theForum is run by the charity Unlock. We do not actively moderate, monitor or edit contributions but we may intervene and take any action as we think necessary. Further details can be found in our terms of use. If you have any concerns over the contents on our site, please either register those concerns using the report-a-post button or email us at forum@unlock.org.uk.


Polygraph Interview also SOR Requirements


Polygraph Interview also SOR Requirements

Author
Message
Mr W
Mr W
Supreme Being
Supreme Being (6.4K reputation)Supreme Being (6.4K reputation)Supreme Being (6.4K reputation)Supreme Being (6.4K reputation)Supreme Being (6.4K reputation)Supreme Being (6.4K reputation)Supreme Being (6.4K reputation)Supreme Being (6.4K reputation)Supreme Being (6.4K reputation)

Group: Forum Members
Posts: 187, Visits: 3.4K
Theunknown - 27 Feb 20 8:57 PM
Theunknown - 27 Feb 20 12:28 PM
JASB - 26 Feb 20 2:45 PM
Theunknown - 25 Feb 20 6:32 PM
AB2014 - 13 Feb 20 3:15 PM
Theunknown - 13 Feb 20 2:38 PM
AB2014 - 13 Feb 20 11:41 AM
Theunknown - 13 Feb 20 11:11 AM
Theunknown - 6 Feb 20 12:41 PM
AB2014 - 6 Feb 20 8:59 AM
Theunknown - 5 Feb 20 7:24 PM
JASB - 5 Feb 20 3:01 PM
Theunknown - 5 Feb 20 10:51 AM
If you are on SOR, as noted from the NARO website, one of the following requirements is:
“If you are living with a child or staying in a household where a child lives for at least 12 hours each day”
However on the Unlock website says that a person on Sex Offender should inform the police if he has stayed in a household for more than 12 hours where a child u/18 lives.
Which one is correct?
Also the PPU has never informed me about this requirement? I was put on SOR in 1999.

Polygraph Interview.  My application for SOR discharge was rejected by the PPU HQ giving false reasons. When I pointed out this to them, the PPU HQ invalidated their decision admitting the mistakes and have decided to reconsider, No apologies, but has made it more difficult for me by INVITING me to attend a polygraph interview. Note: Polygraph tests, being very unreliable,(a report from Wikipedia) are not admissible in the UK Criminal Courts. But can carry some weight in a civil court setting in a criminal court, which could apply in my case. 
I feel very nervous about it and suffer many medical conditions which can affect the test. I have informed the PPQ HQ about these conditions. A week has gone, still, I have not received a reply, Shall I go ahead with the test, bearing in mind I am not required to take the polygraph interview. 
A reply to the above two questions will be highly appreciated.


Hi,
First and most important the fact is that websites are not always up to date and like many aspects of legal life, it is the writers interpretation of the legal wording - unless it is a cut and paste from a government document and than as long as that is the latest version lol.
A SOPO condition does not have to be in place as it comes under the term of "public protection", and as interviews are not recorded, there is no constraining of their questions if they wish. Its is suggested that these sort of questions come under the heading of "risk assessment" as well.
In my experience any sex offender when visited will be asked about family and relationships. If either or both exist, the conversation is expanded to include contact with children, even if they are extended family members.
As mentioned, Social Services would be contacted unless the PPU felt there was no risk. Be aware that from my experience, that decision can differ between PPU officers and constabularies.
If you have always ensured you have not broken any of their rules and kept the PPU informed of your consequences, then you should not worry.

Polygraph:
I would seek legal advice.
The Government / Media response after the Jeremy Kyle escapade, highlighted the concern that many psychologists are strongly opinionated about there accuracy as many are stating they are not. The same concerns have also been raised - after the recent terrorist atrocities - by the Government and experts.  
You have mentioned you informed them of your medical health concerns, which could be seen as a avoidance tactic so why not take a positive and co-operative approach?
Possibly consider / offer to undertake an independent psychologists assessment instead because of the expert accuracy concerns.

I hope this helps in some small way - keeps us informed and wish you success.
“As advised by you in the first paragraph of your post, I have gone through the Govt. Website but I can't find anywhere having resided/stayed for more than 12 hours where a child under 18 lives. Kindly correct me if I have misunderstood their information
  http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/42/part/2/crossheading/notification-requirements
Changes to legislation:
Sexual Offences Act 2003, Cross Heading: Notificationrequirements is up to date with all changes known to be in force on or before05 February 2020. There are changes that may be brought into force at a future date. Changes that have been made appear in the content and are referenced with annotations.
his having resided or stayed, for a qualifying period, at any premises in the United Kingdom the address of which has not been notified to the police under section 83(1), this subsection, or section 2 of the SexOffenders Act 1997,
 (6)In this section, “qualifying period” means—
(a)a period of 7 days, or
(b)two or more periods, in any period of 12 months, which taken together amount to 7 days.




Well, the Sexual Offences Act 2003 was updated by The Sexual Offences Act 2003 (Notification Requirements) (England and Wales) Regulations 2012. Section 10 of those regulations says that:

"10.—(1) The information set out in paragraph (2) is prescribed for the purposes of section 83(5)(h) of the 2003 Act in a case where a relevant offender (R) resides, or stays for a period of at least 12 hours, at a relevant household."

Section 2 says:


“relevant household” means a household or other place—
(a)where a child resides or stays, and
(b)to which the public do not have access (whether for payment or not)."

That seems to agree with the Unlock information. PPU won't tell you about this requirement, as the question should be asked every time you register, and they should then tell you to notify them if any of the information you have given them changes.

Thanks, Supremebeing. You seem to be a Suprmebeing as you are a goldmine of information on questions like mine.


Hello, here I am again. Thanks once again for your continued advice. As I mentioned before I was going to attend a Polygraph Test which I did. The questions were asked similar to those you mentioned that I might be asked. At the end of the test, the examiner said that that she did not believe that I had no unsupervised contacts with children u/16, which I never even I had nor was there any court order placed on me not to have any contacts with u/16. She was accompanied by a Police Officer who stayed outside the test room. However, at the end of the test, the examiner asked me to wait as she was going to see if the police officer who had come with her had any questions to ask, which she decided not to. I was given a sheet of the examiner and the police officer phone numbers if I had any questions had to ask later on. After coming back home I phoned the police officer asking that if that the examiner's comments would affect my SOR Removal application, which was going to be reconsidered. She was very sympathetic saying not to worry too much about it that just only the test results would have not have too much impact on me my reconsidered SOR removal application. The PPU Superintendent took this action when I had pointed out to my investigating officer that there were some fatal mistakes in the original determination. So my first worry is that if the examiner's comments would affect my SOR second review? Please, What are your comments about this issue?
2. I told the examiner that I had a resiprical visit every 3-4 months with a family friend coming with children but except Saying a Hello, I that hardly ever spoke to them and they are very shy anyway and there were always parents present there. However, I added that at one occasion the father went outside for about 20 minutes so I left the sitting room and went upstairs in case the mother popped into the kitchen. She asked what would I do if that happened again, I told that I would go out with him.
My second worry is that examiner would report these visits to the Police and they might alert the Social Services and they would be visiting with the Police to my friend’s house and the Social Service asking to sign an undertaking with them for not have any contact with me when there are their children are present. They are our very close friends and us, and especially, my wife won’t like to lose contact with them. If the Police ask me their address, am I under any legal obligation to do so, as I have no order placed on me for not to have any contact with u/16 years old children?
All the advice on these issues will be highly appreciated

There's something like this going on in a separate discussion. The problem is that the police define unsupervised as "not supervised by one of the police, probation or social services". The fact that the parents are present is not always taken into account.

  Thanks for your guidance. I approached the site you mention. However, I notice the word SOR (I have bolded it) though this person is not on SOPO. Is it a mistake or not? Could you please clarify

"This isn't overriding the SHPO, it's something different. They said it wasn't a breach of the SHPO, because it wasn't. However, the one-size-fits-all approach means nobody on the SOR can have contact with children regardless of what might be on their SHPO/SOPO, which is a matter for the police to pass to child services to consider. These situations can sometimes require written consent from the parent/guardian."


There is nothing in the notification requirements of being on the SOR that says you have to report all contact with any child. However, the police has a separate duty of safeguarding, and this is one they can pass to social services, so they can always say they're just doing their job. Because they see everyone on the SOR as all being the same, they will probably report any contact with an under-18 to social services, even if the person's offence involved a much older person of a different gender. They would see it in the same light as a report from a "concerned neighbour" about child neglect or cruelty, except in this case they don't have to do any investigation themselves.

