangerous!!!

[solitaire]

Yet another perfect example of why people despair of the useless justice system we have in this country.

Originally Posted by solitaire

Yet another perfect example of why people despair of the useless justice system we have in this country.

To be fair, the justice system does allow for people committing crimes like this, here and now, to be jailed indeterminately for the public safety. What it doesn't do is allow courts to convict people of things that weren't a crime when they did them, or to punish them with punishments that weren't available when they did them.

From time to time, especially when the law has recently changed, that throws up extremely unfortunate anomalies like this. But on the whole, it is more civilised not to shift the goalposts when it comes to crime and punishment. That way lies arbitrary and retrospective state victimisation.

Nevertheless, in this situation I can only hope that the local police, wherever this bloke ends up, are able to make up for the deficiencies that existed in the law prior to 2005, by watching him very closely indeed in 2014.

[techguyone]

I agree entirely with Chris on this

[Taf]

But it still means he only served about 2 years for offences against the 7 year old.

[ianch99]

Originally Posted by Chris

To be fair, the justice system does allow for people committing crimes like this, here and now, to be jailed indeterminately for the public safety. What it doesn't do is allow courts to convict people of things that weren't a crime when they did them, or to punish them with punishments that weren't available when they did them.

From time to time, especially when the law has recently changed, that throws up extremely unfortunate anomalies like this. But on the whole, it is more civilised not to shift the goalposts when it comes to crime and punishment. That way lies arbitrary and retrospective state victimisation.

Nevertheless, in this situation I can only hope that the local police, wherever this bloke ends up, are able to make up for the deficiencies that existed in the law prior to 2005, by watching him very closely indeed in 2014.

My concern is that with the drastic cuts in public services especially the Police, these are the sort of individuals that will slip through the net and be able to commit new crimes.

Originally Posted by Taf

But it still means he only served about 2 years for offences against the 7 year old.

Because that was the sentence available for the crime, at the time he committed it. Without having looked at it in detail, I'm guessing he has probably had the equivalent a 4 year sentence with automatic early release.

[MalteseFalcon]

And yet again the justice system shows why it is an ass.

[nomadking]

Originally Posted by ianch99

My concern is that with the drastic cuts in public services especially the Police, these are the sort of individuals that will slip through the net and be able to commit new crimes.

How come? Do you expect him to be under observation 365/24/7?

[ianch99]

Originally Posted by nomadking

How come? Do you expect him to be under observation 365/24/7?

How come what?

Originally Posted by Chris

Because that was the sentence available for the crime, at the time he committed it. Without having looked at it in detail, I'm guessing he has probably had the equivalent a 4 year sentence with automatic early release.

The way I read it he was incorrectly given a indeterminate sentence for a crime which, at the time it was committed, was not eligible for that type of sentence. As a result it's been overturned as a legal obligation.

[nomadking]

Originally Posted by ianch99

How come what?

You were complaining that the police etc wouldn't be able to stop him committing another crime. The ONLY way to stop him, apart from the obvious of locking him up, would be 24hr surveillance. A probation officer visiting once every 4 months isn't going to make a difference.

Originally Posted by Damien

The way I read it he was incorrectly given a indeterminate sentence for a crime which, at the time it was committed, was not eligible for that type of sentence. As a result it's been overturned as a legal obligation.

Correct - however AFAIK had he not served an appropriate length of time under the law as it was, he could have been made to remain in jail today. He has been released because, the indeterminate sentence being unlawful, it had to be replaced with one that *was* lawful. And the lawful sentence for the crime he committed, under the law as it was at the time he committed it, was around 4 years. Under our current early release/probation rules, that equates to 2 years behind bars, then supervision by the probation service afterwards.

[ianch99]

Originally Posted by nomadking

You were complaining that the police etc wouldn't be able to stop him committing another crime. The ONLY way to stop him, apart from the obvious of locking him up, would be 24hr surveillance. A probation officer visiting once every 4 months isn't going to make a difference.

Not quite correct, I was saying that with a lot less police on the front line the chances of a criminal intent on re-offending and getting away with it is higher.

If you cut front line policing, you have fewer officers patrolling, fewer officers visiting schools to advise children on the dangers of people like this criminal, fewer officers able to respond to calls for help, etc.

Here's a couple of the many recent articles on police cuts:

http://www.itv.com/news/story/2014-1...unsustainable/
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-sussex-30333435

[nomadking]

How many police officers would there have to be on patrol, in order to catch him about to commit another offence? It's impossible.