I've had one poster try to use this forum for vigilante purposes on pedophile Dennis Ferguson, so I'm posting this comment from Greg Barns for feedback.

The Today Show has a responsibility - having given this morning ample and sympathetic coverage to the lynch mob of Carbrook which is protesting against convicted sex offender Dennis Fergusson being in their community -to remind viewers of some vital facts that could help to prevent the murder or at least infliction of a serious assault on Dennis Fergusson.

The vigilantes of Carbrook are out in force, even producing a hangman’s rope last night at a public meeting in which Queensland Police Minister Judy Spence gave new meaning to the phrase ‘entering the lion’s den.’

The views of Carbrook residents, given airplay this morning by the Today program, are simply, let’s not mince words here, ignorant and hysterical.

Why doesn’t the Today Show assist in seeking to eradicate the lynch mob mentality of Carbrook by laying facts, rather than emotion, on the table.

And what are these facts?

Well, for starters, the rate of re-offending by sex offenders is low, between 5 to 14 percent – it is 50 percent in the case of property crimes. As one of the world’s leading researcher in this area, Karl Hanson from Public Safety Canada observes, “The observed rate of sexual offenders' recidivism is much lower than commonly believed.”

Second, it is far more likely that child sex abuse crimes will be perpetrated by a member of the victim’s family than by a stranger.

Thirdly, if a community or individual wants to increase the possibility that a sex offender will re-offend, then destabilising their mental state will do the trick. The lynch mob of Carbrook is behaving in just such a way towards Mr Ferguson.

It is time the media stopped egging on ignorance and prejudice in Queensland.

aah.. Graham asks

"Why doesn’t the Today Show assist in seeking to eradicate the lynch mob mentality of Carbrook by laying facts, rather than emotion, on the table."

very simple.. "facts" are selected for maximum commercial effect.

Like politics.. its not about being fair, its about power.(money)

Alright, let's move him in next door and gamble the stats for re-offending on Greg's kids. I'll come back and discuss ignorance and prejudice after that happens.

How many people would volunteer to gamble the lives of their kids on it?.

....and the 'vigilante' with the 'noose' was a 15 year old kid with his mates shinning it up for the cameras.....the 'noose' was some string.

Where we you when they were asking for someone to take him on board?. They end up having to pay someone a thousand dollars a day to do it.

"It is time the media stopped egging on ignorance and prejudice in Queensland."

Only Queensland?

Of course the media eggs on ignorance and prejudice. It's their stock in trade as well as their consumer base. If people were informed and objective they'd hardly be watching the Today Show. If the citizens of Carbrook were sitting around having an informed and civilised discussion of the issue there'd be no sensationalist footage to boost advertising revenue during the coverage. Hopefully the good citizens of Carbrook will rush out to buy said advertised products and provide some justification for all this nonsense.

Nonsense?...

"Dennis Ferguson is an Australian child sex offender who in 1987 kidnapped three children from their home and raped them over a period of three days. Later, one of the children became suicidal and all required long-term counselling. He was convicted of kidnapping, sodomy, gross indecency, indecent dealing and carnal knowledge the following year. In 1989, the Brisbane Supreme Court sentenced Ferguson to 14 years in jail, saying that his chance of rehabilitation was 'nil'.

In 2003, Ferguson was released from jail, and eight months later was found to be living in Miles, Queensland, with a 17-year-old girl. The girl was removed, and Ferguson was also charged with having separately molested two girls, aged 4 and 5, since his release. He had also taken a job selling cleaning products to schools, and failed to inform police of his potential contact with children as required by law.

He rented a house in Murgon, 270 km north of Brisbane, just one block from a child care centre. Protesters forced him to flee. He then sought refuge in Ipswich but was forced out again. The town of Narangba forced him out also, along with several other towns.

Ferguson is currently residing in Carbrook, Queensland."

Again...nonsense?.

Dear Graham,

I don't know what should be done with men like Dennis Ferguson,
who seem to keep on re-offending with sex offences.

What I do know is - the Media must bear some of the
responsibility for the hysteria of the small township
in Queensland - that wants him to leave - or worse.

I saw the people of that town on television, and they
appeared extremely emotional.

That man would not last very long in that town.

What I don't understand is, if he's a repeat offender -
why do they release him, when its
only a question of time before he offends again?

Dennis Ferguson is surely not the only one with a problem
such as this. What is to be done with these people?
Shouldn't our Society should be looking at long-term
solutions to this problem, instead of - shipping it out
to rural areas, in the hope that "It'll be right!"

As this case proves, it won't be right at all

Ahhhhhhh ...the media.
Satans great tool to bring a world down.