  I'm having difficulty in posting the following, so I will try again.
Dear Suprembeing. I am sorry to bother you once again, as I found the advice and information you have been giving me. Incidentally, I made a small contribution to Unlock about two weeks ago and intend to make more in the near future. 
Firstly re my friendship with a family friend who have young children;  the PPU and Social Services visited my friend’s house but he was not in so they left a card to phone them which he did as soon as he came back home, ( soon afterwards they came), and he answered satisfactorily to all the question the PPU officer asked and they said that they would o longer be contacting them.  
Now a request on another matter  As I previously mentioned that the PPU Superintendent is reconsidering my SOR removal application as in his original determination there were a few fatal mistakes. When I pointed it out, he accepted at least one mistake and decided to reconsider my application but invited to attend a voluntary Polygraph Test.  Its result will have an impact on my case. But I will have to wait for up to 28 days to get a copy of it. So I won’t have a chance to defend myself against any negative polygraph report’s comments, as my reconsideration will already be underway. Only I can guess that the examiner said I was being dishonest when I said NO  to the question that if I ever had any unsupervised contact a with children u/16. I pointed her out that I was telling the truth and anyway I have no restrictions on me to not have any unsupervised contact.  Also, she mentioned out that the test was 85 t0 95 per cent correct. In reply, I commented that in school and colleges the students can pass a test with flying colours even when they get 75 to 80 per cent answers correct. To this comment, she concluded as that I had I lied at least once.
In addition to my original application to come off the reregister, which was declined, I want to send an additional application commenting on Grounds the PPU Superintendent gave for the rejection. But I won’t have a chance to say in my defence to any adverse comments made on the Polygraph results.  Could  I please have our advice on this matter?


Hi
I wasn't sure if you was asking AB2014 for further advice but I thought I'd reply on my info.
I am pleased the SS outcome was as you hoped and I hope your friend and his family remain that, supportive friends. A bit of advice I would give is that you ensure you manage any future "scenarios" in a way that protects you . Always bear in mine what someone else might suggest when viewing the interaction from a distance.
On the "poly test", I am assuming they offered that as a deterrent; not only being vindictive because you highlighted their errors, but also thinking you wouldn't want to take one. I always remember listening to others saying how they would answer the question "do you love children? Yes or No". When you have been through the turmoil many of us have, you start to think of 101 ways your answer could be misunderstood.

I understand why you replied quoting the "student exams pass marks"  but I feel they can take comments like that in the same way they say someone is in "denial" when they quote mitigation reasons. As an excuse to hide something. I would suggest not to speak those type of replies in future. Remember they have probably undertook the test many times and heard everything before and could be cynical.
In regards to commenting on the errors made by the Police in your previous application, remember there is always the possibility that they could be taken as you suggesting they are incompetent and therefore not received well. The use of a solicitor would be wise to highlight those issues, as their words are received in a more acceptable manner. In fact they may even suggest you do not bother mentioning it and then you may get a more sympathetic reaction from them due to you not trying to embarrass them to the Judge.  
Finally on not knowing the results of the test,  the use of a solicitor may gain the support for holding the hearing after the test results have been made. Otherwise I would just word a sentence in a positive manner for example: I willingly accepted the offer of a poly test to demonstrate my rehabilitation and positive character . Or something like that. Again I would not chastise the use of them lach I am suggesting. You need their support more if you are alone; hence why something as important as this I have / are using a solicitor. Understanding that the financial restrictions of some, does make this a quality of life v financial balancing decision though.

I wish you luck and look forward to reading other advice to you.

 
Thank you very much for such a piece of long comprehensive advice. I have not even though about the advice you have given.  I made my original application through a  Manchester solicitor whose firm was advertising as a specialist in the sex offences case. But I felt very disappointed with this solicitor. Though my offending manager had informed through an email that my case would be decided within the 3 months period, so is mentioned on a Government website, but he PPU took more than two years to give me a decision.  I tried to contact this solicitor through phone and emails to chase the PPU to expedite. But over the two years from him, I did not receive any phone calls or emails from him. When I would phone his secretary, she would say that she would pass my message on to the solicitor.
Previously I was approached from my then Offending PPU officer, who had drafted the letter and my SOPO was Varied from 5 prohibitions to a single one, and to his own words to a MANAGEABLE LEVEL.   Two years later I got my SOPO discharged totally unopposed by the PPU solicitor, but by some hesitation by the court the magistrates.  Though I had used a local Solicitor, who had admitted that he had not dealt before with any Sex Offences cases, but he would seek advice, if necessary, from his colleagues. So in both cases, he had hardly any work to do. If even now I am not removed from the register, I do not intend to appeal. This is because I might get any press adverse press publicity. I have moved to a new area, and would not like my growing-up child to be told that his father is a paedophile. He is four and a half years old and is my from the second marriage. From my previous marriage, I have 6 grown-up children who have moved far afield where I live. Incidentally in my previous cases, as mentioned above, there was no press reporter in the courtroom, where my csas were decided. But I may not be that lucky third time. And even if the PPU allows me to remove me from the register, I wonder, if the PPU ever find that I have been in contact with children, supervised or unsupervised, they would alert the children services.
And this is not a big deal to remain on the register as I have only to inform at a police station of my foreign travel (which I do once a year) and give my bank and passport details which are almost the same from the day one. I have not ever stayed in a house for more than a few hours, whether there are children present or not.  
As, perhaps, you may have guessed that English is not my first language. I am not as eloquent as you would expect from a native speaker with good qualifications. So,  I will not write directly to any such higher authorities such an important letter. As I have always done previously done I will use a  solicitor, and in the present case to just write a letter.
Thank you once again your continued support with such valuable advice.
PS: I could not read your reply yesterday as I was in the hospital all day and when I came I felt so tired that I went to bed early.


  27 March. Thanks for your another prompt reply.
I forgot to tell you that the PPU visits had reduced to about once a year. When my first review was rejected, the investigating officer had told me that the police visits would stop, they would only contact me now and then over the phone.  As she went back and checked and confirmed that I had only one SOPO breach only in 2005, and not several breaches and that the last was not one in 2015. The breach was for attending a local gym, for which I was given a lighter sentence of rehabilitation order for which the Probation Services had recommended I had to attend a two years sexual offending programme, which I completed successfully.  Had I I not pointed out this factor, I would have remained on SOR on rather easy terms. Now they would not be as kind.   As you mentioned that if you challenge them they could Ivindictive. So that they invited me to attend Polygraph Interview. Also have you any idea what kind of press publicity can I expect t if I appeal in a magistrate the court,  which I want to avoid at any cost. Incidentally, my children with me when I was sentenced. Thanks for giving me details of a competent lawyer, at whose Office I am going to phone tomorrow and asking Andrew to write a letter on my behalf to the  Police Superandent.  
Thanks again for your continued immensely valuable advice.


Forgive my interference but you've touched on a subject I'm interested in.
Theunknown said:
The breach was for attending a local gym
This hits close to home to me as I've been fighting about gyms for a long time.
How did they define you attending a gym as a breach, if you don't mind me asking?



=====
Fighting or Accepting - its difficult to know which is right and when.
Edited
7 Months Ago by Mr W
JASB
JASB
Supreme Being
Supreme Being (14K reputation)Supreme Being (14K reputation)Supreme Being (14K reputation)Supreme Being (14K reputation)Supreme Being (14K reputation)Supreme Being (14K reputation)Supreme Being (14K reputation)Supreme Being (14K reputation)Supreme Being (14K reputation)

Group: Awaiting Activation
Posts: 493, Visits: 747
Mr W - 27 Feb 20 10:06 PM
Theunknown - 27 Feb 20 8:57 PM
Theunknown - 27 Feb 20 12:28 PM
JASB - 26 Feb 20 2:45 PM
Theunknown - 25 Feb 20 6:32 PM
AB2014 - 13 Feb 20 3:15 PM
Theunknown - 13 Feb 20 2:38 PM
AB2014 - 13 Feb 20 11:41 AM
Theunknown - 13 Feb 20 11:11 AM
Theunknown - 6 Feb 20 12:41 PM
AB2014 - 6 Feb 20 8:59 AM
Theunknown - 5 Feb 20 7:24 PM
JASB - 5 Feb 20 3:01 PM
Theunknown - 5 Feb 20 10:51 AM
If you are on SOR, as noted from the NARO website, one of the following requirements is:
“If you are living with a child or staying in a household where a child lives for at least 12 hours each day”
However on the Unlock website says that a person on Sex Offender should inform the police if he has stayed in a household for more than 12 hours where a child u/18 lives.
Which one is correct?
Also the PPU has never informed me about this requirement? I was put on SOR in 1999.

