"You have left your children home alone with a paedophile."

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

wow.

i burst out laughing when i read the topic name bcz it sounded heaps ridiculous but its actually a very serious matter.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

both failed, her as a woman of not detecting good or bad character. the system failed but i would also wonder what kind of woman would be attracted to a sex offender. when you get close to someone, there are undeniable traits and signs they give off.

she is a fail and so is the system. it's also very counterintuitive and even self-deluding for a woman to assume that she can replace a biological father. this pervading deception of mixing families as if it is just perfectly natural is what causes so as many problems. this "i will find you a dad" is perverse. you would really need to analyze the mind of someone who thinks this way as well as most often, the real motive is money to make it easier for themselves or just selfish motivation in having a partner without real consideration for the child or it's secondary, though they will often pretend otherwise.

it is not natural for most people to consider other's offspring as thier natural children and most stepchildren are treated at least differently or some form of abuse. it's the children who suffer because of the selfishness or stupidity of their parents. only narcissistic sociopaths themselves would assume that others are automatically looking to take care of other's children and just love them as thier own. it's ridiculous.

there are mixed families that are fine when the parents are good people to begin with and usually when a stepparent is like a uncle/aunt or respects the others children.

but again, this is not the norm as in most people are not wired to care or even respect other's children.

especially this woman who has daughters, really put them at risk by assuming some strange man would consider them his children.

i think it's just as sick for people to assume this and i suspect it's self-deception. there is no way around it. it goes against all that is natural. that said, it does not dissolve this man scum of responsibility for what he has done. when entering into a relationship with other's children, at the least it is thier responsibility to be a part of the family and treat each member as such or at least respect them as human beings not predate on them. if they were not going to fulfill that responsiblity, then they should have chosen someone that does not have children from a previous relationship. there are no excuses for them either.

but in the end, it is society's fault and failure on many levels. one being that the dark side of step-families is almost never discussed or admitted to and adults never considering or even ignoring the risk or plight they are subjecting thier children to. society often focuses mysteriously on the exceptions in this case such as success stories. i venture to guess it's to assuage guilt and also to give adults the upperhand since adults have power, not children. what is most sick is children, through their innocence, often will believe the adults are sincere even when it's heinously apparent otherwise. an abusive stepparent that is more honest in telling them that they don't consider them thier child and ignores them is even better than one that feigns being thier parent in order to get close to them to abuse them and keep up the front to pervert the child's sense of who and what they are and what is right and wrong. some so go so far as even enjoying having someone to have power or control over to abuse or use any way they wish. even when it's not that heinous, most stepchildren are treated condescendingly in some way or not as favored and no child should have to go through that.

that's why it's imperative that stepparents are not given the same rights over the child as a biological parent. anyone with real common sense or real concern for the child/children would understand that immediately and foremost.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Its a bit hard to say that the mother should have known, or seen things to indicate he was a paedophile. Sure, with some people, you can see traits and signs that show something is not right. But from what I've seen and heard in my life (which is sadly a fair bit), paedophiles are some of the most deceptive and shifty people, who will do anything to get what they want. I've actually known people who were (past tense) friends with paedophiles and even had men in their family who are paedophiles. Paedophiles are not like normal people, they are sick and do not care for the children at all. They often say they love them, and care alot for them, which is why they do the things they do, but there is no love there, just a desire to fulfil their sick fantasy. Also, i completely disagree with almost everything you said about stepparents, but thats kind of going off on a tangent.

Your whole post kind of didnt even touch on the question, who failed to protect these children from a sex offender?

In my opinion, it was both DoCS (Department of Childrens' Services), and the police. They both should have made sure the woman knew he was a registered sex offender.

Saying that, my family and I actually had a similar situation, with trying to prove someone we knew was a sex offender. We knew he was a sex offender, and wanted to prove it to someone who let him babysit their children. Anyway, long story short, the police told us that they were not legally allowed to reveal registered sex offenders to the public, and that there was no way we were able to get that information (I ended up getting around it and finding proof myself).

