Don't forget that this is the same person who insisted that a government minister had to resign over a spent juvenile conviction for a minor offence. It may well be that the person in question has changed, but I suspect that she is just trying to get out of the situation without having to admit that someone hadn't checked him out properly. Or that they had but decided not to raise it with anyone.

=========================================================================================================

If you are to punish a man retributively you must injure him. If you are to reform him you must improve him. And men are not improved by injuries. (George Bernard Shaw)

There has been lots of research into the reasons, although much of it has not made it through into the mainstream. The role of porn addiction for example. Thats why Huw Edwards is important in raising the profile of SO beyond the media stereotype. He has an audience outside of academia or the legal system and could influence the public debate, although so far his over reliance on the mental health defence and an apparent refusal to take any responsibility for what he did, is not doing him any favours.

The argument she has given is that he has changed and can help with solutions to the problem of radicalisation. Which to be fair is a good thing. It is a big step forward for a political leader.

Same could be said of SO's a lot of us would not even think about offending again. So why not learn from us what caused us to offend and what can be stopped from other people offending. I don't want to make excuses for my offending but I know the reasons why it happened and I could help others to understand the triggers. I feel there is very little research done into offending reasons and even less work done in stop offending. 

A interesting twist on the whole rehabilitation and forgiveness debate this week. Kemi Badenoch speaking about giving a former neo nazi with a string of convictions a second chance, insisting he has been rehabilitated. Not what I expected from the Conservatives, especially when they do not seem to want to give second chances to anyone currently in prison. If a neo nazi can be forgiven, then why not an SO?

I'm not currently living at home since the local rag published my conviction. The idea was that it would keep my family safe if I wasn't there. However that didn't stop some moron from throwing rocks at the house last week & smashing a window. We're actively looking to relocate but for them there's still the fear that people in the new area find out & we're targeted again.

The same as you, a lifetime of contribution to society, friends & extended family all dismissed as though none of it happened. It's saddening & I can't see it changing anytime soon in the UK.

I also see that Huw Edwards has been criticised for entering a poetry competition as well. This is the problem with him every thing he tries to do will be publicly reported on.

My take on all of this is that he has the public profile to be able to talk about these things and for people to read it. So in some ways he could do some good in highlighting the way people react to someone convicted of a sexual offence. However I don't really think that the majority of the general public are ready to accept that SO's are redeemable.  

My own experience on this is that it is only my family that really stood by me. Majority of people I knew disowned me as soon as I was arrested and pleaded guilty. Many of my partners friends also disowned her for standing by me. People don't want to listen or understand what happened. I haven't changed as a person, I made one mistake in my life which lasted a few minutes and I am being judged for this instead of all the good I have done in the rest of my life.

When my SHPO and registration period ends in a few years it is most likely we are going to sell up and move somewhere where no one knows us. That way to a degree we can start again, make new friendship groups without all of this hanging over us. In the area we are in there is always the risk of someone saying something about me if we just do every day tasks such as go to the local Pub. 

Yeah, I offered my friends the same thing. They could ask questions and I'll try to answer and if they just want to cut ties I understood, all I asked was they remain respectful. 

One of the bigger surprises was one of my close friends, known each other about 30 years. Went to school to together, I was at his wedding, I helped him with the subsequent divorce, I helped him when his mum took her own life. Again, I didn't ask for us to remain best friends, just that if we did part for him to be somewhat respectful. 

Instead he shared the articles around anyone who would listen, as we were friends he had pictures of us together so sent them to the local Guy Fawkes mask enthusiast group and has seemingly kept tabs on me ever since as I still see him popping up here and there. I don't want to go for an eye for an eye thing but if some of the folk knew about his skeletons that I know... Well...

I did speak to the police about it but they're not interested seemingly because nothing has actually happened off the back of it.

I completely get what you're saying but I'm not sure that's the way he means it? (subjective of course)
I also agree about his local plod, if he's on a SHPO or notification then it's not spent at all.

Same here. I made the mistake of thinking that people who'd know me for 30 years plus would stop & think, but no. Immediate judgement without conversation apart from a few very values individuals who understood my story. A couple at least listened before binning me but that I can respect, at least they listened.

This was slightly eye-opening for me too. Of course I knew I'd lose friends and acquaintances but the extent to which I did was the eye-opener. Folk I had grown up with, been friends with for 30+ years just binned me and treated me like shite at the flip of a switch. I'm not saying they're not allowed to be upset at me but the sudden black and white switch was what took me off guard.

I have to say that I'm never convinced by someone who resorts to the hierarchy of offending as their first line of defence. He's effectively saying that what he did was unfortunate but don't forget that he's not as bad as those people over there. He justifies himself in a way that minimises what happened, as if he is an innocent bystander drawn into someone else's offending. He might have finished his suspended sentence, but I suspect his local plod will take note of his attitude.

=========================================================================================================

If you are to punish a man retributively you must injure him. If you are to reform him you must improve him. And men are not improved by injuries. (George Bernard Shaw)

Thanks for posting this, it's an illuminating read which I can relate to. Since I turned my life around I've become heavily influenced by the Stoics so to see someone reference them is interest in this context. I have sympathy with much of what he says (I don't judge what i don't know) & have to say that my conviction was based on some similar grounds. I'm never going to say anything about my conviction publicly but I also suffered over 3 months of digital interrogation which resulted in all my devices being returned to me (make of that what you will 💁‍♂️).
Obviously I don't have the public profile he has, thank God, but I'm astounded as to how few people who've known me for decades have assumed I'm worth hating & how many who don't now hate me.
I don't care about them in the slightest but the effect on my immediate family is heartbreaking 😔

https://substack.com/home/post/p-206618134

This could have been written by lots of us on the forum. Not sure why he is posting it on substack, but fair play to him for putting his head above the parapet.