Polygraph Interview.  My application for SOR discharge was rejected by the PPU HQ giving false reasons. When I pointed out this to them, the PPU HQ invalidated their decision admitting the mistakes and have decided to reconsider, No apologies, but has made it more difficult for me by INVITING me to attend a polygraph interview. Note: Polygraph tests, being very unreliable,(a report from Wikipedia) are not admissible in the UK Criminal Courts. But can carry some weight in a civil court setting in a criminal court, which could apply in my case. 
I feel very nervous about it and suffer many medical conditions which can affect the test. I have informed the PPQ HQ about these conditions. A week has gone, still, I have not received a reply, Shall I go ahead with the test, bearing in mind I am not required to take the polygraph interview. 
A reply to the above two questions will be highly appreciated.


Hi,
First and most important the fact is that websites are not always up to date and like many aspects of legal life, it is the writers interpretation of the legal wording - unless it is a cut and paste from a government document and than as long as that is the latest version lol.
A SOPO condition does not have to be in place as it comes under the term of "public protection", and as interviews are not recorded, there is no constraining of their questions if they wish. Its is suggested that these sort of questions come under the heading of "risk assessment" as well.
In my experience any sex offender when visited will be asked about family and relationships. If either or both exist, the conversation is expanded to include contact with children, even if they are extended family members.
As mentioned, Social Services would be contacted unless the PPU felt there was no risk. Be aware that from my experience, that decision can differ between PPU officers and constabularies.
If you have always ensured you have not broken any of their rules and kept the PPU informed of your consequences, then you should not worry.

Polygraph:
I would seek legal advice.
The Government / Media response after the Jeremy Kyle escapade, highlighted the concern that many psychologists are strongly opinionated about there accuracy as many are stating they are not. The same concerns have also been raised - after the recent terrorist atrocities - by the Government and experts.  
You have mentioned you informed them of your medical health concerns, which could be seen as a avoidance tactic so why not take a positive and co-operative approach?
Possibly consider / offer to undertake an independent psychologists assessment instead because of the expert accuracy concerns.

I hope this helps in some small way - keeps us informed and wish you success.
“As advised by you in the first paragraph of your post, I have gone through the Govt. Website but I can't find anywhere having resided/stayed for more than 12 hours where a child under 18 lives. Kindly correct me if I have misunderstood their information
  http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/42/part/2/crossheading/notification-requirements
Changes to legislation:
Sexual Offences Act 2003, Cross Heading: Notificationrequirements is up to date with all changes known to be in force on or before05 February 2020. There are changes that may be brought into force at a future date. Changes that have been made appear in the content and are referenced with annotations.
his having resided or stayed, for a qualifying period, at any premises in the United Kingdom the address of which has not been notified to the police under section 83(1), this subsection, or section 2 of the SexOffenders Act 1997,
 (6)In this section, “qualifying period” means—
(a)a period of 7 days, or
(b)two or more periods, in any period of 12 months, which taken together amount to 7 days.




Well, the Sexual Offences Act 2003 was updated by The Sexual Offences Act 2003 (Notification Requirements) (England and Wales) Regulations 2012. Section 10 of those regulations says that:

"10.—(1) The information set out in paragraph (2) is prescribed for the purposes of section 83(5)(h) of the 2003 Act in a case where a relevant offender (R) resides, or stays for a period of at least 12 hours, at a relevant household."

Section 2 says:


“relevant household” means a household or other place—
(a)where a child resides or stays, and
(b)to which the public do not have access (whether for payment or not)."

That seems to agree with the Unlock information. PPU won't tell you about this requirement, as the question should be asked every time you register, and they should then tell you to notify them if any of the information you have given them changes.

Thanks, Supremebeing. You seem to be a Suprmebeing as you are a goldmine of information on questions like mine.


Hello, here I am again. Thanks once again for your continued advice. As I mentioned before I was going to attend a Polygraph Test which I did. The questions were asked similar to those you mentioned that I might be asked. At the end of the test, the examiner said that that she did not believe that I had no unsupervised contacts with children u/16, which I never even I had nor was there any court order placed on me not to have any contacts with u/16. She was accompanied by a Police Officer who stayed outside the test room. However, at the end of the test, the examiner asked me to wait as she was going to see if the police officer who had come with her had any questions to ask, which she decided not to. I was given a sheet of the examiner and the police officer phone numbers if I had any questions had to ask later on. After coming back home I phoned the police officer asking that if that the examiner's comments would affect my SOR Removal application, which was going to be reconsidered. She was very sympathetic saying not to worry too much about it that just only the test results would have not have too much impact on me my reconsidered SOR removal application. The PPU Superintendent took this action when I had pointed out to my investigating officer that there were some fatal mistakes in the original determination. So my first worry is that if the examiner's comments would affect my SOR second review? Please, What are your comments about this issue?
2. I told the examiner that I had a resiprical visit every 3-4 months with a family friend coming with children but except Saying a Hello, I that hardly ever spoke to them and they are very shy anyway and there were always parents present there. However, I added that at one occasion the father went outside for about 20 minutes so I left the sitting room and went upstairs in case the mother popped into the kitchen. She asked what would I do if that happened again, I told that I would go out with him.
My second worry is that examiner would report these visits to the Police and they might alert the Social Services and they would be visiting with the Police to my friend’s house and the Social Service asking to sign an undertaking with them for not have any contact with me when there are their children are present. They are our very close friends and us, and especially, my wife won’t like to lose contact with them. If the Police ask me their address, am I under any legal obligation to do so, as I have no order placed on me for not to have any contact with u/16 years old children?
All the advice on these issues will be highly appreciated

There's something like this going on in a separate discussion. The problem is that the police define unsupervised as "not supervised by one of the police, probation or social services". The fact that the parents are present is not always taken into account.

  Thanks for your guidance. I approached the site you mention. However, I notice the word SOR (I have bolded it) though this person is not on SOPO. Is it a mistake or not? Could you please clarify

"This isn't overriding the SHPO, it's something different. They said it wasn't a breach of the SHPO, because it wasn't. However, the one-size-fits-all approach means nobody on the SOR can have contact with children regardless of what might be on their SHPO/SOPO, which is a matter for the police to pass to child services to consider. These situations can sometimes require written consent from the parent/guardian."


There is nothing in the notification requirements of being on the SOR that says you have to report all contact with any child. However, the police has a separate duty of safeguarding, and this is one they can pass to social services, so they can always say they're just doing their job. Because they see everyone on the SOR as all being the same, they will probably report any contact with an under-18 to social services, even if the person's offence involved a much older person of a different gender. They would see it in the same light as a report from a "concerned neighbour" about child neglect or cruelty, except in this case they don't have to do any investigation themselves.

  I'm having difficulty in posting the following, so I will try again.
Dear Suprembeing. I am sorry to bother you once again, as I found the advice and information you have been giving me. Incidentally, I made a small contribution to Unlock about two weeks ago and intend to make more in the near future. 
Firstly re my friendship with a family friend who have young children;  the PPU and Social Services visited my friend’s house but he was not in so they left a card to phone them which he did as soon as he came back home, ( soon afterwards they came), and he answered satisfactorily to all the question the PPU officer asked and they said that they would o longer be contacting them.  
Now a request on another matter  As I previously mentioned that the PPU Superintendent is reconsidering my SOR removal application as in his original determination there were a few fatal mistakes. When I pointed it out, he accepted at least one mistake and decided to reconsider my application but invited to attend a voluntary Polygraph Test.  Its result will have an impact on my case. But I will have to wait for up to 28 days to get a copy of it. So I won’t have a chance to defend myself against any negative polygraph report’s comments, as my reconsideration will already be underway. Only I can guess that the examiner said I was being dishonest when I said NO  to the question that if I ever had any unsupervised contact a with children u/16. I pointed her out that I was telling the truth and anyway I have no restrictions on me to not have any unsupervised contact.  Also, she mentioned out that the test was 85 t0 95 per cent correct. In reply, I commented that in school and colleges the students can pass a test with flying colours even when they get 75 to 80 per cent answers correct. To this comment, she concluded as that I had I lied at least once.
In addition to my original application to come off the reregister, which was declined, I want to send an additional application commenting on Grounds the PPU Superintendent gave for the rejection. But I won’t have a chance to say in my defence to any adverse comments made on the Polygraph results.  Could  I please have our advice on this matter?