But really, who are the Australian police protecting with this ridiculous law? I cannot even understand why they would protect paedophiles, yet not protect potential victims by keeping paedophiles' identity a secret.

 

sex offenders start abusing somewhere and not all of them get caught or brought to justice or are registered either. as a matter of fact, there are many who have no record at all. even worse, they are often protected not just by the system but by people they know from family members, friends, and the community. this is because even sex offenders are part of the community or society at large. the victim is often pressured or even threatened in some way to keep quiet and not rock the boat or disrupt family, keep dirty laundry hidden (at the victim's expense) to not bring shame or keep up a respectable front. using religion, guilt and forgiveness of perpetrator is another tactic. citing that the perpetrator is also a victim in some way as an excuse is another tactic. attacking the victim is also another. the victim is often made to be obscure or unimportant or the opposite where character asassination is used on them, especially if they act out later in life (not as a perpetrator but a spiral of self-destruction is used against them as so-called "evidence" or lashing out at those who did not protect them is twisted to present to others that the victim is a 'bad' person or of the stereotypical 'loser' nobodies in the world) as that is when most get the courage to know thier rights or gain enough self-esteem to see past the intimidation. perpetrators and thier complicit cohorts directly or indirectly use stereotypes to hide behind as well as project onto others, because they know others do not know the whys or the real background story. it usually ends up a cycle that demonizes the victim more than the perpetrator. society is rather full of lies. it's way worse than naive people realize. a victim gets a really ugly glimpse into what people really are about. of course, the same ones that do this would not accept it if it happened to them. it's often about power structure as to who is considered important.

i mentioned stepfamilies, because statistically, most who are abused or assaulted in these situations are from stepparents just like this situation. it can happen in any scenario but this is a common one.

as far as stepparents, unfortunately, it is true since the stepparent is not the natural parent so there is a greater risk and more propensity for abuse or maltreatment due to this reason in these family dynamics.

i did make sure to indicate that not all families or stepparents are bad people and that it doesn't apply to all mixed families. but overall, it does need to be considered.

i did say the system failed and is wrong. too often, individuals are not held accountable. why i was making an example of this woman was that she represents in some way why the system failed, even culturally. i clearly expounded and explained it and that many women especially, for some reason, think that they can find a man who will automatically accept thier children as thier own or that if a man shows interest in them, they can artificially be a family. my point was that it totally ignores the basic nature of people in general(it is not really thier child and they know it) and that is a mistake or blindspot.

in this situation, technically, it was just the system. but that is because she did not know he was a registered sex offender if that really is the case.

but we don't know if she had seen signs or indications and failed to protect her daughter or take any action before it was too late.

the overall issue i have with this is society's unwillingness to admit that mixed families are not really natural. furthermore, too many people don't care as long as the parents lusts for partner or companionship are satisfied at the expense of thier child's welfare and more often, these women seek relationships not for the welfare of thier child as much as for personal desires. of course this is never admitted.

how i look at it is, if your relationship failed no matter whose fault it is and you brought a child into the world. then your child is the number one priority and not your quest for a husband/wife one thinks will complete you and hope that they will be surrogate parents to your offspring from another.

 

Yes, the police should have told her, especially since she had children...and he's a paedophile (not the kind who banged his 16 year old girlfriend when he was 18), or is it common to leave paedophiles around kids? Well, in my opinion paedophiles should be locked up forever because apparently this isn't a 'fad', but rather a 'sexual orientation' if I can put it that way. Someone who jerks off when watching children play will not stop just because they were for a few years in prison.

I bet that if she knew, then these things would have never happened. Because, seriously who in their right mind would willingly spend their life with someone who likes to rape little children?