I think if we went back down the timeline and came through all over again (wheres that Tardis?) and watched very carefully what the media was doing, we might just see that the media was primarily reponsible for the fall of the western society we're presently in.
Sensationalism, sleaze, lies and innuendo have created skepticism and distrust with governments; even a generation of sex offenders are being created and fed today with all of the sexual smut of rag publications like the Daily Telegraph.
All of the newspaper websites are full of sex and and sex photography.

The media is behind so much of todays evil its hard to comprehend why they are doing it?

Are they blind to "the fall" they have so greatly assisted?

Who will tackle them to save at least some of what was good?

I have to disagree with Graham on this one .Once imprinted,paedophiles tend to be recidivst offenders.I think it is a sickness of denial.If paedophilia was legal and accepted,many would not do it.It is the crossing the boundary of everything that is repulsive to the rest of society that is the power turn on.This is where they get their Kudos.

Paedophiles often beget paedophiles,since sexual imprinting at an early age,does pervert sexuality.Some victims eventually lead normal lives,most do not and continue the chain of perversion.

Hi Gibo

You write 'The media is behind so much of todays evil its hard to comprehend why they are doing it? '

They are doing it because God has handed them along with all other god deniers and haters to their own lusts. The end result is gross immorality, child abuse and homosexuality. We are reaping what we have sown in the 60's and 70's where we allowed the Marxist policies to destroy the family unit. This has been done by saturating society with sexual perversion making many thinking their only real value is in the amount of sex they have. Many have indulged so much that they are unable to say no to their kids because of their own excesses.

The media hate righteousness (especially our national broadcasters). They now promote global warming crap which gives the 'elite' some sense of outward moral comfort. Inwardly they refuse to be cleansed which can only come when man humbles Himself before Christ our Saviour. Interesting that it was a journalist who exploited his own daughter in trying to make a political statement about child nudity. Their is an occasional journalist with ethics although that is usually career suicide for them. Just look at Kerry O'Brien's disgraceful 'bias' on election night.

I do not support murderers and lynching thugs. This man could well be dead now if it weren't for the protection, and murder is a more heinous crime than non-murder, no matter how you cut it.

This bloke has earned the hate, he is a repeat offender and may well do it again.
I stand by the view the person who set him free is a threat to us all.
But kill him?
No the crowds the anger is not pleasant but it is expected.
Medea always values the story more than morals we expect that.
How many truly would feel safe if he lived in our street?
An answer must be found a place he can live be found that does not put him near kids.

I feel enough is enough and it is about time these protesters were arrested with some type of 'obstruction of juctice' charge.

What these fools don't realise is that those of us who wish to see this man face his day in court and be convicted if found guilty, are being robbed of our rights because all they are doing is adding strength to his legal defence.

Remember, his case was thrown out because of excessive publicity and here they are doning the same thing again.

If anyone on this site is one of these protesters how about you and you mob pull your heads in because if this guy belongs behind bars then you are going the right way towards preventing juctice from occurring.

It seems that the chief "witch-hunter", Hetty Johnston, has had a slight change of heart.

From the C-M this morning: "Child protection campaigner Hetty Johnston said yesterday the angry response to Ferguson's presence had probably ended any chance of Queensland adopting a public register of serious sexual offenders, similar to the United States' Megan's Law.

Ms Johnston said that after alleged sightings of Ferguson in public she was fearful people who vaguely resembled Ferguson could be "beaten up"."

While I have little sympathy for Ferguson, I am appalled by the ways in which our laws and public policy are being debased today. Once, a person "did the crime, did the time" and was adjudged fit for return to society, albeit with certain strictures pending exemplary conduct.

far too much of our law today is designed to pander to the perceptions of those with the loudest voice, leading to oppressive laws and poor long-term outcomes. Let's face it, if someone is pilloried regardless of guilt, what is to stop them committing the act?

To all those with a lynch-mob mentality out there, let me remind you of the words of Pastor Martin Niemoller:

"In Germany, they came first for the Communists, And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Communist;

And then they came for the trade unionists, And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a trade unionist;

And then they came for the Jews, And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Jew;

And then . . . they came for me . . . And by that time there was no one left to speak up."

Having a loud voice and a sense of righteousness does not make one right.

Youre so right Runner.
I watched it all happen over the last four decades.
Each year the press got worse, more corrupt and more decadent.

Once fine womens magazines...now you wouldnt hang on a nail in the long drop.
In behind the scenes Im sure many newspapers have connections to the porn printing industries...creating and maintaining sex fiends all over the world.

No one has gone in deep to ferret it out though.

The Media truly are all about the fall of a civilisation.
Only a repetnece will change the destruction they are doing.
The death of world society is at their hands.

Antiseptic thanks for the quote. I'd heard it before but didn't recall it until I saw your posting. The message in it is one I value a lot, not always perfectly.

