NationStates Jolt Archive

I read an article in The Sun yesterday about a CONVICTED paedophile being allowed to drive kids to school. When I tried to find the same article on The Sun's website (http://www.thesun.co.uk), I found TWO articles(http://www.thesun.co.uk/article/0,,2-2007040611,00.html and http://www.thesun.co.uk/article/0,,2006510000-2007100448,00.html) about convicted paedophiles CURRENTLY being allowed to drive kids to school.

Isn't this illegal?

(As far as I'm aware, paedophiles often re-offend so having "served time" makes no difference - and isn't it illegal for adults convicted of sexual offences to work with children?)

Alternately-formatted links for anyone who can't use the above: http://************/34g395 and http://************/24wqeq EDIT: 404 fixed

Your link to the sun is a 404.

And this being a tabliod I wouldn't be suprised if this was blown hugely out of proportion. Maybe these alleged child molesters work for these bus companies who do school runs.

*reads article 1*
He said the conviction happened when he was a teenager, adding: “Everybody was having a laugh in those days.”

The council insisted it had checked Emms and was satisfied he posed no risk.
See, just the Sun being sensationalist.

*reads article 2*
Alright, I'll give them that one.

THE CONTACT DETAILS OF THE TWO COMPANIES THAT ALLOW CHILD MOLESTORS TO DRIVE BUSES/COACHES WITH KIDS ON:

sicko number one:

Ann's Executive Coaches - 01386 556688
Unit 18, The Keytec Business Park, Pershore, Worcs. WR10 2JN.


sicko number two:

Johnson Bros Tours Ltd
Green Acres, Green Lane, Hodthorpe,
Worksop, Nottinghamshire S80 4XR
Telephone 01909 720337 - 724840 - 721847
Fax 01909 722886
enquiries@johnsonstours.co.uk
Opening hours: Monday - Friday 09.00 - 18.00
Saturday 09.00 - 13.00 Sunday Closed

Thanks, I need to hire a bus from Worksop to Birmingham next week

I hear paedophiles are working in hotels across Birmingham as well but don't have a cite. Could you get some addresses of hotels under GBP100 with enough rooms for a party of 25 as well? I think that's where they generally work - near the NEC if possible

No it in't. Sexually abusing kids is not "having a laugh" and anyone who thinks it is needs their head testing.

I took more note of the fact that it happened when he was a teenager(so he might not actually be a paedophile) and the fact that he was cleared by the council.

Your link to the sun is a 404.

And this being a tabliod I wouldn't be suprised if this was blown hugely out of proportion. Maybe these alleged child molesters work for these bus companies who do school runs.

*reads article 1*

See, just the Sun being sensationalist.

No it in't. Sexually abusing kids is not "having a laugh" and anyone who thinks it is needs their head testing. I deliberately left out the other stories I found where the paedophile was no longer working with kids. I don't want a witch hunt, I just don't want child molestors working with kids and I want people to know if they are.

One of them was released 16 years ago and has not re-offended and has been cleared by the council.

The other on the other hand is more worrying though even if there are cameras on every coach

No it in't. Sexually abusing kids is not "having a laugh" and anyone who thinks it is needs their head testing. I deliberately left out the other stories I found where the paedophile was no longer working with kids. I don't want a witch hunt, I just don't want child molestors working with kids and I want people to know if they are.

I took more note of the fact that it happened when he was a teenager(so he might not actually be a paedophile) and the fact that he was cleared by the council.
A 17 year old having sex with a 15 year old is child molestation in some parts of the USA (right?) so it may not really be pedophilia at all.

I took more note of the fact that it happened when he was a teenager(so he might not actually be a paedophile) and the fact that he was cleared by the council.

Even if he was a teenager, sexual assault is sexual assault. Just because he's older it doesn't mean he considers girls any less worthy of being treated as objects

No it in't. Sexually abusing kids is not "having a laugh" and anyone who thinks it is needs their head testing. I deliberately left out the other stories I found where the paedophile was no longer working with kids. I don't want a witch hunt, I just don't want child molestors working with kids and I want people to know if they are.

Which is why you posted contact details for both companies.

Even if he was a teenager, sexual assault is sexual assault. Just because he's older it doesn't mean he considers girls any less worthy of being treated as objects
It doesn't denote particularly being attracted to children, though. And like I said, in the USA apparently 15 year olds having consensual sex = sexual assault, according to other threads I've seen here.

for his sick attack.
Sicko ... driver Crowther
The vile pervert
we revealed he molested little girls.
Most. Unprofessional. Article. Ever.

Which is why you posted contact details for both companies.

So people can urge the companies to fire the men. I didn't track down the addresses or contact details of the men.

Even if he was a teenager, sexual assault is sexual assault. Just because he's older it doesn't mean he considers girls any less worthy of being treated as objects

The article didn't give the details of the crime he was convicted of, other than it being indecent assault of a girl under 14 when he was a teenager. How do you know he wasn't drunk or high at the time? And even if he is a paedophile, has it occured to you that jail might have scared him out of even trying to think about re-offending?

