Jump to content

Man ordered to tell police if he plans to have sex - is this fair?


Recommended Posts

Today a man who was acquitted of a rape charge was ordered to give police 24 hours' notice before he has sex. The court imposed a 'sexual risk order', a new measure which means if he breaks the conditions he can be imprisoned for 5 years.

 

I had never heard of these measures before and they sound harsh and unfair. They also sound alien to our system of justice and the concept of innocent until proved guilty. The man is innocent of any crime, yet he's having this threat to his liberty and I don't understand why.

 

Full story here, thoughts anyone? - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-york-north-yorkshire-35385227

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought that he had to inform the police if he intended to have a sexual relationship with someone. I think he only has to tell them once, not three times a day:)

 

It is an odd power though and one that I also find somewhat unsettling.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok that's wierd. Never heard of it and I'd assume there would have been a big fuss made about it becoming law but can't remember owt. Clearly the powers that be view him as a dangerous rapist and that the jury got it wrong so from a safeguarding point of view rather he's under the gun than women are raped but it does seem a bit of a far ranging power.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

'Sexual Risk Orders were introduced in March last year and can be applied to any individual who the police believe poses a risk of sexual harm, even if they have never been convicted of a crime. They have a minimum duration of 2 years and can last indefinitely.'

 

What I find just as alarming is that this can be introduced with no debate and no one knowing about it.

What with that, and Secret courts, we should all beware the creeping power of the State.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What with that, and Secret courts, we should all beware the creeping power of the State.

 

Enlighten the readers with your knowledge of secret courts. But please make sure you get your facts rights - if you don't then someone is going to put them / you right very quickly

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The article says

 

"It also contains restrictions on his use of the internet and mobile phone devices and requires him to inform officers of any change of address."

 

The authorities obviously believe he poses a danger . It would be better he be locked up instead of these 'restrictions'

 

However , if he was found not guilty and not charged with any other crimes then he should be free to carry out all law abiding activities .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.