Hi
I wasn't sure if you was asking AB2014 for further advice but I thought I'd reply on my info.
I am pleased the SS outcome was as you hoped and I hope your friend and his family remain that, supportive friends. A bit of advice I would give is that you ensure you manage any future "scenarios" in a way that protects you . Always bear in mine what someone else might suggest when viewing the interaction from a distance.
On the "poly test", I am assuming they offered that as a deterrent; not only being vindictive because you highlighted their errors, but also thinking you wouldn't want to take one. I always remember listening to others saying how they would answer the question "do you love children? Yes or No". When you have been through the turmoil many of us have, you start to think of 101 ways your answer could be misunderstood.

I understand why you replied quoting the "student exams pass marks"  but I feel they can take comments like that in the same way they say someone is in "denial" when they quote mitigation reasons. As an excuse to hide something. I would suggest not to speak those type of replies in future. Remember they have probably undertook the test many times and heard everything before and could be cynical.
In regards to commenting on the errors made by the Police in your previous application, remember there is always the possibility that they could be taken as you suggesting they are incompetent and therefore not received well. The use of a solicitor would be wise to highlight those issues, as their words are received in a more acceptable manner. In fact they may even suggest you do not bother mentioning it and then you may get a more sympathetic reaction from them due to you not trying to embarrass them to the Judge.  
Finally on not knowing the results of the test,  the use of a solicitor may gain the support for holding the hearing after the test results have been made. Otherwise I would just word a sentence in a positive manner for example: I willingly accepted the offer of a poly test to demonstrate my rehabilitation and positive character . Or something like that. Again I would not chastise the use of them lach I am suggesting. You need their support more if you are alone; hence why something as important as this I have / are using a solicitor. Understanding that the financial restrictions of some, does make this a quality of life v financial balancing decision though.

I wish you luck and look forward to reading other advice to you.

 
Thank you very much for such a piece of long comprehensive advice. I have not even though about the advice you have given.  I made my original application through a  Manchester solicitor whose firm was advertising as a specialist in the sex offences case. But I felt very disappointed with this solicitor. Though my offending manager had informed through an email that my case would be decided within the 3 months period, so is mentioned on a Government website, but he PPU took more than two years to give me a decision.  I tried to contact this solicitor through phone and emails to chase the PPU to expedite. But over the two years from him, I did not receive any phone calls or emails from him. When I would phone his secretary, she would say that she would pass my message on to the solicitor.
Previously I was approached from my then Offending PPU officer, who had drafted the letter and my SOPO was Varied from 5 prohibitions to a single one, and to his own words to a MANAGEABLE LEVEL.   Two years later I got my SOPO discharged totally unopposed by the PPU solicitor, but by some hesitation by the court the magistrates.  Though I had used a local Solicitor, who had admitted that he had not dealt before with any Sex Offences cases, but he would seek advice, if necessary, from his colleagues. So in both cases, he had hardly any work to do. If even now I am not removed from the register, I do not intend to appeal. This is because I might get any press adverse press publicity. I have moved to a new area, and would not like my growing-up child to be told that his father is a paedophile. He is four and a half years old and is my from the second marriage. From my previous marriage, I have 6 grown-up children who have moved far afield where I live. Incidentally in my previous cases, as mentioned above, there was no press reporter in the courtroom, where my csas were decided. But I may not be that lucky third time. And even if the PPU allows me to remove me from the register, I wonder, if the PPU ever find that I have been in contact with children, supervised or unsupervised, they would alert the children services.
And this is not a big deal to remain on the register as I have only to inform at a police station of my foreign travel (which I do once a year) and give my bank and passport details which are almost the same from the day one. I have not ever stayed in a house for more than a few hours, whether there are children present or not.  
As, perhaps, you may have guessed that English is not my first language. I am not as eloquent as you would expect from a native speaker with good qualifications. So,  I will not write directly to any such higher authorities such an important letter. As I have always done previously done I will use a  solicitor, and in the present case to just write a letter.
Thank you once again your continued support with such valuable advice.
PS: I could not read your reply yesterday as I was in the hospital all day and when I came I felt so tired that I went to bed early.


  27 March. Thanks for your another prompt reply.
I forgot to tell you that the PPU visits had reduced to about once a year. When my first review was rejected, the investigating officer had told me that the police visits would stop, they would only contact me now and then over the phone.  As she went back and checked and confirmed that I had only one SOPO breach only in 2005, and not several breaches and that the last was not one in 2015. The breach was for attending a local gym, for which I was given a lighter sentence of rehabilitation order for which the Probation Services had recommended I had to attend a two years sexual offending programme, which I completed successfully.  Had I I not pointed out this factor, I would have remained on SOR on rather easy terms. Now they would not be as kind.   As you mentioned that if you challenge them they could Ivindictive. So that they invited me to attend Polygraph Interview. Also have you any idea what kind of press publicity can I expect t if I appeal in a magistrate the court,  which I want to avoid at any cost. Incidentally, my children with me when I was sentenced. Thanks for giving me details of a competent lawyer, at whose Office I am going to phone tomorrow and asking Andrew to write a letter on my behalf to the  Police Superandent.  
Thanks again for your continued immensely valuable advice.


Forgive my interference but you've touched on a subject I'm interested in. You said:
The breach was for attending a local gym
This hits close to home to me as I've been fighting about gyms for a long time.
How did they define you attending a gym as a breach, if you don't mind me asking?


Hi Mr W,
My experience on the "gym" subject comes from discussions with both the PPU and Probation Office.
In brief they wanted to ensure no one under 16 years of age attended, i.e. not a family orientated facility. However I personally believe that as I did not have any SOPO etc restrictions concerning this activity, it was more of wanting to stop me from continuing with a pre-offence activity to see my reaction. In the end I found an adult gym - more common and the sort I prefer anyways.
Hope this helps.

Learn from yesterday, live for today, hope is for tomorrow else what is left if you remove a mans hope.
JASB
JASB
Supreme Being
Supreme Being (14K reputation)Supreme Being (14K reputation)Supreme Being (14K reputation)Supreme Being (14K reputation)Supreme Being (14K reputation)Supreme Being (14K reputation)Supreme Being (14K reputation)Supreme Being (14K reputation)Supreme Being (14K reputation)

Group: Awaiting Activation
Posts: 493, Visits: 747
Theunknown - 27 Feb 20 8:57 PM
Theunknown - 27 Feb 20 12:28 PM
JASB - 26 Feb 20 2:45 PM
Theunknown - 25 Feb 20 6:32 PM
AB2014 - 13 Feb 20 3:15 PM
Theunknown - 13 Feb 20 2:38 PM
AB2014 - 13 Feb 20 11:41 AM
Theunknown - 13 Feb 20 11:11 AM
Theunknown - 6 Feb 20 12:41 PM
AB2014 - 6 Feb 20 8:59 AM
Theunknown - 5 Feb 20 7:24 PM
JASB - 5 Feb 20 3:01 PM
Theunknown - 5 Feb 20 10:51 AM
If you are on SOR, as noted from the NARO website, one of the following requirements is:
“If you are living with a child or staying in a household where a child lives for at least 12 hours each day”
However on the Unlock website says that a person on Sex Offender should inform the police if he has stayed in a household for more than 12 hours where a child u/18 lives.
Which one is correct?
Also the PPU has never informed me about this requirement? I was put on SOR in 1999.

Polygraph Interview.  My application for SOR discharge was rejected by the PPU HQ giving false reasons. When I pointed out this to them, the PPU HQ invalidated their decision admitting the mistakes and have decided to reconsider, No apologies, but has made it more difficult for me by INVITING me to attend a polygraph interview. Note: Polygraph tests, being very unreliable,(a report from Wikipedia) are not admissible in the UK Criminal Courts. But can carry some weight in a civil court setting in a criminal court, which could apply in my case. 
I feel very nervous about it and suffer many medical conditions which can affect the test. I have informed the PPQ HQ about these conditions. A week has gone, still, I have not received a reply, Shall I go ahead with the test, bearing in mind I am not required to take the polygraph interview. 
A reply to the above two questions will be highly appreciated.


