paedophilia - a solution

[i_love_som_tam]

In an election year, in many US states they'll round up, convict and pillory nudists on beaches and people who piss in public as 'sexual offenders'. Not too long ago homosexuals were executed in Germany (still are in some fundamentalist countries) and were left to rot in US jails.

"Paedophilia is Mother Nature's way to take care of orphans and widows," once whote a philosopher much smarter than we all.

In USA you are a paedophile if you love a 17.5 year old ('statutory rape'). In Spain or Mexico it's OK to have consensual sex with 12 year olds, 14 y o in most EU countries. In Saudi Arabia and Yemen you can legally marry a 7 year old, actually in Thailand too.... ect ect

Go figure!

ohhh, unclench your butt cheeks and pull your head out of there. there are many privately owned nude beaches in the usa. would you like someone pissing on your business door step or are you of such a low moral character that you piss when and where the mood suits you. if so, the only difference between you and a soi dog is that a soi dog will sleep in the middle of traffic.

people who piss in public are not labeled sex offenders. they are issued citations for depositing offensive material in a public place. it is not a sex crime you ignorant wretch.

in germany homosexuals were killed and left to rot in US jails? huh? this makes no sense. homosexuals are still being stoned to death under sharia law in muslim countries.

in the USA you can love anyone you want and it's not a sex crime. having sex with a minor is a different matter. evidently from your post you seem to condone sex with minors, as young as 12 years old it seems. this makes you lower than a soi dog.

and... in looking at your profile, why in God's name, are you so interested in having women with young children visit you in Germany? man... you creep me out :shock:

[Admin_2]

In an election year, in many US states they'll round up, convict and pillory nudists on beaches and people who piss in public as 'sexual offenders'. Not too long ago homosexuals were executed in Germany (still are in some fundamentalist countries) and were left to rot in US jails.

"Paedophilia is Mother Nature's way to take care of orphans and widows," once whote a philosopher much smarter than we all.

In USA you are a paedophile if you love a 17.5 year old ('statutory rape'). In Spain or Mexico it's OK to have consensual sex with 12 year olds, 14 y o in most EU countries. In Saudi Arabia and Yemen you can legally marry a 7 year old, actually in Thailand too.... ect ect

Go figure!

This is pretty freaky if you ask me. Are you saying that pedophiles are a good thing for young orphans? It really looks like that, and I don't want to believe what I am reading...please explain if I am wrong.

I feel dirty just reading that.

[Count_Jason]

..

[CiaranM]

In an election year, in many US states they'll round up, convict and pillory nudists on beaches and people who piss in public as 'sexual offenders'. Not too long ago homosexuals were executed in Germany (still are in some fundamentalist countries) and were left to rot in US jails.

"Paedophilia is Mother Nature's way to take care of orphans and widows," once whote a philosopher much smarter than we all.

In USA you are a paedophile if you love a 17.5 year old ('statutory rape'). In Spain or Mexico it's OK to have consensual sex with 12 year olds, 14 y o in most EU countries. In Saudi Arabia and Yemen you can legally marry a 7 year old, actually in Thailand too.... ect ect

Go figure!

ehhhhhh .... this guy is either a f**king wind up (and not a funny one) or one sick f**king dude !!

should creeps like this be allowed on here .... "mothers with young kids" ..... like WTF !!!!!!!!!

[Stramash]

It is an unfortunate fact that the US penal system is more about business and profit than any sort of rehabilitation;

where is this fact from? granted, there are a few privately owned prisons in the US, but, for the most part most prisons are owned and operated by the federal and state governments. some of these operate businesses, such as some of the low security federal prisons that make office furniture for government buildings.

the days of hiring convict labor out to local construction companies are long over.

rehabilitation is available in nearly all prisons in california and is accomplished through education. convicts on california can earn high school diplomas an college degrees, courtesy of the california tax payers. the only prison in california that does not offer any rehabilitation is the super maximum security prison at pelican bay.

as far as programs targeting pedophiles and other sex offenders... california started a program about 15 years ago called the serious habitual offender program, or SHOP. this program targeted sexual offenders that were likely to reoffend after being released on parole.

extreme conditions were placed on their paroles, mainly denying them the ability to visit places where children congregate. we would follow these parolees as they were released from vacaville state prison. most were found to be in violation of their parole by hanging out at play grounds within a few days. the fastest violation was within 30 minutes of this mope walking out the gate.

castration, whether surgical or chemical, does not work, ask one of te co-founders of NAMBLA who was looking at 60 years for numerous counts of chid molestation. he had himself surgically castrated in order to mitigate his sentencing. when sentenced to the maximum he admitted that he still had the urge to molest young boys. it's all in the mind. maybe a lobotomy?

The system may not be completely leaning towards the private sector yet, but it is certainly moving that way.

"Working-class Americans who used to protest when state officials announced plans to build prisons in their communities now compete to attract new penitentiaries and the jobs they create. The incarceration of convicts -- once perceived as a grim governmental responsibility -- has become a thriving, recession-proof industry. Prison officials have shifted their priorities from inmate rehabilitation programs to budgetary concerns; instead of focusing on the prevention of recidivism, they focus on the reduction of "average daily inmate costs." (Alex H Pitofsky)

At the moment there are 264 private prisons in the US, but that number is expected to grow dramatically over the coming years. Especially considering that there were only around 10 of these institutions in 1990. It is viewed as a recession proof sector and on of the few areas that is still seeing growth.

Interestingly, and off at a tangent somewhat, the first ever for profit prison in the US was San Quentin in 1852!!

Back to the main subject; the SHOP programme is the sort of thing I am advocating. If a release is given there should be extremely close supervision. If the offenders do anything that is against parole conditions then they go back inside immediately.

And on the castration; you are actually agreeing with what I said! What I stated was that it was not a proven method as it did not work for all. Plus there is the chance of the frustration at not being able to achieve penetration leading to murder.

Although I know you were slightly tongue in cheek saying lobotomy, you may actually not be far off the truth, as least in the near future. If neurologists can identify a particular area of the brain that either causes the offences of which fails to control the urges (remembering my earlier comments that there are many with sexual attractions to children who never act on those attractions) then perhaps some chemical or invasive treatment will be developed.

But, to return to my main point. Which was that this Coalinga method, which is now spreading and has just been adopted by New York, doesn't work in any way and is completely unethical.

While the SHOP programme is along the right lines, Jessica's Law has created the problem (although I appreciate, as a parent, the right and power of knowing if a convicted pederast has moved into your community) where objections to the housing of a molester can prevent his release. It has also caused a rise in vigilanteism where landlords who have agreed to house released offenders have been attacked and had their houses fire bombed.

There is one case currently at Coalinga where a judge had ordered an inmate's release due to his incarceration there being unconstitutional (and there are many other cases pending) yet he is still waiting over a year later to be released; purely on the basis that they can find anywhere to house him.

Coailnga doesn't work, is not rehabilitating the majority of its inmates, costs over 3 times the average cost of keeping an offender in prison in California, and is very ethically grey.