 

it doesn't matter if it was a five year old or a 15 year old or a 30 year old, molestation is molestation, rape is rape and assault is assault. it affects the person no matter what age they are and a tremendous personal violation. in some cases, if they are very young provided their was no physical damage as in serious organ or bone rupture due to thier size etc, on an emotional and mental level, they may forget much easier since they don't know what is going on. however, an older person would suffer the full mental and emotional effects much more, the worst effects is usually for early tweens to late teens as they are becoming more aware of thier identity and personal boundaries but yet don't have the full power of an adult. they are totally aware at this stage though which makes the violation that much more personal and isolates them from others in their age group.

as for who would, there are a lot of people who do, even knowingly and try to cover it up.

this woman may be a good one but we don't know that either since we don't know if she ignored any clues or signs in her partner.

as for the question if she should have been notified, that is obvious. should she have lost her kids in this situation? probably not if the info is true.

 

Uhm, okay...I don't think that I ever put that in doubt.

In some cases? Just because there are no obvious signs of the adverse effects on a young child after such an horrific encounter, doesn't mean that it...'forgets' it easier. At some point it will always somehow regurgitate, whether the victim knows the source of its behavioural and/or mental issue, or not. If it hurts, then you don't have to know what kind of act is being performed on you, all you need to know is that it hurts, and that you'd like to escape from this pain. Children realise more than one would like them to. I find it ridiculous to claim that just because children aren't fully 'aware' after your standards that they'd suffer less than someone who's reached puberty.

Yes, there are some, but from what I've observed most of them realised this only after they were already with said partner together. I doubt that anyone who knows from the get go that this person is engaging in weird sexual activities such as raping kids would want to spend their life with them unless they'd share similar preferences, well that's my opinion, of course.

You're right, but there will always be lacking evidence, we can only assume.

Hmm. I wonder why she wasn't notified. That would be quite interesting to find out.

 

This makes it sound like the mother who let a man move in with her and her children is totally blameless for doing so. In America, we have sex offender registries, and they probably exist in other developed countries. Did this mother assume that the name he told her was his true name? Or did she check his license or ID? Did she even bother to search the registry for his name, real or fake? Even if she approached the police and they could not tell her if he was/wasn't on the child protection register, the police would then would have known the intent of this pedophile, and they would probably come and take him away.

One nice thing about getting married is that people's names are usually circulated around ... people's engagements get into the newspaper, etc. Concerned knowledgeable citizens see someone's name, and realize a pedophile is marrying a woman with young children. And being decent people, as most people are, they would probably notify her and/or the police. In the very least, people marrying must go down to City Hall and properly identify themselves to the authorities. Perhaps these clerks should notify the police of these people's names, and perhaps a law actually exists that compels them to do so.

Obviously, the mother has some responsibility here, perhaps the greatest amount of responsibility. Did she ever see any official ID that identified him?? Did she ever know his real name before it was too late? Did she ever try to know him and his background? We all know that, in the dating scene, women probably won't date guys with felony convictions, but this mother ended up doing much more than "dating" him ... Didn't she!!

When I was a little kid, I was taught to remove my hat out of respect when entering a building. I even asked my mother, "Out of respect for what, the building?" And she didn't know. Now, after 9-11, I see signs everywhere about removing hats, hoods, and sunglasses upon entering banks, government buildings, etc. And now I know ... it's out of respect for the people there and for society in general — it's a common sense security measure. We had merely forgotten about it.

In the same sense, marriage is also a common sense security measure that we've seemed to have forgotten. It lets society know who you're shacking up with, and it allows the citizenry to alert the people involved and the authorities. It at least lets a person know if the other person is committing bigamy. Come on!

What the mother did was very wrong, and I think the authorities acted appropriately, especially if she pretended that she was an innocent victim. Women who want the responsibility of being a single mother also need to accept the accountability that goes along with it. The one goes hand-in-hand with the other. Even if the father to her children had run off, she still needs to take on this responsibility/accountability or risk the loss of her children — one way or another. Sadly, she lost them both ways, and it need never have come to that!!!!

