Plan B Forum

Posted: **Wed May 23, 2012 10:10 pm**

people like this chap...

A predatory sex attacker has escaped jail because a judge decided locking him up would be 'utterly cruel'.

Andrew Jackson, 48, twice stalked schoolgirls aged 13 and 14 and made sexual approaches in Bridlington, East Yorkshire, before finding a disabled woman to attack.

But Judge Jeremy Richardson QC allowed Jackson to walk free from Hull Crown Court, saying it would border on cruelty to jail him because he suffers from Asperger's Syndrome.

He told Jackson: 'I wish to make it plain you deserve to be sent to prison.

'But sending someone like you to prison would be utterly cruel.

'You are very much to be pitied.

'You have never had a full sexual relationship. It must be very frustrating.'

He added: 'I have a public duty, but it would be quiet wrong to impose a cruel punishment.

'Quite frankly you could not cope in prison. I have no doubt your life would be a misery.'

Jackson had already been spoken to twice by police for stalking children around Bridlington in playgrounds and wooded areas on a moped.

He showed one girl aged 13 a picture of his privates.

The police said he sexually questioned two 14-year-old girls before asking: 'Are you legal?'

And the court heard Jackson sexually assaulted a disabled woman he met while walking around Bridlington on April 18 last year.

He shoved his hands into the underwear of the 21-year-old on a park bench and refused to let go.

The woman's friend heard her screams for help and had to drag Jackson off her.

Judge Richardson said he aggravated matters by initially insisting on a trial falsely claiming the woman had prostituted herself to him for £20.

Barrister Martin Sharpe said police in Bridlington were so concerned about Jackson’s potential threat they wanted a Sexual Offences Prevention Order for him to stay out of children’s playgrounds.

Defence barrister Patrick Palmer said Jackson had an IQ of 75, lived at home with his parents, did not work and had suffered all his life from an undiagnosed condition.

Mr Palmer said he had a facial habit of winking which was open to misinterpretation by young girls.

He said Jackson's Asperger's could not be cured, but could be managed from day to day

Jackson, of Trentham Close, Bridlington, had pleaded guilty to a charge of sexual assault by touching, knowing that the woman did not consent.

He was made the subject of a two-year community order with a supervision requirement in an effort to alter his behavior in the long term.

Judge Richardson also imposed a 10-year sexual offences prevention order and placed Jackson on the sex offenders’ register for five years.

The judge told Jackson: 'Young girls have to be protected in your area.

'You have to learn to control yourself. I regard sexual offences as a very serious crime. Usually the men involve deserve to be sent to prison. It would not be right here. It would be bordering on cruelty.

'However if you harass any more girls you will end up in jail.'

Ok, ignoring the Mail's usual hyperbole, and concentrating on the issues; the man is low IQ with Aspergers and some other mental health/learning difficulty, which has been undiagnosed. BUT He has sexual urges which he does not know how to control, and/or is incapable of understanding what is appropriate or not.

Should protection of society take prescient over his right to be free? Is he morally culpable for his actions?

I have a similar lad on my caseload at present, (aged 19.)

Posted: **Wed May 23, 2012 10:16 pm**

It's not about his right to be free. It's that someone in his condition will be a target for violence in prison. His crimes, however horrific, did not warrant the death penalty legally, one should not be imposed de facto by locking him up with people who will see him as lunch.

Posted: **Wed May 23, 2012 11:22 pm**

Actually Strop, if this is true:

The police said he sexually questioned two 14-year-old girls before asking: 'Are you legal?'

I would say that he is perfectly capable of understanding what is appropriate or not.

Bromide in his tea perhaps?

Posted: **Wed May 23, 2012 11:39 pm**

Scooter wrote:It's not about his right to be free. It's that someone in his condition will be a target for violence in prison.
His crimes, however horrific, did not warrant the death penalty legally, one should not be imposed de facto by locking him up with people who will see him as lunch.

Which doesn't really address what would be the right thing to do about him. Should his liberty be curtailed to protect others?