Now given that the number of mentally ill in US prisons outnumbers those in inpatient hospitals by 5 to 1, and given that these child molesters are not actually mentally ill, would it not be better keeping the child molesters in prison and giving proper mental health treatment to those who need it but are left in prison?

(and please note mate; this is not an anti-US diatribe. Child sex offences are a worldwide problem and the academic literature crosses all national boundaries. The post was based on the Coalinga documentary and as such examines the US penal system)

[Stramash]

In an election year, in many US states they'll round up, convict and pillory nudists on beaches and people who piss in public as 'sexual offenders'. Not too long ago homosexuals were executed in Germany (still are in some fundamentalist countries) and were left to rot in US jails.

"Paedophilia is Mother Nature's way to take care of orphans and widows," once whote a philosopher much smarter than we all.

In USA you are a paedophile if you love a 17.5 year old ('statutory rape'). In Spain or Mexico it's OK to have consensual sex with 12 year olds, 14 y o in most EU countries. In Saudi Arabia and Yemen you can legally marry a 7 year old, actually in Thailand too.... ect ect

Go figure!

That quote from a 'philosopher much smarter than we are' is possibly the most disturbing post I have read on TF. So, you advocate some aspects of paedophilia??

You should really check your figures on ages of consent too. Spain is in fact 13, although there are caveats for those over 16 having sex with those aged 13-16.

The majority of EU countries has an age of consent of 16, not 14, although there are a few with 14 or 15 as their level, though again there are often caveats to prevent 'adults' exploiting these age levels. So, for instance, where it may be legal for an 18 year old to have sex with a 15 year old, it will be illegal for a 22 year old to commit the same act.

Perhaps the most disturbing in Europe (though some would say the least surprising) is Vatican City;

".There is an equal age of consent set at 12 years of age in Art. 331 (1). When there is a relationship of dependence (like teacher/student, etc.) the age of consent is 15 years in Art. 331 (2)[20]"

The US varies from state to state, with 16 and 18 being most common. However, as with most other countries, there are caveats, and, if the age difference is less than 3 or 4 years, then a prosecution will not occur.

You are right (hey once at least!) in your comments on Saudi Arabia - this has been a grey area, but actually (and surprisingly) this is being addressed and Saudi is instituting a ban on marriage for those under 14, as no one in authority, whether state or religious, were willing to state an age level within marriage where sex was permissible.

And lastly, phew, on your Thailand comments;

"Although Thailand's age of consent is usually said to be 15, the laws can be interpreted to allow prosecution for sex with someone under 18."

[Stramash]

In an election year, in many US states they'll round up, convict and pillory nudists on beaches and people who piss in public as 'sexual offenders'. Not too long ago homosexuals were executed in Germany (still are in some fundamentalist countries) and were left to rot in US jails.

"Paedophilia is Mother Nature's way to take care of orphans and widows," once whote a philosopher much smarter than we all.

In USA you are a paedophile if you love a 17.5 year old ('statutory rape'). In Spain or Mexico it's OK to have consensual sex with 12 year olds, 14 y o in most EU countries. In Saudi Arabia and Yemen you can legally marry a 7 year old, actually in Thailand too.... ect ect

Go figure!

ohhh, unclench your butt cheeks and pull your head out of there. there are many privately owned nude beaches in the usa. would you like someone pissing on your business door step or are you of such a low moral character that you piss when and where the mood suits you. if so, the only difference between you and a soi dog is that a soi dog will sleep in the middle of traffic.

people who piss in public are not labeled sex offenders. they are issued citations for depositing offensive material in a public place. it is not a sex crime you ignorant wretch.

in germany homosexuals were killed and left to rot in US jails? huh? this makes no sense. homosexuals are still being stoned to death under sharia law in muslim countries.

in the USA you can love anyone you want and it's not a sex crime. having sex with a minor is a different matter. evidently from your post you seem to condone sex with minors, as young as 12 years old it seems. this makes you lower than a soi dog.

and... in looking at your profile, why in God's name, are you so interested in having women with young children visit you in Germany? man... you creep me out :shock:

and the fact that he had 'lots of problems with unwelcoming local governments' raises a lot of questions too...

[Neo]

"Paedophilia is Mother Nature's way to take care of orphans and widows," once whote a philosopher much smarter than we all.

I doubt it. Come on... who is this "much smarter than we all" philosopher whose quotes don't appear on the internet?

[Stramash]

"Paedophilia is Mother Nature's way to take care of orphans and widows," once whote a philosopher much smarter than we all.

I doubt it. Come on... who is this "much smarter than we all" philosopher whose quotes don't appear on the internet?

Yes, I am intrigued too. I have carried out a number of boolean searches using your "quote" and it does not seem to exist...

unless you count yourself as a philosopher and much smarter than us all...

[Guest marty]

apologies for the length, but as this is a highly emotive subject, wanted to reproduce the article in full. It comes from the BBC news magazine and discusses last night's Louis Theroux programme where he visited Coalinga Hospital in California, where they have started incarcerating sex offenders once their prison term is over...

California thinks it has found a way to deal with recidivist paedophiles by putting them in a comfortable mental hospital. Indefinitely. But is this the answer, asks Louis Theroux.

I'd been at Coalinga a couple of days when Mr Rigby showed me his dormitory. He'd been a high school sports coach before being convicted of molesting some of his students.

He told me he was a great appreciator of the male physical form.

Above his bed were photos of classical statues of male nudes. These gave me pause, since I knew some paedophiles like to justify their proclivities by citing the ancient Greeks' famous enthusiasm for pederasty.

There was also a reproduction of a painting of young male ballet dancers, which had a definite erotic overtone. I asked one of Mr Rigby's social workers, who was standing by, if it was okay for patients to have mildly sexual imagery on their walls, especially since it seemed to me it was in the area of the patients offences. He said it was - "as long as they're of age".

Mr Rigby's room, which he shared with three other men, was airy and spacious. There was a large window with no bars on it. Mr Rigby had told me he was married with two sons, but that he'd also been in a physical relationship with another of the men at Coalinga, who was also a child molester.

Nice place

This too, apparently, was not in violation of hospital rules. Mr Rigby's therapists told me he'd been making good progress in his rehabilitation. In theory, if he carried on with counselling and group sessions, he might be back outside in less than a year.

One of the striking things about Coalinga, given that it houses 800 or so sex offenders, is how nice everything is. There is a large open indoor area - called "the mall" for its resemblance to a shopping mall - with a barbers shop and a cafe and a small library.

You can spend time in the well-appointed gymnasium, where loud music plays over an indoor tennis court and a variety of exercise machines. You can drop in on an art therapy class or visit the music centre. All in all, you'd be forgiven for thinking it might be the newly built premises of a posh boarding school.

In fact, Coalinga is something quite different - a maximum security hospital containing some of the state of California's more serious paedophiles and rapists.

