“You cannot judge someone today based on something they have done 25 years ago ?

“You cannot judge someone today based on something they have done 25 years ago."

Says the employer of a man who was a dangerous rapist a quarter of a century ago, and now has access to the houses and adresses of the sort of people that were his victims through his job.

http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/student-rapist-dubbed-the-bedsit-8814130

But, that's what has been going on in the wake of the Saville scandal. What are the rights and wrongs of this?

Giving a 'second chance' is fine but knowingly putting a person, upon release from restriction, into an environment whereby the ease of access and the temptation to re-offend in a similar vein are a constant reminder is crass on the part of the people employing him and unfair on the person employed therein. Rape with violence is a psychological malady and rarely completely curable without very intense therapy - something I very much doubt was given to this offender.
knowing how we 'rehabilitate' criminals in this country. He should have been in a secure hospital for the duration of his incarceration - not a prison. And his rehabilitation back into society constantly monitored for relapses. (We don't have the resources for that and so we get these constant problems).

For the criminally insane there doesn't appear to be any way back and therefore they should be shot if they re-offend thereafter. Well - what answer do you have?

You might think a community charity would act responsibly, and not send a famous rapist round to your house without mentioning it to you. But you would be wrong. It's the secrecy that's the problem.

It's ok to give a second chance to someone who has comitted crimes in their youth, but the people involved in giving him that second chance should be aware of the circumstances, so they can assess their own level of risk. There are some dangerous people out there you wouldn't want to have in the house, or anywhere near you. The lady in this news story who realised what her boyfreind was doing must have had quite a shock.

http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/unnatural-twisted-obsessive-pharmacist-jailed-8830198

A browse of the greater manchester news shows a fairly constant stream of rape and violence. Upsetting to see my home town going down the pan. However, looking at the news from most other northern towns and cities, it's the same picture, a lot of ruthless and dangerous people about.

Crime is supposed to be going down, but, is it? Re-offending in this type of crime is too common, perhaps people commiting this sort of crime against the person should be sent to secure psychiatric units and realistically assessed before being considered for release, rather than go to ordinary prisons.

Rochdale is no worse or better than the vast majority of towns in this country that have been scarred by the demise of the industrial revolution or that have had a large influx of immigration since the war or had a waste of its youthful talents through unemployment. Idle hands make the devil's work and benefit cultures make indolence and negativity. All these things must be put right before the crime that exacerbates the problems can be eradicated (or at least brought down to acceptable levels - if such exists). It's not the people, it's the system by which and in which they are ruled. Even in the days of full employment (and I remember them) we still had some violence and disorder. It's in the nature of the beast.
There isn't anything you can do about it other than to perhaps hope that regionalism as opposed to centralism can be brought about over the next few years and that the local politicians, who will become far more answerable to the towns population, will strive to combat the problems from the bottom up - as opposed from the top down. It's your time - and as always, you will have to make the best of it.

The social history of Lancashire is difficult, the effects of the industrial revolution were very hard on people. Putting a large population in on top of that pre-existing situation was not a brilliant idea. People cope and get used to a low quality of existence, and count their blessings, but it could and should be a lot better.

Believe me when I tell you that the quality of an individuals existence now is far better than it ever was in my youth. I visited America in the very early 1960's and for all their wealth (which was substantial then) I found just the same type of deprivation as existed at home in Rochdale at the time. I don't think today's generation could ever understand the 'lack' of even the basics in my early days, so used are they to having so much now. That doesn't mean to say that they should not have the same as many other parts of the country, just that 'want' seems to have replaced 'need' as a point of reference. Which is far flung from what we were expected to put up with.

I cannot say I'm a great believer in the Universal credits system as such. I know the argument goes that to 'means test' everything costs a great deal of money but one has to weight that against 'fairness to all' and the fact that those employed to administer the system are alongside the rest of us as 'tax-payers' (in other words 'employed and paying in as opposed to sitting at home on benefits and moaning). The wealth (however collected) should be distributed on 'need' and after all 'need' is satisfied put into public/private development nation wide - and then if there is anything left over - abroad to worthy cause.

Do you see anyone with the guts to do that in these elections??? No. And you never will.

It shouldn't be underestimated how much effort goes into a muppet show, there are costumes to sew, scripts and jokes to find, guest stars to book, lighting to arrange, music, and all that goes on behind the scenes. With all that show to keep on the road, not much time left.

Those who follow political debate may wonder why straightforward statements and answers to questions are often delayed as politicians erm um, ah, gargle, I erm well I'm sure, erm that the er, and generally punctuate with erm, the er, er, pauses and erm, diversions.

We must be patient, it has to be appreciated that even while they are speaking, politicians have to think through and choose a combination from the various options of fobbing off, glossing over, being economical with the truth, diverting attention, pretending to misunderstand the qu, qu, qu, question, twisting the facts, lie, deny or obfuscate, or simply bore the audience into a coma. All these tactics going on in the mind of the responsible politician are qu, qu, quite exhausting, not much time left for thinking about real problems that need fixing. All this can eventually be sorted out by passing some more poorly thought out legislation full of unintended negative consequences without bothering to read it through.

Yes you seem to have understood the system well with your analysis above. We must however hope (there's a word used too frequently nowadays) that amongst all the expounded drivel there might just be the makings of progress - somewhere? Somehow? Sometime?

We do miss Gordon Browns' style in electioneering though, he really knew how to smarm over a potential voter with his synthetic smile and wavey, pointy hands in front of the camera, enquire after her grandchildren, pat her on the back, and then call her a "just a sort of bigoted woman who used to vote labour, ridiculous, whose idea was that", once he is back in the car. A classic political interview.

Will anyone be able to beat Gordons' outstanding display of pompous hypocrisy combined with blistering, blustering incompetence, in the run up to this general election?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CTr8IVWBuPE

Or, is that being too judgemental? Speaking of judging people, who will judge the judges?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-31920906

I think it pretty naive for anyone to think that 'judges' are not human. Find me a man who says he doesn't view porn at some time in his life and I will give you a liar. It's more the point of 'viewing' whilst in 'term time' i.e. during working hours that has got them the push. Silly to get caught in my opinion. Not terribly bright for educated people. But then I do find intelligent people have less common-sense than others at the best of times. A lot of our 'terrorist' runaways are quite bright pupils. Not the sense they were born with . In a more enlightened society such misdemeanors would be dealt with in a more 'educated' manner. Silly really.

If judges want to kill time by looking at porn or playing online sudoku, they should do so at home, not at work on the office computer.

If anyone, in a work place, wants to do that or gabble away like demented fairies on mobile telephones then in my opinion they should all be sacked. Do it in your own time.

People blame the demented fairies for a lot that goes wrong, but, this may really be due to a lack of fully trained scapegoats.

We are all fully trained scapegoats in this world. The trick is to know when it's coming and who's brandishing it. Too many malicious pillocks out there. Just keep watching your back kiddo.