Steel Mann is correct in what he says, however there is another side to this that everyone dismisses. What of the family of the offender? They are forced by the 'vigilantes' to suffer just as much as the offender by proxy, as if even being related to the offender is reason enough to be convicted of the same crime. With the hysteria that is often surrounded by these cases family and former friends are forced to either go into social hiding or move to another town to escape the hatred and recrimination, the gossip and rumours.

So I have to ask this, What business is it of yours what is done with Dennis Ferguson? Perhaps if people were less focused on the rabid pursuit of justice at all costs the family (if not in this case then other cases) would not have to suffer so!

I'm not an expert on this subject.
I simply don't know enough about it,
and although I've held some very strong
views in the past I now realize that each
case must be treated on an individual
basis.

Regarding Dennis Ferguson - if he's on
medication to control his urges, and he's
going to be constantly monitored by the
police - and will be living in an isolated
area, away from neighbours, schools, parks, et cetera,
why can't he be allowed to live in peace?

Child abuse exists in our society - not only from
paedophiles. And of course children need
our protection. But in a case where the man has been
punished, presumably is on medication, and now lives
in an isolated area, being monitored by police, I don't
know what else can be done.

It's irresponsible of the media
to whip things into a frenzy.

StG

"Don't think even the extreme greenie leftie touchy feely everyone deserves a break civil liberty spruiking knobs.."

Well, I'm glad you've got that off your chest! Not sure how it helps the debate though.

"..would disagree this fella is a class 'A' piece of excrement."

No, I agree, very few people would have any sympathy for this man or any other child molestor. I certainly don't. At the risk of inviting another stream of colourful invective, I will state however that he himself is a victim. While the community must be protected from him, he needs to be left alone to live out what is left of his life like any other convicted criminal who has served his time. The hysterical vigilante hounding of this sad pathetic man is every bit as damaging to the community fabric as his presence is feared to be.

Yes, this is a difficult issue. Clearly, this guy's an allegedly recidivist kiddy fiddler who denies his guilt and who has little hope of rehabilitation. However, despite the current moral panic over this issue, our society has always spawned such creeps, and there are many more dangerous ex-murderers, rapists etc who have done their time and live on parole in the community without attracting the kind of vigilante hysteria that Ferguson does.

I also think that the media need to shoulder some of the responsibility for the current situation. In sensationalising Ferguson's case and in publishing his address, they have contributed to the reasons the judge gave for his most recent charges to be set aside, i.e. that he is unlikely to be able to receive a fair trial in Queensland. Further, given that the Crown's evidence is apparently weak, the encouragement by some media of vigilantism seems to me be in contempt of the court.

Yes, this guy seems to be a creep of the worst order, but he is by no means as dangerous to the community as many others who don't attract the same level of hysterical vigilantism. Trials should be conducted by properly constituted courts, not the mass media.

Arthur N, you are correct about vigilantes and the offender's families. As child sex offenders are so despised by the community they find it difficult to make friends with anybody else but other sex offenders. This also results in them befriending children and the next thing you know there's another victim.

I believe it's up to the Courts to determine the punishment that should apply to all criminals, and it is never up to a vigilante group to give out justice.

Regardless of how evil a criminal is, I don't believe that means society should be evil in its justice. If we condone evil in return for evil, we have no right to condemn the offender's actions and we lose the right to consider ourselves a civilised society.

Part of the problem with Ferguson is that he looks the part, and so the media can have a field day with it. The real danger here is that the media are encouraging public opinion about how a child molestor "looks", which had the potential for molesters that look "normal" to not come onto the radar for parents and kids.

That said, public opinion of an individual should not prevent a trial occuring. If a suitable jury cannot be found, there should be a mechanism for a judicial trial, perhaps by a bench of judges. It maybe that our system allows for this?? Not sure, but it should have been invoked in this case, both in the interest of justice for the alleged victim, and for Ferguson himself.