 

it's very annoying when people talk about things with authority assuming they know what they are talking about but really don't such as yourself. it's something they've rationalized out etc. that is not what i meant. the reason i explained the trauma is horrific for not just "little children" is because too often society considers it much more damaging when they picture a four year old, for example. in the case of rape, it's much more physically damaging but on a psychological level for an older person, especially young teen it's even worse. there have been psychiatric studies done on this so you needn't argue with me.

this often leaves others the impression that somehow it's more acceptable because the person was sexually more developed or just because they are more older and therefore deserves less sympathy or the effects are not as dire.

these subjects really upset me and the blindspots of people who wax on is insulting. i will use myself as an example. i remember being sexually abused several times by a family friend when i was around four or five years old but though it was icky to me and i felt dehumanized because of the way i was treated, i only had a faint emotional connection to the memory. what saved me, in some ironic way, was that i was not as aware. an analogy would be drugged to some extent undergoing surgery vs being fully awake and aware. when i was sexually assaulted again starting when i was 13 years old, that experience changed the entire course of my life and nearly totally destroyed me emotionally and mentally and i was a wreck from then on. it was seared into my memory and the experience of violation was tremendous to my sense of dignity and self-worth. this is because i was more lucid at this stage, my boundaries were more defined and sexually developing which made the violation that much more personal. my entire sense of myself and self-worth was trashed and i did not have the even slight luxury or saving grace of less awareness anymore which i wish i had. people also assume that it's just normal sex but sexual predators are often very narcissistic and treat thier victim as objects. this involves the most demeaning acts possible to humiliate and dehumanize. it can be something as sick as forcing sex on a toilet (which was done to me) to lewd fondling, contorting the body in the most humiliating manner, and just anything to make a mark on the person so they can never regain thier dignity again. treated as an object is something no one understands unless they have gone through it. sociopaths will grab you like an object whenever they have the urge to satisfy whatever lusts or desires they have, at even the most inappropriate time and machinations. they believe they have an inherent right to take what they want or use whomever they choose. even worse, they project the other wants it. by forcing themselves on someone, they create it by involuntary physical reaction. they will continue in any way possible to make it happen. this is the most derogatory and demeaning aspect of sexual violation which predators view lasciviously as confirmation that it was mutual. it is horrendous. i did not want my perpetrator to be my first experience with sex and all my innocence, beautiful and romantic dreams of meeting the one was gone in the most cruel, devilish and evil fashion. i felt dirty and unworthy of anyone from that point on and my expectations for myself dropped like i fell off the highest peak to my death. most, not all, sexual predators are perverts. there is malice and sadism involved. it is a deeply and horrible violation on many levels. there is nothing worse short of murder. at least with murder, a person does not have to live with the memory and the aftermath. coupled with sexual abuse, there is other forms of abuse from emotional, mental, verbal to even physical battery. most abusers don't just abuse in one way. and if anyone is under the impression that perpetrators are some kind of victim, that is not true. it is their selfishness and immorality that is the main root of thier actions. they also know what is right and wrong which is why they cover so well. they did not lose any sleep or suffer or feel guilt. their life was unaffected.

i tried to run away many times but it never worked in my situation. the sense of being trapped was tremendous and the fear was palpable. rape creates an unwanted link between perpetrator and victim because they "learn" you at the deepest level. it's as if i couldn't even take the slightest action or thought without the perpetrator knowing or sensing. i was surrounded in some hell not just in the physical sense but just as real. the physical act of violation is not the end but only the beginning as the perpetrator has penetrated the deepest recesses of your soul and it's as if i couldn't get him out of my system or it's mark on me. i tried to cut my wrists and they found me and from then on i was watched scrupulously. whenever i tried to run away, i was always sent back as i trusted the wrong people and it is the most disheartening feeling as any hope that was left in my heart was betrayed. i had fantasies of killing the perpetrator and my mother who betrayed me. i remember seeing a gun at an acquaintance's house and wanting to take it but i couldn't. when i look back, if i could have killed them and went to prison i would not be worse off today as my life was hell regardless. i became homeless and wandered for a very long time and no one could help or fix what was most broken or damaged and that was my soul and heart.

it bothers me that people tend to falsely place more value on small children over older children. it is a mistake as both are wrong but it affects older children much worse on a mental and emotional level. i know as i've experienced both at different stages of my life.

and yes, people forget context in some of these situations called rape. a teen who mutally engages in sex with someone who is 18, would not consider it rape of course, even if by law that is so. a forty year old man who forces themself on a 13 year old or anytime someone is forced upon is definitely rape in the true sense.