Coalinga is the flagship of a relatively new programme created in response to public anxiety about the release of sexual predators from prison. All the men at Coalinga have completed their custodial terms, but instead of being released they've been diagnosed as mentally ill, and locked up again - this time indefinitely and not in prison but in hospital.

Legal loophole

The niceness of the surroundings at Coalinga is part of the package. The patients are not there to be punished. They have had their punishment in prison. The purpose of Coalinga is to try to make them mentally well.

In a sense, in creating Coalinga and other Civil Commitment Centres, the authorities have exploited a legal loophole. The public demanded that the state should lock up sex offenders for longer. But since they've done their time, the only way to keep them confined past their sentences is by hospitalising them.

On the one hand, the patients are legally classified as "sexually violent predators". They are behind high barbed-wire fences in a remote area of California.

On the other hand, the staff treat the patients with an occasionally over-the-top decorousness. The approved term for the confined men is "individuals", since the word "patients" is considered demeaning. In conversation, they are called "Mr".

No one can leave, but otherwise, the rules are surprisingly relaxed. Patients can vote in elections - one mentally ill rapist, who'd amputated his own toe in a protest against hospital policy, told me he'd voted for Obama. They can view pornography. There are no rules against watching TV shows with children in them or receiving DVDs on a children's theme.

One of the ways the hospital tries to foster a healthy ambience is by allowing regular social events. One night I attended the Coalinga Halloween party. I was treated to the surreal scene of 15 or so serious sex offenders singing the theme tune to the Addams Family. The following week was a talent show - billed as "Coalinga Idol".

No consensus

The therapists and social workers have their work cut out for them. Using therapy to overcome phobias, anxiety, and addiction, is one thing. But the men at Coalinga are some way beyond that.

Though no consensus exists as to whether paedophilia is genetic or environmental in origin, therapists at Coalinga agree that it can't really be cured. There is evidence to suggest that a sexual attraction to children may be an "orientation" and no easier to reprogramme in a person than, say, heterosexuality.

For the patients involved in therapy, their time at Coalinga is a regimen of group meetings and counselling - something like a twelve-step recovery programme for alcoholism. Those in the early stages of recovery make a full account of their sexual offences, including those never reported to the authorities.

They learn to acquire a sense of empathy for their victims. They also monitor their ongoing thoughts and learn techniques for redirecting their thinking away from areas that are likely to lead to fantasising in unhealthy ways. The therapists challenge their "cognitive distortions" or delusions - the big one being that children actually want sex with adults.

Patients have lie detector tests and a form of sexual test called a plethysmograph. This is a device which is put around the subject's penis to measure his sexual arousal as he's shown a variety of images.

Reformed character

Some are pornographic images of consenting adults, while some are deviant such as violent sex or suggestive images of children eating fruit and running around in bathing costumes. Then there are non-suggestive images to establish a baseline of non-arousal (photos of the Canadian city of Toronto).

At least one of the men I met, Mr Lamb, gave the impression of being a reformed character.

In his late forties, he had been an inveterate molester of teenaged boys, some of them playmates of his two young daughters.

He admitted that even prison hadn't shaken him out of his old ways and said he'd only begun to change on the Sexually Violent Predator programme. He valued the therapy, but said the turning point for him was being castrated, which freed him from intrusive paedophilic thoughts. Castrations are not part of the therapy at Coalinga, but patients can volunteer for them.

One of the first men I spoke to at Coalinga was Mr Price, an ageing Vietnam vet with an extensive history of abusing small girls, many of whom he met through his local church where he taught Sunday school.

Mr Price was deeply committed to his therapy programme, keeping tabs on his own thoughts by "journaling" at great length in a notebook. He repeatedly deplored his own offences.

But the main problem Coalinga faces is that the vast majority of patients are refusing any kind of treatment. This is mostly because they feel they shouldn't have been sent to Coalinga in the first place.

They feel that they aren't mentally ill, that they committed crimes, for which they've done their time, and that they should no longer be locked up. They view the therapy programme as a charade, designed to keep them locked up indefinitely.

Alcohol problem

I spoke to several men not involved in therapy. They were indignant at the idea that they might have psychiatric problems. When I asked one, Mr Yahn, if he had considered treatment, he said: "Would you get treatment for a headache?".

Another patient, trying to excuse his transgressions, blamed the fact that he'd molested children on an alcohol problem - as though paedophilia was something anyone might be capable of, given a few too many drinks.

Men like these are clearly damaged. But one part of the argument is on their side. The record shows that in the more than 10 years the SVP programme has existed, of the hundreds that have come to Coalinga, only 13 have ever graduated and left the hospital through the therapy route.

And so there is a kind of stand-off at Coalinga - with mistrustful patients arrayed against a therapeutic establishment. Despite the therapeutic language and the kindly atmosphere, for the vast majority of men at Coalinga, the hospital might as well be a prison or a warehouse or indeed a pod in outer space for all the good it's doing them.

American taxpayers are funding a lavishly appointed hospital in which hundreds of child molesters and rapists can idle their days away. The annual cost to keep one person at Coalinga is about $200,000. Multiply that by the 1,500 men who would be in the hospital at full occupancy.

Whatever the hopes nurtured for the hospital as a therapeutic institution, it has become a well-upholstered holding pen for keeping America's least wanted out of sight. The men can vote, take tennis lessons, watch their porn videos, throw parties, have sex with other men at the hospital, play bass in a jazz combo. They just can't leave.

More states have signed up to the Coalinga model - including, recently, New York. If a lifelong country club-style internment is the price of keeping paedophiles off the streets, many appear to be willing to pay it.

One of the main questions raised by this programme is the moral right to incarcerate someone once their prison term is finished as a way of preventing recidivism. Regardless of the crime committed, if a court has sentenced someone to a particular length of time, then the end of that sentence should be the end. Resorting to labelling their crimes as mental illness is a get out clause; I am not condoning widespread release of sex offenders back to the community, but sentences should reflect the severity of the crime and should attempt rehabilitation during that sentence.

If the scenario was around murderers or burglars, and they were sent to a mental hospital once their sentence was complete, in order to prevent them from committing murder or burglary again, then human rights groups would be up in arms (though some are opposing this incarceration at Coaling. But due to the horrific and emotive nature of these men's crimes, it appears acceptable for this as a solution.

Now given that the cost of keeping someone at Coalinga is 134,000 GBP per year, and given that many of the therapists do not think large numbers of these 'patients' can be cured, surely the better solution is for sentencing levels to be increased, and, particularly in the most severe cases, a sentence of life without parole.

DSM IV is used, particularly in American psychiatry, as a cop out too much of the time; if a behaviour is outwith the moral and understood parameters of society, then label it as a 'syndrome' or as a 'disorder'. Too often an easy way to brush problems under the carpet rather than tackle them in a realistic manner.

In the US the laws now exist (Jessica's Law if I remember rightly) to protect and notify communities if a sex offender moves into their area.