Hi,
First and most important the fact is that websites are not always up to date and like many aspects of legal life, it is the writers interpretation of the legal wording - unless it is a cut and paste from a government document and than as long as that is the latest version lol.
A SOPO condition does not have to be in place as it comes under the term of "public protection", and as interviews are not recorded, there is no constraining of their questions if they wish. Its is suggested that these sort of questions come under the heading of "risk assessment" as well.
In my experience any sex offender when visited will be asked about family and relationships. If either or both exist, the conversation is expanded to include contact with children, even if they are extended family members.
As mentioned, Social Services would be contacted unless the PPU felt there was no risk. Be aware that from my experience, that decision can differ between PPU officers and constabularies.
If you have always ensured you have not broken any of their rules and kept the PPU informed of your consequences, then you should not worry.

Polygraph:
I would seek legal advice.
The Government / Media response after the Jeremy Kyle escapade, highlighted the concern that many psychologists are strongly opinionated about there accuracy as many are stating they are not. The same concerns have also been raised - after the recent terrorist atrocities - by the Government and experts.  
You have mentioned you informed them of your medical health concerns, which could be seen as a avoidance tactic so why not take a positive and co-operative approach?
Possibly consider / offer to undertake an independent psychologists assessment instead because of the expert accuracy concerns.

I hope this helps in some small way - keeps us informed and wish you success.
“As advised by you in the first paragraph of your post, I have gone through the Govt. Website but I can't find anywhere having resided/stayed for more than 12 hours where a child under 18 lives. Kindly correct me if I have misunderstood their information
  http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/42/part/2/crossheading/notification-requirements
Changes to legislation:
Sexual Offences Act 2003, Cross Heading: Notificationrequirements is up to date with all changes known to be in force on or before05 February 2020. There are changes that may be brought into force at a future date. Changes that have been made appear in the content and are referenced with annotations.
his having resided or stayed, for a qualifying period, at any premises in the United Kingdom the address of which has not been notified to the police under section 83(1), this subsection, or section 2 of the SexOffenders Act 1997,
 (6)In this section, “qualifying period” means—
(a)a period of 7 days, or
(b)two or more periods, in any period of 12 months, which taken together amount to 7 days.




Well, the Sexual Offences Act 2003 was updated by The Sexual Offences Act 2003 (Notification Requirements) (England and Wales) Regulations 2012. Section 10 of those regulations says that:

"10.—(1) The information set out in paragraph (2) is prescribed for the purposes of section 83(5)(h) of the 2003 Act in a case where a relevant offender (R) resides, or stays for a period of at least 12 hours, at a relevant household."

Section 2 says:


“relevant household” means a household or other place—
(a)where a child resides or stays, and
(b)to which the public do not have access (whether for payment or not)."

That seems to agree with the Unlock information. PPU won't tell you about this requirement, as the question should be asked every time you register, and they should then tell you to notify them if any of the information you have given them changes.

Thanks, Supremebeing. You seem to be a Suprmebeing as you are a goldmine of information on questions like mine.


Hello, here I am again. Thanks once again for your continued advice. As I mentioned before I was going to attend a Polygraph Test which I did. The questions were asked similar to those you mentioned that I might be asked. At the end of the test, the examiner said that that she did not believe that I had no unsupervised contacts with children u/16, which I never even I had nor was there any court order placed on me not to have any contacts with u/16. She was accompanied by a Police Officer who stayed outside the test room. However, at the end of the test, the examiner asked me to wait as she was going to see if the police officer who had come with her had any questions to ask, which she decided not to. I was given a sheet of the examiner and the police officer phone numbers if I had any questions had to ask later on. After coming back home I phoned the police officer asking that if that the examiner's comments would affect my SOR Removal application, which was going to be reconsidered. She was very sympathetic saying not to worry too much about it that just only the test results would have not have too much impact on me my reconsidered SOR removal application. The PPU Superintendent took this action when I had pointed out to my investigating officer that there were some fatal mistakes in the original determination. So my first worry is that if the examiner's comments would affect my SOR second review? Please, What are your comments about this issue?
2. I told the examiner that I had a resiprical visit every 3-4 months with a family friend coming with children but except Saying a Hello, I that hardly ever spoke to them and they are very shy anyway and there were always parents present there. However, I added that at one occasion the father went outside for about 20 minutes so I left the sitting room and went upstairs in case the mother popped into the kitchen. She asked what would I do if that happened again, I told that I would go out with him.
My second worry is that examiner would report these visits to the Police and they might alert the Social Services and they would be visiting with the Police to my friend’s house and the Social Service asking to sign an undertaking with them for not have any contact with me when there are their children are present. They are our very close friends and us, and especially, my wife won’t like to lose contact with them. If the Police ask me their address, am I under any legal obligation to do so, as I have no order placed on me for not to have any contact with u/16 years old children?
All the advice on these issues will be highly appreciated

There's something like this going on in a separate discussion. The problem is that the police define unsupervised as "not supervised by one of the police, probation or social services". The fact that the parents are present is not always taken into account.

  Thanks for your guidance. I approached the site you mention. However, I notice the word SOR (I have bolded it) though this person is not on SOPO. Is it a mistake or not? Could you please clarify

"This isn't overriding the SHPO, it's something different. They said it wasn't a breach of the SHPO, because it wasn't. However, the one-size-fits-all approach means nobody on the SOR can have contact with children regardless of what might be on their SHPO/SOPO, which is a matter for the police to pass to child services to consider. These situations can sometimes require written consent from the parent/guardian."


There is nothing in the notification requirements of being on the SOR that says you have to report all contact with any child. However, the police has a separate duty of safeguarding, and this is one they can pass to social services, so they can always say they're just doing their job. Because they see everyone on the SOR as all being the same, they will probably report any contact with an under-18 to social services, even if the person's offence involved a much older person of a different gender. They would see it in the same light as a report from a "concerned neighbour" about child neglect or cruelty, except in this case they don't have to do any investigation themselves.

  I'm having difficulty in posting the following, so I will try again.
Dear Suprembeing. I am sorry to bother you once again, as I found the advice and information you have been giving me. Incidentally, I made a small contribution to Unlock about two weeks ago and intend to make more in the near future. 
Firstly re my friendship with a family friend who have young children;  the PPU and Social Services visited my friend’s house but he was not in so they left a card to phone them which he did as soon as he came back home, ( soon afterwards they came), and he answered satisfactorily to all the question the PPU officer asked and they said that they would o longer be contacting them.  
Now a request on another matter  As I previously mentioned that the PPU Superintendent is reconsidering my SOR removal application as in his original determination there were a few fatal mistakes. When I pointed it out, he accepted at least one mistake and decided to reconsider my application but invited to attend a voluntary Polygraph Test.  Its result will have an impact on my case. But I will have to wait for up to 28 days to get a copy of it. So I won’t have a chance to defend myself against any negative polygraph report’s comments, as my reconsideration will already be underway. Only I can guess that the examiner said I was being dishonest when I said NO  to the question that if I ever had any unsupervised contact a with children u/16. I pointed her out that I was telling the truth and anyway I have no restrictions on me to not have any unsupervised contact.  Also, she mentioned out that the test was 85 t0 95 per cent correct. In reply, I commented that in school and colleges the students can pass a test with flying colours even when they get 75 to 80 per cent answers correct. To this comment, she concluded as that I had I lied at least once.
In addition to my original application to come off the reregister, which was declined, I want to send an additional application commenting on Grounds the PPU Superintendent gave for the rejection. But I won’t have a chance to say in my defence to any adverse comments made on the Polygraph results.  Could  I please have our advice on this matter?


Hi
I wasn't sure if you was asking AB2014 for further advice but I thought I'd reply on my info.
I am pleased the SS outcome was as you hoped and I hope your friend and his family remain that, supportive friends. A bit of advice I would give is that you ensure you manage any future "scenarios" in a way that protects you . Always bear in mine what someone else might suggest when viewing the interaction from a distance.
On the "poly test", I am assuming they offered that as a deterrent; not only being vindictive because you highlighted their errors, but also thinking you wouldn't want to take one. I always remember listening to others saying how they would answer the question "do you love children? Yes or No". When you have been through the turmoil many of us have, you start to think of 101 ways your answer could be misunderstood.

I understand why you replied quoting the "student exams pass marks"  but I feel they can take comments like that in the same way they say someone is in "denial" when they quote mitigation reasons. As an excuse to hide something. I would suggest not to speak those type of replies in future. Remember they have probably undertook the test many times and heard everything before and could be cynical.
In regards to commenting on the errors made by the Police in your previous application, remember there is always the possibility that they could be taken as you suggesting they are incompetent and therefore not received well. The use of a solicitor would be wise to highlight those issues, as their words are received in a more acceptable manner. In fact they may even suggest you do not bother mentioning it and then you may get a more sympathetic reaction from them due to you not trying to embarrass them to the Judge.  
Finally on not knowing the results of the test,  the use of a solicitor may gain the support for holding the hearing after the test results have been made. Otherwise I would just word a sentence in a positive manner for example: I willingly accepted the offer of a poly test to demonstrate my rehabilitation and positive character . Or something like that. Again I would not chastise the use of them lach I am suggesting. You need their support more if you are alone; hence why something as important as this I have / are using a solicitor. Understanding that the financial restrictions of some, does make this a quality of life v financial balancing decision though.