Runner, perhaps a read and a couple of days serious reflection (maybe some prayer) over the message in the superbly put post at http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=7598#118209 . It fits your earlier foul post on this thread quite well.

Graham, this is a difficult issue. Ferguson appears to be a repeat offender who has shown no remourse for past abuse nor been willing to take part in any programs designed to reduce the risk of further offences. If so then he is an ongoing risk which our legal system does not deal with adequately.

The mob mentaility is another ongoing risk that our legal system does not deal with adequately as well but then Ferguson is not in my neighbourhood.

There don't seem to be neat answers which fit the ideals of our justice system along with reasonable levels of child protection. It's a hard road.

R0bert

I have a solution - let's do the 'Pacific Solution' job on Dennis and his pals. We have all these nice facilities in Naru, so ship them all there where they can hang out with each other on the beach, enjoying the fun and sun at the taxpayers expense. We can feed them and guard them and nobody would have to live next to them.

Hey if it worked for refugees...

Given the role the media has played in all of this, maybe the best place for Ferguson is a nice, comfy News Ltd office.

StG, yes, nonsense. Ferguson has people in the house with him and police outside 24/7. He is effectively in a prison. All this nonsense is achieving is getting the heads of Carbrook residents on the telly every night and increasing the likelihood that some innocent person unlucky enough to vaguely resemble Ferguson gets hurt. Or worse.

I have no sympathy for Ferguson and am disgusted by what he's done. I wouldn't insult animals by calling him one and certainly wouldn't want him living near me. But people need to acknowledge that it's actions like those we're seeing in Carbrook that are the reason his trial was abandoned and he's in Carbrook in the first place.

Personally, I feel that most paedophiles who have molested children are not doing it to satisfy a sexual desire but are getting gratification from the hurt they cause to their victims and possibly families as well as society as a whole. I believe Dennis Ferguson to be one of these types.

Most people with a sexual desire towards children, will thankfully never act out their desires, and if they had the opportunity to do so (even if hypothetically they were not to be prosecuted), I doubt that they would find the experience satisfying.

I don't believe Dennis Ferguson is motivated by sexual attraction to children. I believe he is a very sick man who is motivated by hate. Hate towards children and hate towards a society that wants to protect children. My concern is that all this protest action could motivate him to offend and his next offence may be more serious than sexual abuse. Concentrate on protecting your own children, and leave Dennis Ferguson to the police to monitor.

If anything, the media has been quite restrained about Dennis Ferguson and Carbrook.
I attended the public meeting and it was not drummed up by the media. There were hurriedly photocopied pamphletts distributed, text messages, phone calls, conversations etc that resulted in a reported 1000 attendees.
I attended the meeting at Carbrook at which the Police Minister, Judy Spence failed to show any leadership.
I defy any of you, who have children, and within spitting distance of Ferguson, not to feel some apprehension.
Put yourself in the shoes of Ferguson's neighbour, who can see the house where this sick man lives, whose two daughters are now prisoners. Would you just duck up the road for the groceries?
Put yourself in the shoes of the young bloke who dangled a rope. He's well-known around here as a bit of a scallywag. But his young brothers get off the school bus within metres of Ferguson's front gate.
And personally, put yourself in my shoes, whose wife has been doing her daily walk past Ferguson's back gate. Would you tell her that she's being irrational and hysterical, when she now won't even walk out our front gate? Irrational, emotional? Probably. But a normal, average reaction? For sure.
Yes, there were extreme reactions, but the huge surge of anger was palpable; it was unanimous; it allowed for no calm pathetic ministrations from our wonderfully ineffective leaders. The community did not 'mince words'. They were not hysterical nor ignorant, they were very, very, very angry. The facts were clear. A known, convicted pedophile, was allowed to walk free from jail, was placed in our community, where our children live, learn and play… who was supposed to be monitored in the past who still found ways to play out his fantasies and who can not be rehabilitated.
The Carbrook community believes it has been badly let down by both the political and the justice system. I think that you might underestimate the intelligence of Australians. Your correspondents' banging on about the media supposedly inciting the lynch-mob mentality seriously misreads the Australian sense of justice and freedom.

I have great sympathy for neighbours who fear for the safety of their children when known serial sex offenders move into the area.

However, there are also some human rights issues and rehabilitation issues which must be kept in balance. Not to mention the danger of violent vigilante action.

Has any thought been given to the use of modern technologies that allow for constant surveillance and monitoring of people's authorised or unauthorised movements?

These include: Radio Frequency Identification (RFIDs) e.g. Chip implants, wireless bracelets or anklets, and other technologies such as GPS tracking.
(See for example: http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,1282,68372,00.html)

Australian laws on surveillance and monitoring of serial sex offenders can be found at:
http://www.caslon.com.au/offendersnote2.htm

Some of the issues are discussed at:
http://www.caslon.com.au/offendersnote.htm

Edmund, your post took on the appeasers and apologists in a reasonable, intelligent manner. Let's see them argue with that.

