should we name them and shame them

[Strawb]

Just found out through a hockey friend a former and I use the word former friend got convicted as a Paedophile. I was sent the link of his photo on Facebook and it got me thinking should we be naming and shaming paedophiles?
I am one who says that we should. I still find it as a shock though finding out.

[RustyCage]

If convicted yes

[Strawb]

Rusty I agree if they are convicted yes we should. He was convicted but because he pleaded guilty he got 30% off his sentence.

[whufc]

Once convicted yep there name and identity should be made open to the general public!

I'm involved as a witness in a 'gross indency' case with a adult and teenager involved. I would love nothing more than reveal this mans identity!!! Scumbag!

[bennymacca]

anything to do with kids? yep.

maybe for some of the lower end of the scale stuff, like stat rape etc no, but if they go on the sex offenders register i think we should be able to see that

[Footy Chick]

anything to do with kids? yep.

maybe for some of the lower end of the scale stuff, like stat rape etc no,

Because rape is ok? especially of people not of consenting age?

[bennymacca]

No, of course not. That's why they have a conviction. But there are at least some people that fit into this category that aren't predators etc

[Booney]

Should they be named and shamed? Absolutely they should.

Should SA Footy be the host for such a list of names? I wouldn't think so.

SAPOL should have a list of names available to the public for people convicted of crimes against minors of a sexual nature, no doubt.

Clearly the reason is for their safety, which is a preposterous notion considering the crimes involved.

[bennymacca]

I also agree that vigilantism should not be tolerated however.

[Mr Beefy]

http://www.mako.org.au/home.html

[Dogwatcher]

Not naming them is actually about protecting the victim.

[Booney]

Not naming them is actually about protecting the victim.

Correct, something that should not be over looked.

[bennymacca]

Not naming them is actually about protecting the victim.

That's a pretty fair point, and probably the biggest reason not to

[JK]

I once read the biggest reason for protecting the identities, was an expected rise in murdered victims (the whole "dead can't tell tales" theory) if the details were released.

I don't know whether it's legit or BS, but not something a lot of people would stop to think about when they make the emotional call. (and Im as guilty of that as anyone)

[Punk Rooster]

I also agree that vigilantism should not be tolerated however.

screw that for a joke, someone needs to take out the trash
You want to protect the " poor peadophile"?
And how does not naming the peadophile protect the victim?
Given that SA has a poor history in this field, it appears the law makers are looking after their own...

[bennymacca]

I also agree that vigilantism should not be tolerated however.

screw that for a joke, someone needs to take out the trash
You want to protect the " poor peadophile"?
And how does not naming the peadophile protect the victim?
Given that SA has a poor history in this field, it appears the law makers are looking after their own...

so you advocate not having a justice system at all?

and do you think there is any sort of stigma, shame, or embarrassment about being a victim? i would think there would be. I would think that would then be the victims choice as to whether they wanted the whole world to know what happened to them.

if we are talking about measures to stop reoffending, i would advocate much, much harsher sentencing for sex crimes, that way they are behind bars instead of in the community where we have to worry about whether they should be named and shamed.

[The Apostle]

Should we be naming and shaming paedophiles?

Considering that 90+% of child sex abuse victims are related to those who molested them I say no.