I wish you luck and look forward to reading other advice to you.

 
Thank you very much for such a piece of long comprehensive advice. I have not even though about the advice you have given.  I made my original application through a  Manchester solicitor whose firm was advertising as a specialist in the sex offences case. But I felt very disappointed with this solicitor. Though my offending manager had informed through an email that my case would be decided within the 3 months period, so is mentioned on a Government website, but he PPU took more than two years to give me a decision.  I tried to contact this solicitor through phone and emails to chase the PPU to expedite. But over the two years from him, I did not receive any phone calls or emails from him. When I would phone his secretary, she would say that she would pass my message on to the solicitor.
Previously I was approached from my then Offending PPU officer, who had drafted the letter and my SOPO was Varied from 5 prohibitions to a single one, and to his own words to a MANAGEABLE LEVEL.   Two years later I got my SOPO discharged totally unopposed by the PPU solicitor, but by some hesitation by the court the magistrates.  Though I had used a local Solicitor, who had admitted that he had not dealt before with any Sex Offences cases, but he would seek advice, if necessary, from his colleagues. So in both cases, he had hardly any work to do. If even now I am not removed from the register, I do not intend to appeal. This is because I might get any press adverse press publicity. I have moved to a new area, and would not like my growing-up child to be told that his father is a paedophile. He is four and a half years old and is my from the second marriage. From my previous marriage, I have 6 grown-up children who have moved far afield where I live. Incidentally in my previous cases, as mentioned above, there was no press reporter in the courtroom, where my csas were decided. But I may not be that lucky third time. And even if the PPU allows me to remove me from the register, I wonder, if the PPU ever find that I have been in contact with children, supervised or unsupervised, they would alert the children services.
And this is not a big deal to remain on the register as I have only to inform at a police station of my foreign travel (which I do once a year) and give my bank and passport details which are almost the same from the day one. I have not ever stayed in a house for more than a few hours, whether there are children present or not.  
As, perhaps, you may have guessed that English is not my first language. I am not as eloquent as you would expect from a native speaker with good qualifications. So,  I will not write directly to any such higher authorities such an important letter. As I have always done previously done I will use a  solicitor, and in the present case to just write a letter.
Thank you once again your continued support with such valuable advice.
PS: I could not read your reply yesterday as I was in the hospital all day and when I came I felt so tired that I went to bed early.


  27 March. Thanks for your another prompt reply.
I forgot to tell you that the PPU visits had reduced to about once a year. When my first review was rejected, the investigating officer had told me that the police visits would stop, they would only contact me now and then over the phone.  As she went back and checked and confirmed that I had only one SOPO breach only in 2005, and not several breaches and that the last was not one in 2015. The breach was for attending a local gym, for which I was given a lighter sentence of rehabilitation order for which the Probation Services had recommended I had to attend a two years sexual offending programme, which I completed successfully.  Had I I not pointed out this factor, I would have remained on SOR on rather easy terms. Now they would not be as kind.   As you mentioned that if you challenge them they could Ivindictive. So that they invited me to attend Polygraph Interview. Also have you any idea what kind of press publicity can I expect t if I appeal in a magistrate the court,  which I want to avoid at any cost. Incidentally, my children with me when I was sentenced. Thanks for giving me details of a competent lawyer, at whose Office I am going to phone tomorrow and asking Andrew to write a letter on my behalf to the  Police Superandent.  
Thanks again for your continued immensely valuable advice.


Hi The unkown,
I have written previously that my sentencing/appeal Court has decided all applications are held in open court with media restrictions whether your appeal is supported or not supported by the Police.
My initial SOPO conditions removal applications were supported by the Police and so I did not have to appear in Court. However my last application concerned 1 and was supported but the Court now requires an appearance to be required. As your application is for the SOR I think you would appear, sorry.
I did contact the Court officers about the media and they suggested as my case was old, they did not think the media would attend.
I would suggest you contact the Court Office and ask them the question about media.
Good luck

Learn from yesterday, live for today, hope is for tomorrow else what is left if you remove a mans hope.
Was
Was
Supreme Being
Supreme Being (1.5K reputation)Supreme Being (1.5K reputation)Supreme Being (1.5K reputation)Supreme Being (1.5K reputation)Supreme Being (1.5K reputation)Supreme Being (1.5K reputation)Supreme Being (1.5K reputation)Supreme Being (1.5K reputation)Supreme Being (1.5K reputation)

Group: Forum Members
Posts: 87, Visits: 936
Theunknown - 5 Feb 20 5:13 PM
Harmless - 5 Feb 20 1:39 PM
Theunknown - 5 Feb 20 10:51 AM
If you are on SOR, as noted from the NARO website, one of the following requirements is:
“If you are living with a child or staying in a household where a child lives for at least 12 hours each day”
However on the Unlock website says that a person on Sex Offender should inform the police if he has stayed in a household for more than 12 hours where a child u/18 lives.
Which one is correct?

My SOR conditions (as presented to me in the paperwork and the intro talk) say nothing about children one way or the other. 

Children are just a subsidiary concept in the sense that if cops come visit you and see you're living with children, they might invoke child services.


Same here. I was only verbally asked to provide my bank details, which I did. Thanks for your reply. 



Theunknown
Theunknown
Supreme Being
Supreme Being (1.2K reputation)Supreme Being (1.2K reputation)Supreme Being (1.2K reputation)Supreme Being (1.2K reputation)Supreme Being (1.2K reputation)Supreme Being (1.2K reputation)Supreme Being (1.2K reputation)Supreme Being (1.2K reputation)Supreme Being (1.2K reputation)

Group: Forum Members
Posts: 24, Visits: 36
JASB - 28 Feb 20 2:36 PM
Theunknown - 27 Feb 20 8:57 PM
Theunknown - 27 Feb 20 12:28 PM
JASB - 26 Feb 20 2:45 PM
Theunknown - 25 Feb 20 6:32 PM
AB2014 - 13 Feb 20 3:15 PM
Theunknown - 13 Feb 20 2:38 PM
AB2014 - 13 Feb 20 11:41 AM
Theunknown - 13 Feb 20 11:11 AM
Theunknown - 6 Feb 20 12:41 PM
AB2014 - 6 Feb 20 8:59 AM
Theunknown - 5 Feb 20 7:24 PM
JASB - 5 Feb 20 3:01 PM
Theunknown - 5 Feb 20 10:51 AM
If you are on SOR, as noted from the NARO website, one of the following requirements is:
“If you are living with a child or staying in a household where a child lives for at least 12 hours each day”
However on the Unlock website says that a person on Sex Offender should inform the police if he has stayed in a household for more than 12 hours where a child u/18 lives.
Which one is correct?
Also the PPU has never informed me about this requirement? I was put on SOR in 1999.

Polygraph Interview.  My application for SOR discharge was rejected by the PPU HQ giving false reasons. When I pointed out this to them, the PPU HQ invalidated their decision admitting the mistakes and have decided to reconsider, No apologies, but has made it more difficult for me by INVITING me to attend a polygraph interview. Note: Polygraph tests, being very unreliable,(a report from Wikipedia) are not admissible in the UK Criminal Courts. But can carry some weight in a civil court setting in a criminal court, which could apply in my case. 
I feel very nervous about it and suffer many medical conditions which can affect the test. I have informed the PPQ HQ about these conditions. A week has gone, still, I have not received a reply, Shall I go ahead with the test, bearing in mind I am not required to take the polygraph interview. 
A reply to the above two questions will be highly appreciated.


Hi,
First and most important the fact is that websites are not always up to date and like many aspects of legal life, it is the writers interpretation of the legal wording - unless it is a cut and paste from a government document and than as long as that is the latest version lol.
A SOPO condition does not have to be in place as it comes under the term of "public protection", and as interviews are not recorded, there is no constraining of their questions if they wish. Its is suggested that these sort of questions come under the heading of "risk assessment" as well.
In my experience any sex offender when visited will be asked about family and relationships. If either or both exist, the conversation is expanded to include contact with children, even if they are extended family members.
As mentioned, Social Services would be contacted unless the PPU felt there was no risk. Be aware that from my experience, that decision can differ between PPU officers and constabularies.
If you have always ensured you have not broken any of their rules and kept the PPU informed of your consequences, then you should not worry.