As you have to live beside this monster, I'm sure that you are much better informed than the posters who have been making accusations of mobs and vigilantes.

Spikey, you mention human rights. When someone becomes a beast, surely that is a rejection of human rights and humanity. What human rights did Ferguson allow his victims?
There is one modern technology (as used in Scandinavia) called 'chemical castration'. Let him volunteer for that.

Here is an observation: the current situation was in created by the hysteria that surrounds Ferguson.

If Ferguson had been treated like any other criminal he would be behind bars now - probably for good. But we can't do that because our justice system requires everyone be given a fair trail (thankfully), and we can't give him one because of the hysteria and resulting media attention.

Its like a sore that we keep picking at and making it worse. If a child was picking a wound like this its mother would step in and stop it one way or another. But we adults don't seem to have the self discipline to do that.

One of the many concerns I have with this whole issue is some of the messages that are being implanted into the developing minds of the children whose parents become involved in this ugly vigilante mob mentality.

1) Don't waste your time trying to separate your hatred for the crime from your hatred for the perpetrator. It's not important.

2) Some people are monsters and you just have to kill them.

3) Never let a person move on and learn from their mistakes. Rub their nose in the mess they've made for as long as they live.

4) People who've committed monstrous crimes will always be monsters.

5) Be extremely wary of all old men with long hair and glasses.

6) It's okay to jump up and down and make a lot of ugly threatening noise when you don't get your own way.

7) It's okay to take the law into your own hands.

8) Fair and compassionate treatment is a waste of time. It doesn't change people.

9) It's okay to give in to irrational fear and let it rule your life.

We may all agree with some of these statements to some extent in regards to Ferguson. But when you look at them objectively and realize that many young children are likely to be exposed to these messages on a fairly routine basis in their home environments, it creates some rather disturbing questions about the attitudes these kids will take on as they grow up.

Arjay

"I have to disagree with Graham on this one. Once imprinted, paedophiles tend to be recidivst offenders."

At least Greg Barnes offered some evidence to support his assertion.

Runner

"Inwardly they refuse to be cleansed which can only come when man humbles Himself before Christ our Saviour."

Normally I scroll through your bilious rants but this time the word humble must have caught my eye. All I can ask is when is your humbling going to occur, Runner? The post by Mercurius which RObert linked us to says it all. I'd suggest you print it out and stick it on your computer.

Austin Powerless,

You ask: "When someone becomes a beast, surely that is a rejection of human rights and humanity. What human rights did Ferguson allow his victims?"

Yes to your first proposition. The answer is "None" for the second.

But are you arguing that we too should become beasts? That we too will eliminate human rights? That we should abandon civilised ways of solving serious social problems and let the anger and the mob rule?

Just like the good old days when...?

I suggest you calm down and read Brownyn's post. Good food for thought there. Then look at all the options rather than the simplistic single solution you offer in rage.

Iain Hall states:

http://iainhall.wordpress.com/2008/07/09/dennis-ferguson-beyond-redemption/

"Perhaps the only solution is to pass legislation
that would enable them to detain scrotes like
Ferguson for the rest of their lives for their
own safety, and the protection of our children,
because there is no freedom when a man is in fear
of his life all of the time and as a repeat offender
this man is clearly beyond redemption."

The pathetic ruling by the judge who claimed Ferguson couldn't get a fair trial was the cause of all this uproar. It seems that the judiciary is becoming more estranged from the average person every day.

I didn't even know who he was until the Judge made this ridiculous decision. Juries are well known for their ability to discern between previous acts and the charges in front of them. Our whole system of law depends upon the "reasonableness" of our juries. So this decision makes no sense whatsoever.

The other thing which annoys me is that with all this publicity his lawyer will have even less trouble making the case that there is no possibility of a fair trial for Ferguson

Bronwyn: "All I can ask is when is your humbling going to occur, Runner?"

Runner knows his posts here are at best ineffective, and he probably has a fair idea of what he could do to fix them. But I suspect rather like the sodomists, secuarlists and killers of the unborn that runner hopes to see burn in hell, he is incapable of changing his ways. Pity.

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=7528#117225

rstuart

'But I suspect rather like the sodomists, secuarlists and killers of the unborn that runner hopes to see burn in hell, he is incapable of changing his ways.'

On the contrary. I would rather all men humble themselves and receive forgiveness for their sin as the post you link indicates.

runner: "On the contrary. I would rather all men humble themselves and receive forgiveness for their sin as the post you link indicates."

Sorry runner. After pausing to think about it - yes of course that is what you would prefer. My mistake.