A past conviction of indecent assault doesn't mean a person is going to rape children at every opportunity.

Most. Unprofessional. Article. Ever.
It's the sun, you expected something else?
So people can urge the companies to fire the men. I didn't track down the addresses or contact details of the men.

Forcing someone out of their job sounds witch hunt-esque to me.

Even if he was a teenager, sexual assault is sexual assault. Just because he's older it doesn't mean he considers girls any less worthy of being treated as objects

It does not say what his relationship with the girl in question was

If it was him raping the girl then it is one thing, if it is him being in a dodgy relationship and having 'consesual' sex with her then it is quite another.

Hell - when my grandpa met my grandma he was 18 and she was 14 - never mind the fact they have been married for over 60 years he's still a sexual deviant yes?

A 17 year old having sex with a 15 year old is child molestation in some parts of the USA (right?) so it may not really be pedophilia at all.


that very well could be the case, however the records are sealed and we will never know. he is a convicted pedo, and will always be known as one. cleared by council means nothing. murderers are freed everyday because they are cleared as well. does that make society safer?

:sniper:

It does not say what his relationship with the girl in question was

If it was him raping the girl then it is one thing, if it is him being in a dodgy relationship and having 'consesual' sex with her then it is quite another.

Hell - when my grandpa met my grandma he was 18 and she was 14 - never mind the fact they have been married for over 60 years he's still a sexual deviant yes?

It was indecent assault, so definately not rape. Well, unless he got a plea bargain.

Isn't this illegal?

(As far as I'm aware, paedophiles often re-offend so having "served time" makes no difference - and isn't it illegal for adults convicted of sexual offences to work with children?)


In order:
No
Yes, sadly, they often do re-offend
and no.

These days it is very common for the judge to give someone a lifelong order banning them from working with children, or even from being in the presence of a child unless there is a social services-approved person there. However, there is no automatic ban.

I believe Ilfreann was suggesting that the old sex offences on the guy's record might have been something he did as, for instance, a 15 year old with a consenting 15 year old. Under those circumstances, both of them could be charged with a sex offence against a child. Strange but true.

but like i say it was 18 years ago and he's served his time and I don't see him as a danger

I agree. The other one looks like a stereotypical dirty old man though.

In order:
No
Yes, sadly, they often do re-offend
and no.

These days it is very common for the judge to give someone a lifelong order banning them from working with children, or even from being in the presence of a child unless there is a social services-approved person there. However, there is no automatic ban.

I believe Ilfreann was suggesting that the old sex offences on the guy's record might have been something he did as, for instance, a 15 year old with a consenting 15 year old. Under those circumstances, both of them could be charged with a sex offence against a child. Strange but true.

Well, the girl was under 14, but that's the gist of it.

I agree. The other one looks like a stereotypical dirty old man though.

he hasn't even been sentenced for his last crime

Most. Unprofessional. Article. Ever.

You've obviously never read the sun, then. For example, any woman mentioned in an article always gets some drooling adjective inserted in front of her name, i.e. Sexy, Busty, Slutty, etc. "Kinky Janet, 21, of Milton Keynes, was stabbed to death last tuesday in..." and you get the idea.

It was indecent assault, so definately not rape. Well, unless he got a plea bargain.

Sorry - what I ment was that it could have either been something that the girl wanted to do, or something that he forced her to do - that she 'consented' to whatever they did or that he forced her into it.

It doesn't sound like he is a child molester though. The other one - hell yes he's a creep, but this guy...

Alas poor Kinky, I knew thee well

Actually, I love this one (their caps):

"A RAT-FACED paedophile is driving a school bus..."

Never mind he's a paedophile, ZOMG RAT-FACED!!!

...but look at the picture, he really is, I can't tell if it's being mean or a rare example of fact-driven journalism

mm i never liked buses..

Aah, The Sun. We love it.

I read an article in The Sun yesterday about a CONVICTED paedophile being allowed to drive kids to school. When I tried to find the same article on The Sun's website (http://www.thesun.co.uk), I found TWO articles(http://www.thesun.co.uk/article/0,,2-2007040611,00.html and http://www.thesun.co.uk/article/0,,2006510000-2007100448,00.html) about convicted paedophiles CURRENTLY being allowed to drive kids to school.

Isn't this illegal?

(As far as I'm aware, paedophiles often re-offend so having "served time" makes no difference - and isn't it illegal for adults convicted of sexual offences to work with children?)

Alternately-formatted links for anyone who can't use the above: http://************/34g395 and http://************/24wqeq EDIT: 404 fixed

Well, if his hands are on the wheel they can't be on the kids.

Aah, The Sun. We love it.

Well, page 3 has it's moments.

Even if he was a teenager, sexual assault is sexual assault. Just because he's older it doesn't mean he considers girls any less worthy of being treated as objectsNo, and I'm sure they didn't clear him "just" because he's older.

Yeah...the busses have camera surveillance and he is not alone with them in a place no one can see them. He has the hands on the steering wheel as someone said. Fat chance he'll do something immoral...