 

^why would you ask a question where the answer is so obvious? of course they should have told her and of course this information should be made public.

but the problem is not all predators get caught, reported or even convicted. the only thing i discovered, accidently too, is that my perpetrator was a girl scouts volunteer earlier in his life. being male and knowing what i knew about him, it was something significant but this person had no previous record.

no one knows if she really had no way of knowing from living with this person. maybe he was that good at hiding it but it doesn't seem to be that way with most abusers as they give signs or treat stepchildren differently especially if that's their intended target. predators can put up a front in public because all interactions are shallow, usually quick and in passing but when you are around them as in living with them, it would be virtually impossible to not detect something. even i sensed this person was a creep as intuition is a powerful tool we all have and there were so many signs.

if there really wasn't, then she of course totally is not responsible and should not have had her kids taken away from her.

my own mother used this excuse that she didn't know but she did know but turned a blind eye to it and even outrageously would let him bathe me, every night for months from the time they got married. he did all kinds of things such as being too focused on me in many ways that were inappropriate or would raise red flags such as making sure that he was the one to blow dry my hair and putting barettes in it. why would a 35 year old man be so fixated on the hygiene habits of a girl? brushing my hair over and over etc. he controlled every aspect of my existence and was intrusive and disrespectful of boundaries. he was even abusive towards me right in front of her, alternately mistreating me atrociously! she paid no attention to me except only when she had to. you would think this person would appear to be what others insult as "queer" or effeminate, he is a stereotypical good 'ol boy traditionalist, republican, heartland americana with the religion and all. he's very dominating and still the most bigoted person i've ever known regarding anything. interestingly, he would be considered the backbone of america but he is the most filthy and corrupt person i've ever known and because of my abuse, i've run into others but even they were not as bad as him.

the signs were all there glaringly and she excuses herself to this day as if she's innocent. this woman left me alone with him at 13 years old when she even caught him staring at my body at inappropriate ways when in bathing suit etc. when i had my first period, i asked she not tell him and she goes and tells him as if it's perfectly okay. again, she is the innocent one with no responsiblity because he commited the act. when i really knew what she was about was after the fact and how she protected him. she is complicit!

 

possibly but the act and what extent has to do with who is around and the dynamic of that. in my case, since he realized he could get away with general abuse it was done in front of the mother. i noticed that when his other kid (son) from a previous marriage lived with us a year, he didn't focus on me that way so you are right, they are good at hiding it whenever needed. when his daughter (half-sister) was getting older to know what was going on, he stopped his more strange behavior automatically. the half sister was no comfort as she is more like him. it's like she was never my sister. she is also an elitest traditionalist like him, looks like him and religious like them. it makes me very angry that he used me while protecting his own kids so that they could view him as not the sociopath he really is. he poured all his issues and angst onto another person's child instead of his own. it makes sense from a standpoint of what's was opportunistic for him but it's infuriating because he's not even my blood but i'm the one who reaped his issues. it's deeply offending, even infuriating and i should not have been made to be responsible for his issues/karma. if anything, his own kids should have, it's like cheating.

as for whether they show signs has to do with the relationship between the parents and what type of relationship they have and what is considered acceptable. the more the woman is excusing, the more the man will not have to put up a front. but you are right about the acting, sociopaths are very good actors. they can change up in less than a second like reflex to appear socalled normal. they fit right into mainstream society easily. as a matter of fact, they seem to represent it which is disturbing and makes you wonder about other people.

my counselors have told me that what i went through was not unusual but severe (because of additional elements involved) and is typical in many ways of sexual abuse and abusive households. it was like terrorism.

today, they are doing missionary work overseas. it just boggles the mind. but the act of society continues.

even today, i'm labeled the weird and disturbed one and they are the upstanding normal citizens. i think situations like mine as well as some others is reasons why certain people check out of society and are fringe (not as in cultural fads) but feel that society is not for them.

