Actually I think that Fardon being released, then put back in prison is dreadful. Talk about torture.

He should not have been released a few rapes back, but releasing him one day & re-arresting him the next highlights all that is bad with the system.

Sensible people want him locked up permanently, but the bleeding hearts want him out.

Can you imaging what it would be like to be told you are out, then be locked up again the next day? Sure he deserves to be locked up permanently, but why can't we get our act together before the fact, make a decision, & then stick with it for gods sake? This Ringa Ringa Roses stuff should be in play school, not our courts.

Dear Suse,

You've paid me such a compliment as to tell me
that I'm "a better woman than you."

However, I've simply realised that I can't keep
doing what I've been doing, and expect different
results.

Foxy, a leopard never changes his spots.
Shades of good ol' boy Antiseptic I'm thinking?

Folks
I think it is time to shut this discussion down
People send to get way off the path and personalize things to the detriment of the argument.
The point here is whether or not there is any justification for the release of sex (rapist) offenders back into the community.
The answer is obviously no but since there is limited accommodation in prisons, even less for the protection of these offenders and the costs are enormous the authorities have to find alternate solutions.
We say no and they say yes. They have the power we do not.
There is one solution though its called community justice vigilantes.
You just saw it in operation in New Guinea after the trail massacre.

Dear Suse,

Have you not read Antiseptic's recent contributions
to this Forum? He's not the poster of old and I
suspect we didn't really get to know him earlier.
He's a man full of surprises. Nice ones.

Besides, I can only be responsible
for my own behaviour. Not for those of others.
And I am doing what I feel is the correct thing to do.
As I said earlier - I can't keep behaving as I have
done to date, and expect different results.

Criminologists say that the parole system works and there are compelling reasons to keep it.

Mistakes are made. Some can be corrected through policy and procedural change, or reducing human error. Criminals are clever in hoodwinking even their lawyers though and mistakes are always possible.

Justice Callinan's report shows the way ahead. Some might still disagree with his assessment of the problems and causes and some here want sex crimes against women to be a special category and a different, reduced standard of proof to be applied, even where the same crimes may be committed against men However, there will never be a perfect solution, especially where the legal system reflects our society's values. I am not sure though that other legal systems such as (say) France's, produce any better results.

Since discussion of Callinan's report is not of interest to posters, maybe instead some might have some thoughts on the the growing (Western) cultural belief that the State can somehow remove all risk and should be attempting to do so. Specifically that risk identification and treatment -hopefully complete removal(!)- is a function of government. Speaking for myself I see it as foolish, intrusive and even dangerous. It is seen for instance in demands for the State to treat the risk of obesity, as well as in some of the suggested extreme 'solutions' to sex crimes.

For the lazy-minded who stereotype, no I am not under-rating the seriousness of rape crimes or other serious offenses in saying that. I do believe that Callinan has a point in suggesting that serial offenders who commit serious crimes should be treated differently by the parole system.