This, coupled with longer sentences for the more severe offenders, and lifelong tagging and supervision of 'lower' level offenders seems a far more realistic and ethical solution than the ethically grey solution that is Coalinga.

your argument is interesting, but I suspect this is politicians actually [for once] listening to public opinio and taking the easy option. Other serious child abusers (in the UK) have/are being detained indefinitely, for example Moors murderer Ian Brady immediately springs to mind. There is such public outcry at certain crimes that there is little alternative other than local communities handing out summary justice to offenders.

I think whatever the merits of debating the rights and wrongs of whether a child abuser should be detained beyond the sentence handed-out by a court of law, we should never forget that there is a victim, a innocent childhood lost forever and a difficult journey through life with low attainment and poor life outcomes, where the child may never learn to trust another.

Labelling abusers' behaviour as a 'syndrome' or as a 'disorder' may not be the answer to understanding and preventing this type of crime, but it at least provides a constructive framework. I haven't got an answer,but if protecting the right of the child means detaining offenders beyong their custodial sentence, than so be it, at least until someone somewhere comes up with evidence-based practice that works for the child, and for the offender.

[i_love_som_tam]

"Paedophilia is Mother Nature's way to take care of orphans and widows," once whote a philosopher much smarter than we all.

I doubt it. Come on... who is this "much smarter than we all" philosopher whose quotes don't appear on the internet?

this guy is so full of crap. no philosopher has ever published that tripe. it is in reference to the prophet Muhammed married his wife, Aisha, when she was nine years. It was done for the good of the war orphans and widows.

This was a practice used by Islam not only for the marrying of minor females, but also for adult females.

would you like a flashlight, you twisted caveman? it's probably pretty dark where your head is at.

:roll:

[i_love_som_tam]

still utterly speechless. this guy makes me want to vomit in my mouth :shock:

[Stramash]

apologies for the length, but as this is a highly emotive subject, wanted to reproduce the article in full. It comes from the BBC news magazine and discusses last night's Louis Theroux programme where he visited Coalinga Hospital in California, where they have started incarcerating sex offenders once their prison term is over...

California thinks it has found a way to deal with recidivist paedophiles by putting them in a comfortable mental hospital. Indefinitely. But is this the answer, asks Louis Theroux.

I'd been at Coalinga a couple of days when Mr Rigby showed me his dormitory. He'd been a high school sports coach before being convicted of molesting some of his students.

He told me he was a great appreciator of the male physical form.

Above his bed were photos of classical statues of male nudes. These gave me pause, since I knew some paedophiles like to justify their proclivities by citing the ancient Greeks' famous enthusiasm for pederasty.

There was also a reproduction of a painting of young male ballet dancers, which had a definite erotic overtone. I asked one of Mr Rigby's social workers, who was standing by, if it was okay for patients to have mildly sexual imagery on their walls, especially since it seemed to me it was in the area of the patients offences. He said it was - "as long as they're of age".

Mr Rigby's room, which he shared with three other men, was airy and spacious. There was a large window with no bars on it. Mr Rigby had told me he was married with two sons, but that he'd also been in a physical relationship with another of the men at Coalinga, who was also a child molester.

Nice place

This too, apparently, was not in violation of hospital rules. Mr Rigby's therapists told me he'd been making good progress in his rehabilitation. In theory, if he carried on with counselling and group sessions, he might be back outside in less than a year.

One of the striking things about Coalinga, given that it houses 800 or so sex offenders, is how nice everything is. There is a large open indoor area - called "the mall" for its resemblance to a shopping mall - with a barbers shop and a cafe and a small library.

You can spend time in the well-appointed gymnasium, where loud music plays over an indoor tennis court and a variety of exercise machines. You can drop in on an art therapy class or visit the music centre. All in all, you'd be forgiven for thinking it might be the newly built premises of a posh boarding school.

In fact, Coalinga is something quite different - a maximum security hospital containing some of the state of California's more serious paedophiles and rapists.

Coalinga is the flagship of a relatively new programme created in response to public anxiety about the release of sexual predators from prison. All the men at Coalinga have completed their custodial terms, but instead of being released they've been diagnosed as mentally ill, and locked up again - this time indefinitely and not in prison but in hospital.

Legal loophole

The niceness of the surroundings at Coalinga is part of the package. The patients are not there to be punished. They have had their punishment in prison. The purpose of Coalinga is to try to make them mentally well.

In a sense, in creating Coalinga and other Civil Commitment Centres, the authorities have exploited a legal loophole. The public demanded that the state should lock up sex offenders for longer. But since they've done their time, the only way to keep them confined past their sentences is by hospitalising them.

On the one hand, the patients are legally classified as "sexually violent predators". They are behind high barbed-wire fences in a remote area of California.

On the other hand, the staff treat the patients with an occasionally over-the-top decorousness. The approved term for the confined men is "individuals", since the word "patients" is considered demeaning. In conversation, they are called "Mr".

No one can leave, but otherwise, the rules are surprisingly relaxed. Patients can vote in elections - one mentally ill rapist, who'd amputated his own toe in a protest against hospital policy, told me he'd voted for Obama. They can view pornography. There are no rules against watching TV shows with children in them or receiving DVDs on a children's theme.

One of the ways the hospital tries to foster a healthy ambience is by allowing regular social events. One night I attended the Coalinga Halloween party. I was treated to the surreal scene of 15 or so serious sex offenders singing the theme tune to the Addams Family. The following week was a talent show - billed as "Coalinga Idol".

No consensus

The therapists and social workers have their work cut out for them. Using therapy to overcome phobias, anxiety, and addiction, is one thing. But the men at Coalinga are some way beyond that.

Though no consensus exists as to whether paedophilia is genetic or environmental in origin, therapists at Coalinga agree that it can't really be cured. There is evidence to suggest that a sexual attraction to children may be an "orientation" and no easier to reprogramme in a person than, say, heterosexuality.

For the patients involved in therapy, their time at Coalinga is a regimen of group meetings and counselling - something like a twelve-step recovery programme for alcoholism. Those in the early stages of recovery make a full account of their sexual offences, including those never reported to the authorities.

They learn to acquire a sense of empathy for their victims. They also monitor their ongoing thoughts and learn techniques for redirecting their thinking away from areas that are likely to lead to fantasising in unhealthy ways. The therapists challenge their "cognitive distortions" or delusions - the big one being that children actually want sex with adults.

Patients have lie detector tests and a form of sexual test called a plethysmograph. This is a device which is put around the subject's penis to measure his sexual arousal as he's shown a variety of images.

Reformed character

Some are pornographic images of consenting adults, while some are deviant such as violent sex or suggestive images of children eating fruit and running around in bathing costumes. Then there are non-suggestive images to establish a baseline of non-arousal (photos of the Canadian city of Toronto).

At least one of the men I met, Mr Lamb, gave the impression of being a reformed character.

In his late forties, he had been an inveterate molester of teenaged boys, some of them playmates of his two young daughters.