 

The referenced article is incomplete in various ways as well as disjointed, especially as to who knew what, and when they knew it. The timeline is not clear. Also, the information in the article from the police suggests that this pedophile had not properly notified them of his living arrangements.

Furthermore, we should pay attention to the lack of sensational facts. For example, it seems that the rape did not occur while the woman was in the hospital, but that it happened prior to that — otherwise, rushing home from the hospital to find her "just-raped" daughter would have been sensational. It also seems that the police and the DOCS did not know the pedophile was living in a household with children — otherwise, the authorities knowing that he lived in a household with children but not investigating the situation would have been sensational.

It seems ludicrous that a DOCS caseworker would tell the mother that her man was a pedophile, leaving it to her to get up out of her sick bed and rush home and figure out all by herself that he had raped her daughter in her absence, or perhaps previously. Instead it makes much more sense that DOCS had learned during the woman's hospital stay that a man with a known pedophile's name was in the home, and DOCS then investigated the household, learned of the previous rape, had the pedophile arrested and the children placed in safe homes, and told the mother what had happened (and she came home to an empty house).

The most logical reconstruction to me is as follows.

Late last year, DOCS investigated a complaint that the woman yelled at her toddler. During this investigation, the DOCS learned about the members of the household. DOCS checked the child protection register and discovered that the man was a convicted pedophile. Meanwhile, the woman checked into the hospital for complications of her pregnancy, where a DOCS official later notified her that the man was a pedophile. She checked out and went home to discover that the pedophile had raped her 10-year-old daughter, that the pedophile was arrested and that the children were removed.

Bells, you have consistently said that there was no way for the woman to know about her man's past, and therefore, she's innocent of any wrongdoing. However, this is not the complete picture. As I said, she could have made sure of his true identity, and then notified the police and DOCS that he was — or would soon be — living in her house with her children, and then let the authorities handle it from there. She would never need to know that he was/wasn't a pedophile in order to protect her children.

What needed to come together was the man's name and the child protection register. Because parents, who know the names (if they investigate sufficiently), can't access the register, they need to make the names available to the authorities who can access it. This is a tragic case, and I hope I've made myself perfectly clear.

 

So, are we supposed to believe that the police and DOCS, who are sworn to serve and protect (especially children), supposedly knew this pedophile was a member of this family and raping the underage daughter and that they simply waited until the mother was hospitalized during her pregnancy before telling her about it, arresting the pedophile, removing the kids, and blaming her?

If not, give us the scenario as you see it.

 

Oh come on........ do you do all the above every time you meet a new friend or partner??? Does anyone, I would worry about anyone who checked out every single person who came into thier lives with the police. I think the poilce probably would as well, would get lableled as insane.




As to the original question, the reponsibility is with the police. They had a duty of care to the woman and others that a sex offender contacts.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duty_of_care

 

Wow. Where do you find these horrible stories? These pedophiles should be put away for life. There's no cure for pedophilia, so releasing them is pretty much asking for trouble.

 

The point is: How well did she really know him? How hard did she try? Checking out every single person is ridiculous, but the guy she was spreading her legs for is not, and the guy she made an intimate part of her family even more so. Obviously. As far as "getting carded", it goes like this .... while scrounging around in her purse, she pulls out her license and says, "Ugh, the photo on my license makes me look hideous ... what's yours look like?" She looks at his, he looks at hers. Maybe people don't do this anymore. If I was a woman, I'd check out who I was spreading my legs for and who I was allowing to join my family.

Yes, thank you. So when she goes to the police and asks about the man by name, the police tell her they can't supply that info, but then they turn around and look up the guy's name (for their own sake) as their duty of care. But she didn't give them that opportunity. The referenced article does not state that the police knew he was living in a family with minor children. If they knew he lived there, then yes, they had a duty to verify that what he told them was correct.

Another way of looking at this is: Being a smarter and wiser woman now, what can she do to prevent this from happening again? I've already given several suggestions.