Posted: **Thu May 24, 2012 12:45 am**

Of course his liberty should be curtailed. The question is whether that can be achieved in prison without killing him. I would hope that his release was accompanied by things like electronic monitoring, restricting him away from areas around schools, etc.

Posted: **Thu May 24, 2012 12:59 am**

What should be done with...this chap....

Judge Jeremy Richardson QC allowed Jackson to walk free from Hull Crown Court, saying it would border on cruelty to jail him because he suffers from Asperger's Syndrome.

Well, in answer to that question, I'd say letting him have his way with The Right Honourable Judge Jeremy Richardson QC would be a good start....

Posted: **Thu May 24, 2012 1:19 am**

Scooter wrote:Of course his liberty should be curtailed. The question is whether that can be achieved in prison without killing him.

Why not in a secure hostel or mental institution? I was hoping, and probably should have said, that the discussion would be broader than "should this guy be jailed".

Should we restrict the liberty of people of limited intelligence/mental illness, if they have the potential to do a degree of harm to others.

Posted: **Thu May 24, 2012 2:39 am**

Yes. An ankle bracelet should suffice.

As a kid, a friend of the family had a severely mentally retarded son, age 21, who still had to wear diapers. As children, around him we were told to be careful, as he didn't know his own strength and acted like a toddler -wanting to grab and touch anything around him.

This was when he was allowed away from the institution-

At 21, he was a big friggin' guy, and imagine a monster with the mind of a child, wanting to paw you...

It was like being the original Frankenstein movie.

Posted: **Thu May 24, 2012 3:02 am**

Lord Jim wrote:
What should be done with...this chap....

Judge Jeremy Richardson QC allowed Jackson to walk free from Hull Crown Court, saying it would border on cruelty to jail him because he suffers from Asperger's Syndrome.
Well, in answer to that question, I'd say letting him have his way with The Right Honourable Judge Jeremy Richardson QC would be a good start....

Sans lubricant.

Posted: **Thu May 24, 2012 3:05 am**

loCAtek wrote:Yes. An ankle bracelet should suffice.

As a kid, a friend of the family had a severely mentally retarded son, age 21, who still had to wear diapers. As children, around him we were told to be careful, as he didn't know his own strength and acted like a toddler -wanting to grab and touch anything around him.

This was when he was allowed away from the institution-

At 21, he was a big friggin' guy, and imagine a monster with the mind of a child, wanting to paw you...

It was like being the original Frankenstein movie.

So you've just proved how pointless an ankle bracelet would be in protecting anyone.

Posted: **Thu May 24, 2012 3:21 am**

Well, we would know where he was, if he offended off the institution, duh.

Posted: **Thu May 24, 2012 3:32 am**

Gob wrote: Should we restrict the liberty of people of limited intelligence/mental illness, if they have the potential to do a degree of harm to others.

So an ankle bracelet would not protect anyone, niether would it restrict his liberty, so it's all a bit pointeless and irrelevant to this debate..

Posted: **Thu May 24, 2012 3:49 am**

Strict supervision, extensive and intensive sex offender treatment, GPS monitoring within a restricted area and stay away from areas frequented by children. If he lives with his parents and has all his life, he's known in the community.

He would be lunch in prison. The offenses charged don't warrant the death penalty and you lot are supposed to be humane.

Some jurisdictions in the US are commiting sex offenders once they've served out their prison terms; much as I'm sickened by the behaviors of such folks, I think that's a clear violation of civil liberties - punishing people for crimes as yet not committed.

Educate children about the danger and monitor their whereabouts.

Bottom line the vast majority of sex abuse victims are molested/raped by daddy, uncle, grandpa, occasionally mommy, priest, coach or teacher - not the creepy neighborhood retard.

Posted: **Thu May 24, 2012 4:55 am**

How about, order to reside within a community home, and only allowed out under supervision of parent or staff member.

Posted: **Thu May 24, 2012 5:11 am**

For a period of time commensurate with a typical jail sentence for the offences for which he was convicted, house arrest would be totally appropriate.