My point was that you could do a much better job then you are of making it happen. You know this, yet you don't.

rstuart

You write 'My point was that you could do a much better job then you are of making it happen. You know this, yet you don't.'

No man can be saved until they call sin sin. Hiding the murder of the unborn in more acceptable terms doesn't change what has happened. The reason most do not get saved is not because of their sin but the failure to acknowledge it and turn to the Only One who can save them. Using nice terminology to hide fornication, adultery, lying, stealing just anesthetizes people to how revolting it is.

If my offense at least causes people to react then it is better than allowing people to sit like a frog in a bowl of water being brought to boiling point. Those who continue to reject the Saviour will reap what they have sown, those who turn to Him will receive mercy and grace. I would much prefer to see the later despite the many character assassinations that come my way.

You assassinate your own character, runner.

Hey guys,
The guy with the noose is one of my best mates he's 18 and lives five houses away from Ferguson's new residence. We have been there everynight and will continue to be there everynight till he is gone. And to be honest none of us care if we get arrested in order to get our point across, at the end of the day we are protecting our friends and family from this scum who has reoffended before so don't start with statistics about percentages of offenders who reoffend cause this scum has done it.

If he's a free man and has no charges pending as such and has done his time blah blah blah why the hell is he getting all this assistance (housing, food, support groups to his house, etc...) when people who commit theft and lesser crimes leave prison with barely bus money to get home and no support afterwards, why don't they get a house and food and everything.... At the end of the day they say he will be homeless unless they support him, oh well big whoop theres homeless people out there that have done nothing wrong and they aren't getting anywhere near $1000 a day spent on them they barely get a hot meal each day.... I say put him on the streets and let him fend for himself..

I suspect that there may be a paedophile or two feeling relieved that Ferguson is drawing all that attention to himself and away from them.

It's the ones who haven't been identified yet that you should be concerned about - not the ones who are under intense scrutiny.

It would be ironic (although not impossible) for there to be one among the protesting mob itself. What better place to hide?

My dear Greg Barns

What sort of signal are you hoping to convey to readers? Why have you resorted to such hyperbole? You sound like a very black pot to me:

"Murder?" "lynch mob?" "serious assault?" "hangman's rope?" "ignorance and prejudice?"

There has been no murder, no lynchings, no serious assault, no hangman's rope, no ignorance and prejudice, only large crowds of rowdy protestors who live in fear for their children.

And the only violence I've witnessed to date was perpetrated by Fergusson (that camera must have cost a pretty penny.)

Historically, it is the paedophile who is notorious for torturing and murdering his victims.

Why do you place the leper's bell around the throats of the innocent?

Your exaggerations will do little to appease community outrage and could potentially incite further unrest.

"And what are these facts?"

Again, these facts are not applicable to Fergusson. Fergusson was molesting children long before the public knew his name. He is a recidivist child molester. He does not require any encouragement from the public to strike again.

I am not beyond experiencing a few fleeting moments of pity for this wretched man who is now being hounded, however, the public are sending a clear message that they will no longer tolerate child abusers living in close proximity to their children.

Some claim that the media beat-up and the vigilantes have ruined Fergusson's chances of a fair trial over the latest sexual abuse allegations. I understood that these days, one can choose not to be heard by jury but rather a judge or a panel of judges. If this is correct, one must ask: "Who's really doing the beat-up?"

Recognising satire isn't your strong point is it toppa?

Settle Bugsy

The rule of law IS being upheld, as it should.

A man who allegedly threatened to harm Dennis Fergusson has been charged by police.

The 29-year-old man allegedly told officers that he would hurt Mr Fergusson during a phone call.

He will face Beenleigh Magistrates Court on July 29.

Dennis Fergusson is also suing an Ipswich grandfather who led a vigilante group that chased him out of town in 2005. The grandfather is serving a six-month suspended jail sentence after being found guilty of threatening Fergusson when he moved to Ipswich.

Civil rights' advocates claim that all this publicity will hinder Fergusson's success in rehabilitation. But Fergusson has been adamant that he doesn't need rehabilitating because he's innocent and he categorically refused it during his fourteen years in gaol.

By the way Bugsy, I heard that Fergusson kicked a cameramen from Channel Nine and the ABC and grabbed a Herald photographer? Do you know if he's been charged with assault?

Police have advised they are well aware of the community reaction to Dennis Fergusson but acknowledge people are allowed to voice their concerns.

Whew....that's a relief. Freedom of speech and public rallies are still permitted in Australia.

Now the only issue outstanding is where to put the outraged Fergusson - out of harm's way. Hmmm...or should that be the other way 'round?

Aha!

I see the posts from toppa have mysteriously disappeared. The phantom moderator strikes again! I hope, phantom moderator, you are paying as attention to the "Suggestions for OLO" topic as you are to this one.