He admitted that even prison hadn't shaken him out of his old ways and said he'd only begun to change on the Sexually Violent Predator programme. He valued the therapy, but said the turning point for him was being castrated, which freed him from intrusive paedophilic thoughts. Castrations are not part of the therapy at Coalinga, but patients can volunteer for them.

One of the first men I spoke to at Coalinga was Mr Price, an ageing Vietnam vet with an extensive history of abusing small girls, many of whom he met through his local church where he taught Sunday school.

Mr Price was deeply committed to his therapy programme, keeping tabs on his own thoughts by "journaling" at great length in a notebook. He repeatedly deplored his own offences.

But the main problem Coalinga faces is that the vast majority of patients are refusing any kind of treatment. This is mostly because they feel they shouldn't have been sent to Coalinga in the first place.

They feel that they aren't mentally ill, that they committed crimes, for which they've done their time, and that they should no longer be locked up. They view the therapy programme as a charade, designed to keep them locked up indefinitely.

Alcohol problem

I spoke to several men not involved in therapy. They were indignant at the idea that they might have psychiatric problems. When I asked one, Mr Yahn, if he had considered treatment, he said: "Would you get treatment for a headache?".

Another patient, trying to excuse his transgressions, blamed the fact that he'd molested children on an alcohol problem - as though paedophilia was something anyone might be capable of, given a few too many drinks.

Men like these are clearly damaged. But one part of the argument is on their side. The record shows that in the more than 10 years the SVP programme has existed, of the hundreds that have come to Coalinga, only 13 have ever graduated and left the hospital through the therapy route.

And so there is a kind of stand-off at Coalinga - with mistrustful patients arrayed against a therapeutic establishment. Despite the therapeutic language and the kindly atmosphere, for the vast majority of men at Coalinga, the hospital might as well be a prison or a warehouse or indeed a pod in outer space for all the good it's doing them.

American taxpayers are funding a lavishly appointed hospital in which hundreds of child molesters and rapists can idle their days away. The annual cost to keep one person at Coalinga is about $200,000. Multiply that by the 1,500 men who would be in the hospital at full occupancy.

Whatever the hopes nurtured for the hospital as a therapeutic institution, it has become a well-upholstered holding pen for keeping America's least wanted out of sight. The men can vote, take tennis lessons, watch their porn videos, throw parties, have sex with other men at the hospital, play bass in a jazz combo. They just can't leave.

More states have signed up to the Coalinga model - including, recently, New York. If a lifelong country club-style internment is the price of keeping paedophiles off the streets, many appear to be willing to pay it.

One of the main questions raised by this programme is the moral right to incarcerate someone once their prison term is finished as a way of preventing recidivism. Regardless of the crime committed, if a court has sentenced someone to a particular length of time, then the end of that sentence should be the end. Resorting to labelling their crimes as mental illness is a get out clause; I am not condoning widespread release of sex offenders back to the community, but sentences should reflect the severity of the crime and should attempt rehabilitation during that sentence.

If the scenario was around murderers or burglars, and they were sent to a mental hospital once their sentence was complete, in order to prevent them from committing murder or burglary again, then human rights groups would be up in arms (though some are opposing this incarceration at Coaling. But due to the horrific and emotive nature of these men's crimes, it appears acceptable for this as a solution.

Now given that the cost of keeping someone at Coalinga is 134,000 GBP per year, and given that many of the therapists do not think large numbers of these 'patients' can be cured, surely the better solution is for sentencing levels to be increased, and, particularly in the most severe cases, a sentence of life without parole.

DSM IV is used, particularly in American psychiatry, as a cop out too much of the time; if a behaviour is outwith the moral and understood parameters of society, then label it as a 'syndrome' or as a 'disorder'. Too often an easy way to brush problems under the carpet rather than tackle them in a realistic manner.

In the US the laws now exist (Jessica's Law if I remember rightly) to protect and notify communities if a sex offender moves into their area.

This, coupled with longer sentences for the more severe offenders, and lifelong tagging and supervision of 'lower' level offenders seems a far more realistic and ethical solution than the ethically grey solution that is Coalinga.

your argument is interesting, but I suspect this is politicians actually [for once] listening to public opinio and taking the easy option. Other serious child abusers (in the UK) have/are being detained indefinitely, for example Moors murderer Ian Brady immediately springs to mind. There is such public outcry at certain crimes that there is little alternative other than local communities handing out summary justice to offenders.

I think whatever the merits of debating the rights and wrongs of whether a child abuser should be detained beyond the sentence handed-out by a court of law, we should never forget that there is a victim, a innocent childhood lost forever and a difficult journey through life with low attainment and poor life outcomes, where the child may never learn to trust another.

Labelling abusers' behaviour as a 'syndrome' or as a 'disorder' may not be the answer to understanding and preventing this type of crime, but it at least provides a constructive framework. I haven't got an answer,but if protecting the right of the child means detaining offenders beyong their custodial sentence, than so be it, at least until someone somewhere comes up with evidence-based practice that works for the child, and for the offender.

I agree totally Marty that the paramount concern in sex offences against children is the victim itself. I had not raised that point as it is a whole separate issue and I was more raising the point of lack of ethics in the Coalinga solution and hoping for debate on viable alternatives.

The case of Brady, and indeed Ian Huntley, are in some ways completely different. These are cases where sex offences were coupled with murder. In the UK and US (and I would imagine most countries or US states without the death penalty) these crimes would result in life without the possibility of parole. And in fact, even in cases where there was no murder, but there was serial or repeat serious sex offences, I would advocate that sort of sentence.

But, my principal point is; Coalinga does not work (and this is shown by EBP), and, given the amount of US prison inmates with genuine mental health issues, and given that these sex offenders in Coalinga are costing 134,000 per annum as compared to a prison inmates cost of 40,000, I feel it would be better to have the legal fallback of extending their prison sentence, rather than falsely labelling them as 'mentally ill' and wasting resources on them.

[Stramash]

still utterly speechless. this guy makes me want to vomit in my mouth :shock:

much as I hate to take the vigilante path, but do we need this sort of member on site?

There are aspects of his post, and indeed his profile, that set off alarm bells from a child protection perspective.

If I had a client who put forward the views of his post and profile in a 1 to 1 sesssion, I would be bound both by the law and my own morals to contact the child protection team for his resident area and inform them of my suspicions. It is then their duty to investigate and make decisions as whether any cause for concern is justified.

[Guest marty]

apologies for the length, but as this is a highly emotive subject, wanted to reproduce the article in full. It comes from the BBC news magazine and discusses last night's Louis Theroux programme where he visited Coalinga Hospital in California, where they have started incarcerating sex offenders once their prison term is over...

California thinks it has found a way to deal with recidivist paedophiles by putting them in a comfortable mental hospital. Indefinitely. But is this the answer, asks Louis Theroux.

I'd been at Coalinga a couple of days when Mr Rigby showed me his dormitory. He'd been a high school sports coach before being convicted of molesting some of his students.

He told me he was a great appreciator of the male physical form.