Beyond that, it's a violation of civil liberties.

Do you have sex offender registry in the UK?

Posted: **Thu May 24, 2012 5:15 am**

Yep, and in Aus.

But I disagree with the time limit. If he is intellectually impaired and unable to comprehend, and has little control over his libido, then stopping his restrictions after a predetermined sentence would not be in anyone's interest.

Posted: **Thu May 24, 2012 5:23 am**

How about mandated chemical castration? I'd support that before life imprisonment for sex assault.

Posted: **Thu May 24, 2012 6:31 am**

Through the bars of a large enclosure
The village ladies intently stared,
Where a gorilla with massive composure
Was impassively combing his hair.
They were shamelessly interested,
Eyeing devoutly a certain spot,
But me mother's a special requester
I refrain from telling you what.
Brother Gorilla!

The door of the circus lock-up,
Where the noble brute had been put,
By an administrational cock-up
Was unwisely left unshut
'I'm going to lose it at last,' he cried,
Swinging lissomely out of his cage,
Referring, of course, to his chastity:
He was just at the difficult age
Brother Gorilla!

Those self-same ladies who previously
Had been licking their lips from afar
Did a bunk, which shows how devious
And whimsical women are.
In the path of the lovesick monkey
There were two who wouldn't budge:
A little old lady all shrunken,
And a petty sessions judge.
Brother Gorilla!

The old girl said 'It would be surprising
And unlikely in the extreme
If anyone found me appetising,
And beyond my wildest dreams!'
The judge intoned with tranquillity:
'To take me for a female ape
Would be the height of improbability'.
Even judges make mistakes.
Brother Gorilla!

It would be curious and uncanny,
Say, if the choice were up to you
To ravish a judge or a granny
And you didn't know which to do.
If I were in such a position
And the choice had got to be mine,
I'd beg the old lady's permission
But go for grandma every time.
Brother Gorilla!

Though the gorilla is very proficient
In the role of a paramour
His mental equipment's deficient
And his eyesight's awfully poor.
With a palaeolithic leer
He gave the old lady the miss
And, grabbing the judge by the ear,
Gave him an introductory kiss.
Brother Gorilla!

In time the gorilla's desires
Were more or less gratified.
The judge, being rather biased,
Couldn't see the funny side.
He was kicking and screaming and wailing
When his moment of truth had come,
Like those wretches he orders daily
To be taken away and hung.
Brother Gorilla!

Posted: **Thu May 24, 2012 6:59 am**

bigskygal wrote:How about mandated chemical castration? I'd support that before life imprisonment for sex assault.

But no one is talking about life imprisonment, or at least I’m not.

There should be alternatives to prison, community based services for those who through no fault of their own, impairment or illness or intellect deficit pose a threat to others. When this threat is sexual, what can we do about it?

The lad I'm case managing has the normal sexual proclivities of a healthy 22 year old man, but has schizophrenia and Aspergers, there is no way on god’s green earth he should be locked up, (again) but there again, we need to protect vulnerable females from him.

Suggestions?

Posted: **Thu May 24, 2012 7:05 am**

On the serious side, it's not his freedom that needs to be curtailed but his sexual urges. I agree with bsg - castration, one way or the other. It seems less cruel than other options.

Meade

Alternatively:
Well I think they should attack them, er, first with bombs and rockets destroying their homes, and then when they run helpless into the streets, er, mowing them down with machine guns. Er, and then of course releasing the vultures. I know these views aren't popular, but I have never courted popularity.

Plan B Forum

What should be done with

What should be done with

Re: What should be done with

Re: What should be done with

Re: What should be done with

Re: What should be done with

Re: What should be done with

Re: What should be done with

Re: What should be done with

Re: What should be done with

Re: What should be done with

Re: What should be done with

Re: What should be done with

Re: What should be done with

Re: What should be done with

Re: What should be done with

Re: What should be done with

Re: What should be done with

Re: What should be done with

Re: What should be done with

Re: What should be done with