I was going to say toppa, if you do manage to put some police in an ambulance you might get an unexpected bonus. With luck your cell will be right beside Fergusons, and you will get hand out your justice to him at your leisure.

But now your posts have gone without a trace, toppa, people will wonder what on earth I am talking about.

Knowing people, whether they're neighbours, friends or family, means SFA. Serial killers have neighbours, friends and family, as do suicide bombers, rapists, burglars and completely innocent, law-abiding people. Knowing someone does not automatically make that someone a good person. After all, the vast majority of child sex offenders are known to the victim as a neighbour, friend or family member.

Statistically speaking, several of the lynch mob in question, neighbours, friends and family, are themselves abusers and several have been abused by members of the mob calling for blood.

I can understand why nobody would want Ferguson living near them. I sure as hell wouldn't. But the mob's behaviour can't be justified on the grounds that they're known to one another.

It's costing so much to keep him where he is because our justice system doesn't presently have any other way to deal with him. It's politicians you need to be hassling about that.

Hi Toppa

Why not ask your mate to put the noose thing away? After all, why risk your good name for a paedophile?

If you incur a conviction for threatening with a noose, your entire future careers may be jeopardised and you could regret having a blemish against your name. This blemish may show when potential employers request a police check etc prior to employment.

In addition, Fergusson's quite adept at seeking compensation. Do you want to incur the potential of having to pay out a paedophile?

I know how you feel Toppa. I was once a passionate 18 year old too, seeking justice for the more vulnerable in my community.

Rule with the head Toppa. Brandishing a noose is not the way to go and will reflect badly on your own character.

Cheers

In our society,there is no longer serious consequences for bad behaviour.The legal system with it's moral equivocation can justify all manner of deviant behaviour because some within their own ranks indulge it themselves.It is this moral eqivocation that blurs the line between right and wrong that has ordinary people taking the law into their own hands.

Not until you have your own child defiled by one of these monsters can you truely know the wrong.While it is true that most paedophilla happens within the family unit,the internet seems to have spawned a proliferation of these creeps who know no shame.It is a deep seated sickness whereby the thrill of being caught intensifies the experience.After the act they may be contrite and even remorseful but are ultimately drawn back to the thrill of the chase that is the pinnacle in the defiling and destruction of our common humanity.
Solution?Have serious consequences for deviant behaviour.

Welcome to OLO Judy. It is very good indeed to have your comments presented on this forum.

I fully support the decision to keep Ferguson where he is until the appeal hearing. We must not give in to vigilantism.

But please don’t think too harshly of senior constable Heather Steinberg. She was only presenting her point of view, which she is entitled to do. She must not be prevented from doing so by being a member of the Qld police force or public service. She must not feel that there is pressure for her to not express her views. Freedom of expression is very important. I remember Peter Beatty saying as much and Anna Bligh has not said anything to counter it.

A lot of people have genuine concerns. But there is also some real over-the-top stuff coming from a lot of those who are against Ferguson staying in Carbrook. This episode has given a lot of people the opportunity to express some very heavy sentiments. It has brought out the nasty side of human nature, which in some of the most vocal critics, indicates that they are potentially as bad as he is.

Indeed this not just about Ferguson. We need to watch our kids and make sure they are aware of the dangers, as potential paedophiles could be anywhere….especially within family circles.

If anything, this sorry little episode has reminded me that freedom and the rule of law can be a fragile thing and how little some people actually think about the price paid for it.

Freedom comes at a price people. Previous generations gave and risked their lives and their children's lives for it. Don't throw it away on stupid paedophile.

While the crowds and anger are a concern, while few of us want to kill or harm this bloke, what if?
What if the crowds had never formed it was not known he was there?
What if he offended again?
What if he does?
Are his human rights more than his neighbors?
Or his victims?
He has a right to live his life without fear but so do we the idea of isolation and lifetime control may well be the answer.
A poster highlights minor criminals are in prison.
And will get far less than we give this bloke.

"What ifs" are fun, aren't they?

What if the sky was green?

What if the moon was made of cheese?

What if all unionists were assumed to be enemies of the State?

While I generally agree with your comments, belly, I've been the victim of a "what if" from a magistrate and I didn't see my kids for 7 months because he wouldn't think about the application to include my kids in my ex-wife's spurious DVO, but instead said "we can't take the chance that the allegation may be proven" and granted the application, with no evidence presented and no opposing case heard.

Our society is now in a situation in which a mere allegation is enough to get the "what if" brigade frothing at the mouth, with the result that a no-doubt serious offender is running free at enormous cost to the State. You should be ashamed of your "what ifs".

There wouldn't be any what ifs, if it weren't for the pathetic ruling by the judge.

This piece of garbage, Ferguson, should take the responsibility of the publicity because he is a recidivist. If he was a first time offender no one would know his name.