Polygraph:
I would seek legal advice.
The Government / Media response after the Jeremy Kyle escapade, highlighted the concern that many psychologists are strongly opinionated about there accuracy as many are stating they are not. The same concerns have also been raised - after the recent terrorist atrocities - by the Government and experts.  
You have mentioned you informed them of your medical health concerns, which could be seen as a avoidance tactic so why not take a positive and co-operative approach?
Possibly consider / offer to undertake an independent psychologists assessment instead because of the expert accuracy concerns.

I hope this helps in some small way - keeps us informed and wish you success.
“As advised by you in the first paragraph of your post, I have gone through the Govt. Website but I can't find anywhere having resided/stayed for more than 12 hours where a child under 18 lives. Kindly correct me if I have misunderstood their information
  http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/42/part/2/crossheading/notification-requirements
Changes to legislation:
Sexual Offences Act 2003, Cross Heading: Notificationrequirements is up to date with all changes known to be in force on or before05 February 2020. There are changes that may be brought into force at a future date. Changes that have been made appear in the content and are referenced with annotations.
his having resided or stayed, for a qualifying period, at any premises in the United Kingdom the address of which has not been notified to the police under section 83(1), this subsection, or section 2 of the SexOffenders Act 1997,
 (6)In this section, “qualifying period” means—
(a)a period of 7 days, or
(b)two or more periods, in any period of 12 months, which taken together amount to 7 days.




Well, the Sexual Offences Act 2003 was updated by The Sexual Offences Act 2003 (Notification Requirements) (England and Wales) Regulations 2012. Section 10 of those regulations says that:

"10.—(1) The information set out in paragraph (2) is prescribed for the purposes of section 83(5)(h) of the 2003 Act in a case where a relevant offender (R) resides, or stays for a period of at least 12 hours, at a relevant household."

Section 2 says:


“relevant household” means a household or other place—
(a)where a child resides or stays, and
(b)to which the public do not have access (whether for payment or not)."

That seems to agree with the Unlock information. PPU won't tell you about this requirement, as the question should be asked every time you register, and they should then tell you to notify them if any of the information you have given them changes.

Thanks, Supremebeing. You seem to be a Suprmebeing as you are a goldmine of information on questions like mine.


Hello, here I am again. Thanks once again for your continued advice. As I mentioned before I was going to attend a Polygraph Test which I did. The questions were asked similar to those you mentioned that I might be asked. At the end of the test, the examiner said that that she did not believe that I had no unsupervised contacts with children u/16, which I never even I had nor was there any court order placed on me not to have any contacts with u/16. She was accompanied by a Police Officer who stayed outside the test room. However, at the end of the test, the examiner asked me to wait as she was going to see if the police officer who had come with her had any questions to ask, which she decided not to. I was given a sheet of the examiner and the police officer phone numbers if I had any questions had to ask later on. After coming back home I phoned the police officer asking that if that the examiner's comments would affect my SOR Removal application, which was going to be reconsidered. She was very sympathetic saying not to worry too much about it that just only the test results would have not have too much impact on me my reconsidered SOR removal application. The PPU Superintendent took this action when I had pointed out to my investigating officer that there were some fatal mistakes in the original determination. So my first worry is that if the examiner's comments would affect my SOR second review? Please, What are your comments about this issue?
2. I told the examiner that I had a resiprical visit every 3-4 months with a family friend coming with children but except Saying a Hello, I that hardly ever spoke to them and they are very shy anyway and there were always parents present there. However, I added that at one occasion the father went outside for about 20 minutes so I left the sitting room and went upstairs in case the mother popped into the kitchen. She asked what would I do if that happened again, I told that I would go out with him.
My second worry is that examiner would report these visits to the Police and they might alert the Social Services and they would be visiting with the Police to my friend’s house and the Social Service asking to sign an undertaking with them for not have any contact with me when there are their children are present. They are our very close friends and us, and especially, my wife won’t like to lose contact with them. If the Police ask me their address, am I under any legal obligation to do so, as I have no order placed on me for not to have any contact with u/16 years old children?
All the advice on these issues will be highly appreciated

There's something like this going on in a separate discussion. The problem is that the police define unsupervised as "not supervised by one of the police, probation or social services". The fact that the parents are present is not always taken into account.

  Thanks for your guidance. I approached the site you mention. However, I notice the word SOR (I have bolded it) though this person is not on SOPO. Is it a mistake or not? Could you please clarify

"This isn't overriding the SHPO, it's something different. They said it wasn't a breach of the SHPO, because it wasn't. However, the one-size-fits-all approach means nobody on the SOR can have contact with children regardless of what might be on their SHPO/SOPO, which is a matter for the police to pass to child services to consider. These situations can sometimes require written consent from the parent/guardian."


There is nothing in the notification requirements of being on the SOR that says you have to report all contact with any child. However, the police has a separate duty of safeguarding, and this is one they can pass to social services, so they can always say they're just doing their job. Because they see everyone on the SOR as all being the same, they will probably report any contact with an under-18 to social services, even if the person's offence involved a much older person of a different gender. They would see it in the same light as a report from a "concerned neighbour" about child neglect or cruelty, except in this case they don't have to do any investigation themselves.

  I'm having difficulty in posting the following, so I will try again.
Dear Suprembeing. I am sorry to bother you once again, as I found the advice and information you have been giving me. Incidentally, I made a small contribution to Unlock about two weeks ago and intend to make more in the near future. 
Firstly re my friendship with a family friend who have young children;  the PPU and Social Services visited my friend’s house but he was not in so they left a card to phone them which he did as soon as he came back home, ( soon afterwards they came), and he answered satisfactorily to all the question the PPU officer asked and they said that they would o longer be contacting them.  
Now a request on another matter  As I previously mentioned that the PPU Superintendent is reconsidering my SOR removal application as in his original determination there were a few fatal mistakes. When I pointed it out, he accepted at least one mistake and decided to reconsider my application but invited to attend a voluntary Polygraph Test.  Its result will have an impact on my case. But I will have to wait for up to 28 days to get a copy of it. So I won’t have a chance to defend myself against any negative polygraph report’s comments, as my reconsideration will already be underway. Only I can guess that the examiner said I was being dishonest when I said NO  to the question that if I ever had any unsupervised contact a with children u/16. I pointed her out that I was telling the truth and anyway I have no restrictions on me to not have any unsupervised contact.  Also, she mentioned out that the test was 85 t0 95 per cent correct. In reply, I commented that in school and colleges the students can pass a test with flying colours even when they get 75 to 80 per cent answers correct. To this comment, she concluded as that I had I lied at least once.
In addition to my original application to come off the reregister, which was declined, I want to send an additional application commenting on Grounds the PPU Superintendent gave for the rejection. But I won’t have a chance to say in my defence to any adverse comments made on the Polygraph results.  Could  I please have our advice on this matter?


Hi
I wasn't sure if you was asking AB2014 for further advice but I thought I'd reply on my info.
I am pleased the SS outcome was as you hoped and I hope your friend and his family remain that, supportive friends. A bit of advice I would give is that you ensure you manage any future "scenarios" in a way that protects you . Always bear in mine what someone else might suggest when viewing the interaction from a distance.
On the "poly test", I am assuming they offered that as a deterrent; not only being vindictive because you highlighted their errors, but also thinking you wouldn't want to take one. I always remember listening to others saying how they would answer the question "do you love children? Yes or No". When you have been through the turmoil many of us have, you start to think of 101 ways your answer could be misunderstood.

I understand why you replied quoting the "student exams pass marks"  but I feel they can take comments like that in the same way they say someone is in "denial" when they quote mitigation reasons. As an excuse to hide something. I would suggest not to speak those type of replies in future. Remember they have probably undertook the test many times and heard everything before and could be cynical.
In regards to commenting on the errors made by the Police in your previous application, remember there is always the possibility that they could be taken as you suggesting they are incompetent and therefore not received well. The use of a solicitor would be wise to highlight those issues, as their words are received in a more acceptable manner. In fact they may even suggest you do not bother mentioning it and then you may get a more sympathetic reaction from them due to you not trying to embarrass them to the Judge.  
Finally on not knowing the results of the test,  the use of a solicitor may gain the support for holding the hearing after the test results have been made. Otherwise I would just word a sentence in a positive manner for example: I willingly accepted the offer of a poly test to demonstrate my rehabilitation and positive character . Or something like that. Again I would not chastise the use of them lach I am suggesting. You need their support more if you are alone; hence why something as important as this I have / are using a solicitor. Understanding that the financial restrictions of some, does make this a quality of life v financial balancing decision though.