Above his bed were photos of classical statues of male nudes. These gave me pause, since I knew some paedophiles like to justify their proclivities by citing the ancient Greeks' famous enthusiasm for pederasty.

There was also a reproduction of a painting of young male ballet dancers, which had a definite erotic overtone. I asked one of Mr Rigby's social workers, who was standing by, if it was okay for patients to have mildly sexual imagery on their walls, especially since it seemed to me it was in the area of the patients offences. He said it was - "as long as they're of age".

Mr Rigby's room, which he shared with three other men, was airy and spacious. There was a large window with no bars on it. Mr Rigby had told me he was married with two sons, but that he'd also been in a physical relationship with another of the men at Coalinga, who was also a child molester.

Nice place

This too, apparently, was not in violation of hospital rules. Mr Rigby's therapists told me he'd been making good progress in his rehabilitation. In theory, if he carried on with counselling and group sessions, he might be back outside in less than a year.

One of the striking things about Coalinga, given that it houses 800 or so sex offenders, is how nice everything is. There is a large open indoor area - called "the mall" for its resemblance to a shopping mall - with a barbers shop and a cafe and a small library.

You can spend time in the well-appointed gymnasium, where loud music plays over an indoor tennis court and a variety of exercise machines. You can drop in on an art therapy class or visit the music centre. All in all, you'd be forgiven for thinking it might be the newly built premises of a posh boarding school.

In fact, Coalinga is something quite different - a maximum security hospital containing some of the state of California's more serious paedophiles and rapists.

Coalinga is the flagship of a relatively new programme created in response to public anxiety about the release of sexual predators from prison. All the men at Coalinga have completed their custodial terms, but instead of being released they've been diagnosed as mentally ill, and locked up again - this time indefinitely and not in prison but in hospital.

Legal loophole

The niceness of the surroundings at Coalinga is part of the package. The patients are not there to be punished. They have had their punishment in prison. The purpose of Coalinga is to try to make them mentally well.

In a sense, in creating Coalinga and other Civil Commitment Centres, the authorities have exploited a legal loophole. The public demanded that the state should lock up sex offenders for longer. But since they've done their time, the only way to keep them confined past their sentences is by hospitalising them.

On the one hand, the patients are legally classified as "sexually violent predators". They are behind high barbed-wire fences in a remote area of California.

On the other hand, the staff treat the patients with an occasionally over-the-top decorousness. The approved term for the confined men is "individuals", since the word "patients" is considered demeaning. In conversation, they are called "Mr".

No one can leave, but otherwise, the rules are surprisingly relaxed. Patients can vote in elections - one mentally ill rapist, who'd amputated his own toe in a protest against hospital policy, told me he'd voted for Obama. They can view pornography. There are no rules against watching TV shows with children in them or receiving DVDs on a children's theme.

One of the ways the hospital tries to foster a healthy ambience is by allowing regular social events. One night I attended the Coalinga Halloween party. I was treated to the surreal scene of 15 or so serious sex offenders singing the theme tune to the Addams Family. The following week was a talent show - billed as "Coalinga Idol".

No consensus

The therapists and social workers have their work cut out for them. Using therapy to overcome phobias, anxiety, and addiction, is one thing. But the men at Coalinga are some way beyond that.

Though no consensus exists as to whether paedophilia is genetic or environmental in origin, therapists at Coalinga agree that it can't really be cured. There is evidence to suggest that a sexual attraction to children may be an "orientation" and no easier to reprogramme in a person than, say, heterosexuality.

For the patients involved in therapy, their time at Coalinga is a regimen of group meetings and counselling - something like a twelve-step recovery programme for alcoholism. Those in the early stages of recovery make a full account of their sexual offences, including those never reported to the authorities.

They learn to acquire a sense of empathy for their victims. They also monitor their ongoing thoughts and learn techniques for redirecting their thinking away from areas that are likely to lead to fantasising in unhealthy ways. The therapists challenge their "cognitive distortions" or delusions - the big one being that children actually want sex with adults.

Patients have lie detector tests and a form of sexual test called a plethysmograph. This is a device which is put around the subject's penis to measure his sexual arousal as he's shown a variety of images.

Reformed character

Some are pornographic images of consenting adults, while some are deviant such as violent sex or suggestive images of children eating fruit and running around in bathing costumes. Then there are non-suggestive images to establish a baseline of non-arousal (photos of the Canadian city of Toronto).

At least one of the men I met, Mr Lamb, gave the impression of being a reformed character.

In his late forties, he had been an inveterate molester of teenaged boys, some of them playmates of his two young daughters.

He admitted that even prison hadn't shaken him out of his old ways and said he'd only begun to change on the Sexually Violent Predator programme. He valued the therapy, but said the turning point for him was being castrated, which freed him from intrusive paedophilic thoughts. Castrations are not part of the therapy at Coalinga, but patients can volunteer for them.

One of the first men I spoke to at Coalinga was Mr Price, an ageing Vietnam vet with an extensive history of abusing small girls, many of whom he met through his local church where he taught Sunday school.

Mr Price was deeply committed to his therapy programme, keeping tabs on his own thoughts by "journaling" at great length in a notebook. He repeatedly deplored his own offences.

But the main problem Coalinga faces is that the vast majority of patients are refusing any kind of treatment. This is mostly because they feel they shouldn't have been sent to Coalinga in the first place.

They feel that they aren't mentally ill, that they committed crimes, for which they've done their time, and that they should no longer be locked up. They view the therapy programme as a charade, designed to keep them locked up indefinitely.

Alcohol problem

I spoke to several men not involved in therapy. They were indignant at the idea that they might have psychiatric problems. When I asked one, Mr Yahn, if he had considered treatment, he said: "Would you get treatment for a headache?".

Another patient, trying to excuse his transgressions, blamed the fact that he'd molested children on an alcohol problem - as though paedophilia was something anyone might be capable of, given a few too many drinks.

Men like these are clearly damaged. But one part of the argument is on their side. The record shows that in the more than 10 years the SVP programme has existed, of the hundreds that have come to Coalinga, only 13 have ever graduated and left the hospital through the therapy route.

And so there is a kind of stand-off at Coalinga - with mistrustful patients arrayed against a therapeutic establishment. Despite the therapeutic language and the kindly atmosphere, for the vast majority of men at Coalinga, the hospital might as well be a prison or a warehouse or indeed a pod in outer space for all the good it's doing them.

American taxpayers are funding a lavishly appointed hospital in which hundreds of child molesters and rapists can idle their days away. The annual cost to keep one person at Coalinga is about $200,000. Multiply that by the 1,500 men who would be in the hospital at full occupancy.

Whatever the hopes nurtured for the hospital as a therapeutic institution, it has become a well-upholstered holding pen for keeping America's least wanted out of sight. The men can vote, take tennis lessons, watch their porn videos, throw parties, have sex with other men at the hospital, play bass in a jazz combo. They just can't leave.

More states have signed up to the Coalinga model - including, recently, New York. If a lifelong country club-style internment is the price of keeping paedophiles off the streets, many appear to be willing to pay it.