The only reason people know who he is, is because he has reoffended after being let out. So he should have to live with the fact that it might be more difficult for him to find jurors who don't know him or his background.

It a monumentally stupid decision by the judge.

Belly, those are worthwhile what if's but there are others.

- What if the reaction to Ferguson makes it more difficult to deal with child abusers?
- What if the reaction to Ferguson ensures that we don't get to know when a known child abuser is in our neighbourhood?
-What if the reaction to Ferguson cements the idea that some people are beyond the reach of the law because they can't be tried fairly?

There will be others. I'd hate to have him in my neighbourhood but assuming that he can't currently be kept in jail the location he is in makes some sense. It's close enough to a built up area so that police and other resources are available - a lot of remote areas will have a small police presence. It seems to be away from concentrations of children (schools, child care centers, parks etc). It's accessable but not densly populated. Government owned land so private landlords don't have to deal with the flow on.

Horrible for those who live nearby but it would be hard to find a location with ready access to resources and where the neighbours would like him in the area.

R0bert

GrahamY, recidivism rates overall are not overly helpful insofar as they disguise the problem. It is true that a person who offends once is only at a minimal risk of recidivism, that is true with paedophiles as with most other criminals, with paedophiles this is normally associated primarily with those who have a one-off 'relationship' with a family member and/or someone they know. When a paedophile reoffends, especially when they start to lie and/or trick their way into the confidence of others in order to reoffend, then they are far more likely to reoffend repeatedly.

Here is an interesting paper on this type of person:

http://www.aic.gov.au/conferences/paedophilia/glaser.pdf

My other question is, if it is so very safe for the public to live around them, why aren't they housed in the same area as Senior Public Servants/Ministers? I mean, such areas (given their known socio-economic makeup) would seem to be far less likely to give rise to lynch mobs, wouldn't they? Thus, despite the higher rent, the lesser need for police protection should ensure a lower overall expenditure? Or is this just a political stunt to put pressure on the judidiciary to try the man, by upsetting as much of the community as possible? Especially low-income, semi-rural Queenslanders, who are noted for having extremely low tolerance for a lot of things? Whose response is utterly predictable? Whose votes rarely favour the ALP anyway?

I mean, it hardly makes sense otherwise (any more than putting him in low income, predominantly Aboriginal areas did other times). I mean, an area whose people have a well known dislike of paedophiles, high incidence of sociopathy and little to no respect for the rule of law with a marked antipathy toward police... Who could predict the outcome of adding a high-profile paedophile to that mix, hmmm?

Cui bono?

I am always prepared to listen to others views.
I learn much that way, sometimes change my mind and view.
But not this time.
I do not want the bloke dead.
But I do not want him free to commit these crimes either.
Close to the bone for me, I know victims.
Too many victims, too many destroyed lives.
From a different generation than most posters, and from a poor background I have seen too much.
Strange as it may seem my job keeps me seeing things that never should have happened.
I have no answers but a few ideas.
Our elderly sometimes live in villages we call retirement homes.
Could we have an open but guarded remote place like this?
My what ifs worry me, my past story of a little girl raped by her father are true.
That kid is now 18 has 3 children and never again a life, it hurts.
Ten times ten times my WHOLE NEIGHBORHOOD warned DOCS she was in danger.
No action took place until after the crime.
Take Dennis Ferguson's freedom not another child's life.

.... I say put him on the streets and let him fend for himself..
Posted by toppa, Thursday, 10 July 2008 2:40:39 PM

Ah toppa, I think you will find this is exactly what he attempted to do it's just that the mob decided that 12km from the nearest shop, school, pub etc was to close.

So what do you mean when you say "put him out in the steet to fend for himself"?

Also, don't forget, he was costing the state next to nothing to be there and thanks to the mob we now have to foot the gand a day scam.

Thanks for that!

Spikey, I just came across your silly accusation of 'rage' from last Thursday. For your info, I was perfectly calm when I wrote my post about the beast. Why did you think otherwise? Was it simply that you disagreed with my views?

You agreed 'yes' for my first point. So, if Ferguson becomes a beast and renounces human rights, what's your problem when he is given none?

As for your opinion of 'food for thought' do you seriously think that Ferguson could learn from his 'mistakes'? Get real. Why don't you think about the ruined lives of his victims for a change and stop worrying yourself over a piece of scum that doesn't deserve life?

BTW, I think it is right to take the law into your own hands when the law fails. You have to realise that law and justice are not the same. As I've stated in the past, Ferguson would not be alive if my kids were his victims. I'm sure that that will further convince you of my 'raging evilness' while you wait patiently for Ferguson's 'rehabilitation'.