No, and I'm sure they didn't clear him "just" because he's older.

Indeed. I believe that his crime was likely not that bad, considering he only received two years probation, no jail time.

Anywho, he's 35 now, this happened 18 years ago, he was either 16 or 17 at the time. The age of the girl is not given, but she was likely not to young(which would have elevated his crime, and sentence, possibly to jailtime, etc), which means that she was around 13-ish minimum.

Put's it in perspective, not someone I would distrust around kids, really. Hell, not even a pedophile.

The other one, on the other hand, is a bit different story, which makes me thinkg "What the hell", before I realize this is the Sun, so I'm not sure how true these stories are.

And this really matters how? It's clearly reprehensible, yes, but he's not exactly going to reoffend on a school bus. Think how many kids there are; plenty of witnesses and people to overpower him if he gets violent.

Ilaer

And this really matters how? It's clearly reprehensible, yes, but he's not exactly going to reoffend on a school bus. Think how many kids there are; plenty of witnesses and people to overpower him if he gets violent.

Ilaer

Are you actually trying to suggest that pedophiles driving a school bus isn't that big of a deal?

Are you actually trying to suggest that pedophiles driving a school bus isn't that big of a deal?

No; I'm not suggesting that at all. I'm merely saying that it should be sorted out quickly and quietly; in the meantime, the kids are pretty safe.

Ilaer

No; I'm not suggesting that at all. I'm merely saying that it should be sorted out quickly and quietly; in the meantime, the kids are pretty safe.

Ilaer

The driver could find himself a kid he likes and than make a visit later. He doesn't have to act while actually on the bus.

Well, page 3 has it's moments.

Page 3 makes me thankful for the internet.

Well, the girl was under 14, but that's the gist of it.


So.. 16 with 13. Oh dear. How horrible.

See, I hate when people mix this stuff together. It really blends the reality of pedophilia and hurts the entire issue.

A teenager having sex with another teenager is not pedophilia. Ever. It can't be by definition. And to compare it to pedophilia is to grossly misunderstand the difference between consensual sex between two individuals both capable of desiring sex and sexual interaction between two individuals, one of whom is incapable of any sexual feelings and another that is not actually interested in sex. They are not comparable.

Notice how the primary topic so far has been the guy who did nothing wrong, instead of focusing on the individual riding around with children after being convicted of molesting a child of exactly the age he is driving around. That's clearly a problem.

Get the facts straight and recognize the difference in effect and in action between to the indiiduals in the two articles, because pretending their is any relationship between the two is just nonsense.

THE CONTACT DETAILS OF THE TWO COMPANIES THAT ALLOW CHILD MOLESTORS TO DRIVE BUSES/COACHES WITH KIDS ON
Wise, wise post.

You know what's better than you, Multiland?

Almost everything, ever.

Damn it! I knew this thread would be about something in the UK before I even read the post. This is one seriously messed-up country.

I read an article in The Sun yesterday about a CONVICTED paedophile being allowed to drive kids to school. When I tried to find the same article on The Sun's website (http://www.thesun.co.uk), I found TWO articles(http://www.thesun.co.uk/article/0,,2-2007040611,00.html and http://www.thesun.co.uk/article/0,,2006510000-2007100448,00.html) about convicted paedophiles CURRENTLY being allowed to drive kids to school.

Isn't this illegal?

(As far as I'm aware, paedophiles often re-offend so having "served time" makes no difference - and isn't it illegal for adults convicted of sexual offences to work with children?)

Alternately-formatted links for anyone who can't use the above: http://************/34g395 and http://************/24wqeq EDIT: 404 fixed

Whats up with people and placing people who have committed crimes and will obviously commit them again in a position where they can easily commit a ccrime again? Thats like taking a guy who was fired for malpractice and making him a doctor again.

It's the sun, you expected something else?


Forcing someone out of their job sounds witch hunt-esque to me.

So everything that's done to ensure the safety of children is a witch hunt now? Stop talking absolute rubbish. At least one of the man HAS BEEN CONVICTED OF A SEXUAL CRIME UPON A CHILD, WHILST BEING AN ADULT, and is thus a dangerous child molestor who should not be working with kids in ANY capacity. I'm willing to accept that one of the men may not be a paedophile (though frankly I don't want anyone who is willing to sexually violate a woman anywhere near women or girls), but one clearly is and should not be anywhere near children.

Also the CCTV is on the bus, directed inside the bus. He could easily find an excuse to get off the bus (just getting some food / kids shouted me, etc.) and molest a kid who had just exited the bus. Plus CCTV on buses doesn't usually cover EVERY part of the bus.

So I ask everyone to phone up the bus company which is employing Gareth Crowther and urge them to fire him.

Are you practicing for a job as a journalist at a tabloid, Multiland?

Well, if his hands are on the wheel they can't be on the kids.
That's a very good point, and since it's a bus, it's not like there's a kid in the same seat or even within arms reach.

Seriously.... who uses The Sun as a source?