One of the main questions raised by this programme is the moral right to incarcerate someone once their prison term is finished as a way of preventing recidivism. Regardless of the crime committed, if a court has sentenced someone to a particular length of time, then the end of that sentence should be the end. Resorting to labelling their crimes as mental illness is a get out clause; I am not condoning widespread release of sex offenders back to the community, but sentences should reflect the severity of the crime and should attempt rehabilitation during that sentence.

If the scenario was around murderers or burglars, and they were sent to a mental hospital once their sentence was complete, in order to prevent them from committing murder or burglary again, then human rights groups would be up in arms (though some are opposing this incarceration at Coaling. But due to the horrific and emotive nature of these men's crimes, it appears acceptable for this as a solution.

Now given that the cost of keeping someone at Coalinga is 134,000 GBP per year, and given that many of the therapists do not think large numbers of these 'patients' can be cured, surely the better solution is for sentencing levels to be increased, and, particularly in the most severe cases, a sentence of life without parole.

DSM IV is used, particularly in American psychiatry, as a cop out too much of the time; if a behaviour is outwith the moral and understood parameters of society, then label it as a 'syndrome' or as a 'disorder'. Too often an easy way to brush problems under the carpet rather than tackle them in a realistic manner.

In the US the laws now exist (Jessica's Law if I remember rightly) to protect and notify communities if a sex offender moves into their area.

This, coupled with longer sentences for the more severe offenders, and lifelong tagging and supervision of 'lower' level offenders seems a far more realistic and ethical solution than the ethically grey solution that is Coalinga.

your argument is interesting, but I suspect this is politicians actually [for once] listening to public opinio and taking the easy option. Other serious child abusers (in the UK) have/are being detained indefinitely, for example Moors murderer Ian Brady immediately springs to mind. There is such public outcry at certain crimes that there is little alternative other than local communities handing out summary justice to offenders.

I think whatever the merits of debating the rights and wrongs of whether a child abuser should be detained beyond the sentence handed-out by a court of law, we should never forget that there is a victim, a innocent childhood lost forever and a difficult journey through life with low attainment and poor life outcomes, where the child may never learn to trust another.

Labelling abusers' behaviour as a 'syndrome' or as a 'disorder' may not be the answer to understanding and preventing this type of crime, but it at least provides a constructive framework. I haven't got an answer,but if protecting the right of the child means detaining offenders beyong their custodial sentence, than so be it, at least until someone somewhere comes up with evidence-based practice that works for the child, and for the offender.

I agree totally Marty that the paramount concern in sex offences against children is the victim itself. I had not raised that point as it is a whole separate issue and I was more raising the point of lack of ethics in the Coalinga solution and hoping for debate on viable alternatives.

The case of Brady, and indeed Ian Huntley, are in some ways completely different. These are cases where sex offences were coupled with murder. In the UK and US (and I would imagine most countries or US states without the death penalty) these crimes would result in life without the possibility of parole. And in fact, even in cases where there was no murder, but there was serial or repeat serious sex offences, I would advocate that sort of sentence.

But, my principal point is; Coalinga does not work (and this is shown by EBP), and, given the amount of US prison inmates with genuine mental health issues, and given that these sex offenders in Coalinga are costing 134,000 per annum as compared to a prison inmates cost of 40,000, I feel it would be better to have the legal fallback of extending their prison sentence, rather than falsely labelling them as 'mentally ill' and wasting resources on them.

in principle, maybe a better solution, but this would have repercussions for the rest of the penal system, i.e. what to do with other crimes? if it were just to be applied to sex offenders / child abusers then in the eu i suspect this might be viewed as discrimination and therefore a non-starter. another debate for another time perhaps

[Count_Jason]

..

[Stramash]

in principle, maybe a better solution, but this would have repercussions for the rest of the penal system, i.e. what to do with other crimes? if it were just to be applied to sex offenders / child abusers then in the eu i suspect this might be viewed as discrimination and therefore a non-starter. another debate for another time perhaps

Not just in principle, the rough framework already exists within the UK legal system and, I would imagine, within the US system too.

If an offender, no matter what the crime, is given a life sentence, there is a recommendation given by the sentencing judge as to the MINIMUM term to be served. At the end of that minimum term, release is not guaranteed, but is decided by the parole board. If it is decided that they have not addressed their crimes, or are likely to re offend after release, then parole is refused and their sentence continues until their next parole hearing.

So, rather than a total overhaul of the system, all that is needed is a tweaking of sentencing guidelines, especially with reference to repeat or serious sex offenders, and particularly where the victims are deemed to be children.

Then, if it is decided that the prisoner has been sufficiently rehabilitated and has addressed their offending, there should still be intense and ongoing supervision post release, as well as a requirement to engage with services on the outside.

[i_love_som_tam]

in principle, maybe a better solution, but this would have repercussions for the rest of the penal system, i.e. what to do with other crimes? if it were just to be applied to sex offenders / child abusers then in the eu i suspect this might be viewed as discrimination and therefore a non-starter. another debate for another time perhaps

Not just in principle, the rough framework already exists within the UK legal system and, I would imagine, within the US system too.

If an offender, no matter what the crime, is given a life sentence, there is a recommendation given by the sentencing judge as to the MINIMUM term to be served. At the end of that minimum term, release is not guaranteed, but is decided by the parole board. If it is decided that they have not addressed their crimes, or are likely to re offend after release, then parole is refused and their sentence continues until their next parole hearing.

So, rather than a total overhaul of the system, all that is needed is a tweaking of sentencing guidelines, especially with reference to repeat or serious sex offenders, and particularly where the victims are deemed to be children.

Then, if it is decided that the prisoner has been sufficiently rehabilitated and has addressed their offending, there should still be intense and ongoing supervision post release, as well as a requirement to engage with services on the outside.

in the US a life sentence, in most states, means that the offender is eligible for parole after 20 years. judges can no longer set a minimum sentence. all sentences are set forth by the penal codes for each state.

in california, for violent crimes, the offender must serve 80% of the sentence imposed by the court. for federal law violations there is no longer any parole. the offender serves 100% of the sentence imposed.

in the three strikes states, the sentence for the third felony conviction is 25 years to life with 25 years being the absolute minimum time served.

[LasseDK]

Am quite shocked that Denmark has low sentencing for sex offenders! Knew the Scandinavians generally favoured rehabilitation, but didn't realise that encompassed sex offences.

Unless you kill a cop, commit economic crime or defend yourselves/commit self-justice, then its not a bad place to be a criminal. Even those crimes, compared to other countries, is sentenced low.

Some people will argue that our low sentences will prevent the criminals to turn really bad, that longer sentences doesnt help, and only make criminal people more criminal, and apparently we try our best to rehabilitate people. But the law actually makes its possible to give fairly hard sentences, problem is just that court rarely use them.