Austin Powerless

How did I know you were in a rage? As it happened I did disagree with your one suggestion - chemical castration. But that's not why I suggested you calm down and consider some other opinions. The rage indicators were your savage rejection of reason. And your inability to engage with other ideas. You wouldn't normally froth at the mouth, would you?

I now see you've become even angrier with anything but your own (even more) extreme position.

"If Ferguson becomes a beast and renounces human rights, what's your problem when he is given none?"

My earlier post told you what the problem with that is - but I'll give you another chance to get it. We should not meet bestiality with state-condoned bestiality. We should not meet violence by the individual with mob violence. We should not meet a person's lawlessness with lawlessness of the group. We should not meet irrationality with more irrationality. In short, we don't want to become like the person we are raging against.

As for 'food for thought' you may be right to think that Ferguson is incapable of learning from his crimes. But the civilised people who have to deal with his carnage surely are capable of learning from his mistakes. Not of repeating them with criminal behaviour.

When you reduce a criminal to"... a piece of scum that doesn't deserve life" and declare that "...it is right to take the law into your own hands when the law fails" and that "Ferguson would not be alive if my kids were his victim", it's hard to see the real difference between you and Ferguson.

You think only in black-and-white terms. The alternatives are not between being totally enraged versus waiting patiently for Ferguson's rehabilitation. Lots of posters have provided some other positive options worth considering.

Spikey, again you're making silly assumptions.

I'm calmly replying to your little 'rage' accusations but I'm sure that you'll still spout out that I am writing in anger.

FYI, I never react in anger. I wait until I have assessed whatever I find wrong or troubling and then decide what to do, or not to do. Vengeance is a dish best eaten cold. Ferguson is safe form me as he never came near my kids. If he did...
From your outbursts, it would appear that you are the one in need of anger management.

How would you propose to treat Ferguson? Let him move in with you?

I did not 'reduce a criminal to"... a piece of scum that doesn't deserve life"'. I described a beast. He's a predator, criminal is too mild a word for him.

As for your laughable 'it's hard to see the real difference between you and Ferguson', you really lost it now. Unless you meant it as a compliment where you don't appear to see much wrong with Ferguson (he's only a criminal in your misty eyes).

If you had kids and the beast molested them, what would you do?

Austin Powerless says: "...I never react in anger. I wait until I have assessed whatever I find wrong or troubling and then decide what to do, or not to do. Vengeance is a dish best eaten cold."

So your menu of calm cold dishes include:

- Threat to murder - albeit conditional: "Ferguson is safe form me as he never came near my kids. [and from your earlier post:] Ferguson would not be alive if my kids were his victims."

- Lawlessness and incitement to others to break the law: "I think it is right to take the law into your own hands when the law fails."

- The use of barbarous punishment: "Chemical castration".

- The amazing capacity to deny you rage and project it on to someone else: "From your outbursts, it would appear that you are the one in need of anger management."

- Reducing alternatives to absurdity: "How would you propose to treat Ferguson? Let him move in with you?" Again you demonstrate that you see issues only in black-and-white. When I reject your over-the-top brutal solutions, I am not advocating a 'soft' approach to crimes of this sort.

You ask: "If you had kids and the beast molested them, what would you do?" I would expect the law to be fully implemented and swiftly. If I were still unhappy with that, I would agitate to have the law changed.

On 10 July 2008 I made some further suggestions. I also commended to you Bronwyn's posting. Does that sound like anger to you?

Hounding the guy only shows the moronic side of man.
Dennis needs to be seperated.
I dont think its as difficult as the government thinks.

Spikey, Spikey, Spikey, you should never make assumptions about the state of mind or otherwise about a poster when you can't see or hear him/her. I hardly ever see printed words as full of 'rage'. It's counter-productive and can lead to the wrong meaning or context to be taken.

It's funny that you find it 'amazing' that I project your perception of rage back at you. Don't you like getting what you dish out? Pathetic.

I still maintain that the 'solutions' to Ferguson I offered were written while in a calm frame of mind. I can be cool, calm and collected yet still advocate taking the law into our own hands and preventative - not barbarous - punishment.

'You ask: "If you had kids and the beast molested them, what would you do?" I would expect the law to be fully implemented and swiftly. If I were still unhappy with that, I would agitate to have the law changed.' How are you going to agitate? In a civilised manner? Who'd listen to you? Well, if you think I'm brutal, your statement above puts you at the opposite pole. A weakling that would not fight for what's right but wring his/her hands and cry in public if the legal system failed. I hope nothing ever happens to your kids as they would get no help from you.

Gibo's right. Ferguson needs to be seperated. From the human race.

Austin Powerless

So little self-awareness. I'd be very worried if you were my father. Thankfully you're not so I'll just get on with being a participating member of a democracy where the rule of law and civilised discussion still prevails.

Great comeback, Spikey.