Personally im offended by it, especially when it comes to serious violence or even worse, crimes against kids. Only good thing is that it has become abit better, and we often see cases where the lower court starts by giving a low sentence, then an outcry of the population, and then it will be alot harder in the higher courts.

When it comes to paedophiles - i blows my mind that theese people are not voted "sick" - but going into that discussion will often just quickly draw comparision to homosexual's, thereby concluding that you cannot be voted sick due to your sexuality, even though its targeted kids. Its a wayout comparision i think, as i dont consider homosexuals to be sick or anything wrong with them, absoultely no problems with that.

But there is something wrong with peaedophiles, its not a just relationsship in any way, its manipulative and they are scaring people for life, and i really do hate theese people for it, and i wish the worst for them.

Any peadophile knows that what they are up to are wrong, and they should have an obligation to turn them self in whenever they recognize just a tinybit of wrong affection towards a kid, theese people dont just do it by mistake or get there by mistake, they must be doing this in their fantasies, and as soon as the first thought enters their mind in whatever place they are in their life, they should get help.

But they dont do they ? no they let it thrive, and in the end they destroy people and scar them for life.

Only comfort is that what the juridical system fails to do, and what the health-system fail to do (vote it a serious mental illness) - prisoners will try hard to perform in any prison around the world, only problem is that isolation is possible for theese people.

[Stramash]

in principle, maybe a better solution, but this would have repercussions for the rest of the penal system, i.e. what to do with other crimes? if it were just to be applied to sex offenders / child abusers then in the eu i suspect this might be viewed as discrimination and therefore a non-starter. another debate for another time perhaps

Not just in principle, the rough framework already exists within the UK legal system and, I would imagine, within the US system too.

If an offender, no matter what the crime, is given a life sentence, there is a recommendation given by the sentencing judge as to the MINIMUM term to be served. At the end of that minimum term, release is not guaranteed, but is decided by the parole board. If it is decided that they have not addressed their crimes, or are likely to re offend after release, then parole is refused and their sentence continues until their next parole hearing.

So, rather than a total overhaul of the system, all that is needed is a tweaking of sentencing guidelines, especially with reference to repeat or serious sex offenders, and particularly where the victims are deemed to be children.

Then, if it is decided that the prisoner has been sufficiently rehabilitated and has addressed their offending, there should still be intense and ongoing supervision post release, as well as a requirement to engage with services on the outside.

in the US a life sentence, in most states, means that the offender is eligible for parole after 20 years. judges can no longer set a minimum sentence. all sentences are set forth by the penal codes for each state.

in california, for violent crimes, the offender must serve 80% of the sentence imposed by the court. for federal law violations there is no longer any parole. the offender serves 100% of the sentence imposed.

in the three strikes states, the sentence for the third felony conviction is 25 years to life with 25 years being the absolute minimum time served.

Thanks for clarifying the sentencing tariff from a US perspective mate. So it still ties in with the idea that the parole board can refuse parole and thus life really can mean life?

Though the three strikes policy still seems rather ambiguous due to the wide range of felonies that falls within its remit.

[zeusbheld]

In an election year, in many US states they'll round up, convict and pillory nudists on beaches and people who piss in public as 'sexual offenders'. Not too long ago homosexuals were executed in Germany (still are in some fundamentalist countries) and were left to rot in US jails.

"Paedophilia is Mother Nature's way to take care of orphans and widows," once whote a philosopher much smarter than we all.

In USA you are a paedophile if you love a 17.5 year old ('statutory rape'). In Spain or Mexico it's OK to have consensual sex with 12 year olds, 14 y o in most EU countries. In Saudi Arabia and Yemen you can legally marry a 7 year old, actually in Thailand too.... ect ect

Go figure!

subtext: "i wish i was michael jackson and could buy my way out of my inevitable legal troubles."

please... go to prison, anywhere on earth. then get back to me on how it's all social customs/all relative... can't wait for your full report, professor.

[zeusbheld]

In an election year, in many US states they'll round up, convict and pillory nudists on beaches and people who piss in public as 'sexual offenders'. Not too long ago homosexuals were executed in Germany (still are in some fundamentalist countries) and were left to rot in US jails.

"Paedophilia is Mother Nature's way to take care of orphans and widows," once whote a philosopher much smarter than we all.

In USA you are a paedophile if you love a 17.5 year old ('statutory rape'). In Spain or Mexico it's OK to have consensual sex with 12 year olds, 14 y o in most EU countries. In Saudi Arabia and Yemen you can legally marry a 7 year old, actually in Thailand too.... ect ect

Go figure!

ehhhhhh .... this guy is either a f**king wind up (and not a funny one) or one sick f**king dude !!

should creeps like this be allowed on here .... "mothers with young kids" ..... like WTF !!!!!!!!!

correction: false dichotomy. if he's on a windup he's still a sick ****.

[Stramash]

In an election year, in many US states they'll round up, convict and pillory nudists on beaches and people who piss in public as 'sexual offenders'. Not too long ago homosexuals were executed in Germany (still are in some fundamentalist countries) and were left to rot in US jails.

"Paedophilia is Mother Nature's way to take care of orphans and widows," once whote a philosopher much smarter than we all.

In USA you are a paedophile if you love a 17.5 year old ('statutory rape'). In Spain or Mexico it's OK to have consensual sex with 12 year olds, 14 y o in most EU countries. In Saudi Arabia and Yemen you can legally marry a 7 year old, actually in Thailand too.... ect ect

Go figure!

ehhhhhh .... this guy is either a f**king wind up (and not a funny one) or one sick f**king dude !!

should creeps like this be allowed on here .... "mothers with young kids" ..... like WTF !!!!!!!!!

correction: false dichotomy. if he's on a windup he's still a sick f*ck.

Let's delve into this a little deeper shall we?

Apparently he is a US Immigration Coach (in other words he will fill in a form fot you if you pay him)

He has a PhD;

"I am is a retired PhD in English and German linguistics"

Would maybe do some revision on that one...

He has lots of experience;

"My most recent experience is teaching adult managers at DW Deutsche Welle TV & radio, Lufthansa, DHL, T-mobile, Nissan, among others, as well as school children ages 7-16. My special talent is pronunciation coaching: I have my own unique method to make my Asian students say R and L correctly, which is a BIG problem.."

He has found loopholes that allows you to adopt children from around the world (well if you are German...)

"In Germany adoption is not even required if you can show that your father is unknown! It's called 'Scheinvaterschaft'. If a German man declares that he is the father of a child born out of wedlock this child gets German EU citizenship almost automatically and is entitled to all the benefits of a German child (>120 euro of child support, free K-12-PhD education and medical care ect, ect), even if it remains in the birth country. Pregnant single women and unmarried mothers of fatherless children should contact us for advice. One German benefactor has thusly declared more than 300 fatherhoods for the benefit of poor kids and mothers. No DNA paternity testing required!"

Seems fine to me...

[zeusbheld]

....

Seems fine to me...

yeh and michael jackson, too, right?

[Mister Moobs]

the dead can molest no one, nor can they rape