I wish you luck and look forward to reading other advice to you.

 
Thank you very much for such a piece of long comprehensive advice. I have not even though about the advice you have given.  I made my original application through a  Manchester solicitor whose firm was advertising as a specialist in the sex offences case. But I felt very disappointed with this solicitor. Though my offending manager had informed through an email that my case would be decided within the 3 months period, so is mentioned on a Government website, but he PPU took more than two years to give me a decision.  I tried to contact this solicitor through phone and emails to chase the PPU to expedite. But over the two years from him, I did not receive any phone calls or emails from him. When I would phone his secretary, she would say that she would pass my message on to the solicitor.
Previously I was approached from my then Offending PPU officer, who had drafted the letter and my SOPO was Varied from 5 prohibitions to a single one, and to his own words to a MANAGEABLE LEVEL.   Two years later I got my SOPO discharged totally unopposed by the PPU solicitor, but by some hesitation by the court the magistrates.  Though I had used a local Solicitor, who had admitted that he had not dealt before with any Sex Offences cases, but he would seek advice, if necessary, from his colleagues. So in both cases, he had hardly any work to do. If even now I am not removed from the register, I do not intend to appeal. This is because I might get any press adverse press publicity. I have moved to a new area, and would not like my growing-up child to be told that his father is a paedophile. He is four and a half years old and is my from the second marriage. From my previous marriage, I have 6 grown-up children who have moved far afield where I live. Incidentally in my previous cases, as mentioned above, there was no press reporter in the courtroom, where my csas were decided. But I may not be that lucky third time. And even if the PPU allows me to remove me from the register, I wonder, if the PPU ever find that I have been in contact with children, supervised or unsupervised, they would alert the children services.
And this is not a big deal to remain on the register as I have only to inform at a police station of my foreign travel (which I do once a year) and give my bank and passport details which are almost the same from the day one. I have not ever stayed in a house for more than a few hours, whether there are children present or not.  
As, perhaps, you may have guessed that English is not my first language. I am not as eloquent as you would expect from a native speaker with good qualifications. So,  I will not write directly to any such higher authorities such an important letter. As I have always done previously done I will use a  solicitor, and in the present case to just write a letter.
Thank you once again your continued support with such valuable advice.
PS: I could not read your reply yesterday as I was in the hospital all day and when I came I felt so tired that I went to bed early.


  27 March. Thanks for your another prompt reply.
I forgot to tell you that the PPU visits had reduced to about once a year. When my first review was rejected, the investigating officer had told me that the police visits would stop, they would only contact me now and then over the phone.  As she went back and checked and confirmed that I had only one SOPO breach only in 2005, and not several breaches and that the last was not one in 2015. The breach was for attending a local gym, for which I was given a lighter sentence of rehabilitation order for which the Probation Services had recommended I had to attend a two years sexual offending programme, which I completed successfully.  Had I I not pointed out this factor, I would have remained on SOR on rather easy terms. Now they would not be as kind.   As you mentioned that if you challenge them they could Ivindictive. So that they invited me to attend Polygraph Interview. Also have you any idea what kind of press publicity can I expect t if I appeal in a magistrate the court,  which I want to avoid at any cost. Incidentally, my children with me when I was sentenced. Thanks for giving me details of a competent lawyer, at whose Office I am going to phone tomorrow and asking Andrew to write a letter on my behalf to the  Police Superandent.  
Thanks again for your continued immensely valuable advice.


Hi The unkown,
I have written previously that my sentencing/appeal Court has decided all applications are held in open court with media restrictions whether your appeal is supported or not supported by the Police.
My initial SOPO conditions removal applications were supported by the Police and so I did not have to appear in Court. However my last application concerned 1 and was supported but the Court now requires an appearance to be required. As your application is for the SOR I think you would appear, sorry.
I did contact the Court officers about the media and they suggested as my case was old, they did not think the media would attend.
I would suggest you contact the Court Office and ask them the question about media.
Good luck

JASB - 28 Feb 20 2:36 PM
Theunknown - 27 Feb 20 8:57 PM
Theunknown - 27 Feb 20 12:28 PM
JASB - 26 Feb 20 2:45 PM
Theunknown - 25 Feb 20 6:32 PM
AB2014 - 13 Feb 20 3:15 PM
Theunknown - 13 Feb 20 2:38 PM
AB2014 - 13 Feb 20 11:41 AM
Theunknown - 13 Feb 20 11:11 AM
Theunknown - 6 Feb 20 12:41 PM
AB2014 - 6 Feb 20 8:59 AM
Theunknown - 5 Feb 20 7:24 PM
JASB - 5 Feb 20 3:01 PM
Theunknown - 5 Feb 20 10:51 AM
If you are on SOR, as noted from the NARO website, one of the following requirements is:
“If you are living with a child or staying in a household where a child lives for at least 12 hours each day”
However on the Unlock website says that a person on Sex Offender should inform the police if he has stayed in a household for more than 12 hours where a child u/18 lives.
Which one is correct?
Also the PPU has never informed me about this requirement? I was put on SOR in 1999.

Polygraph Interview.  My application for SOR discharge was rejected by the PPU HQ giving false reasons. When I pointed out this to them, the PPU HQ invalidated their decision admitting the mistakes and have decided to reconsider, No apologies, but has made it more difficult for me by INVITING me to attend a polygraph interview. Note: Polygraph tests, being very unreliable,(a report from Wikipedia) are not admissible in the UK Criminal Courts. But can carry some weight in a civil court setting in a criminal court, which could apply in my case. 
I feel very nervous about it and suffer many medical conditions which can affect the test. I have informed the PPQ HQ about these conditions. A week has gone, still, I have not received a reply, Shall I go ahead with the test, bearing in mind I am not required to take the polygraph interview. 
A reply to the above two questions will be highly appreciated.


Hi,
First and most important the fact is that websites are not always up to date and like many aspects of legal life, it is the writers interpretation of the legal wording - unless it is a cut and paste from a government document and than as long as that is the latest version lol.
A SOPO condition does not have to be in place as it comes under the term of "public protection", and as interviews are not recorded, there is no constraining of their questions if they wish. Its is suggested that these sort of questions come under the heading of "risk assessment" as well.
In my experience any sex offender when visited will be asked about family and relationships. If either or both exist, the conversation is expanded to include contact with children, even if they are extended family members.
As mentioned, Social Services would be contacted unless the PPU felt there was no risk. Be aware that from my experience, that decision can differ between PPU officers and constabularies.
If you have always ensured you have not broken any of their rules and kept the PPU informed of your consequences, then you should not worry.

Polygraph:
I would seek legal advice.
The Government / Media response after the Jeremy Kyle escapade, highlighted the concern that many psychologists are strongly opinionated about there accuracy as many are stating they are not. The same concerns have also been raised - after the recent terrorist atrocities - by the Government and experts.  
You have mentioned you informed them of your medical health concerns, which could be seen as a avoidance tactic so why not take a positive and co-operative approach?
Possibly consider / offer to undertake an independent psychologists assessment instead because of the expert accuracy concerns.

I hope this helps in some small way - keeps us informed and wish you success.
“As advised by you in the first paragraph of your post, I have gone through the Govt. Website but I can't find anywhere having resided/stayed for more than 12 hours where a child under 18 lives. Kindly correct me if I have misunderstood their information
  http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/42/part/2/crossheading/notification-requirements
Changes to legislation:
Sexual Offences Act 2003, Cross Heading: Notificationrequirements is up to date with all changes known to be in force on or before05 February 2020. There are changes that may be brought into force at a future date. Changes that have been made appear in the content and are referenced with annotations.
his having resided or stayed, for a qualifying period, at any premises in the United Kingdom the address of which has not been notified to the police under section 83(1), this subsection, or section 2 of the SexOffenders Act 1997,
 (6)In this section, “qualifying period” means—
(a)a period of 7 days, or
(b)two or more periods, in any period of 12 months, which taken together amount to 7 days.




Well, the Sexual Offences Act 2003 was updated by The Sexual Offences Act 2003 (Notification Requirements) (England and Wales) Regulations 2012. Section 10 of those regulations says that:

"10.—(1) The information set out in paragraph (2) is prescribed for the purposes of section 83(5)(h) of the 2003 Act in a case where a relevant offender (R) resides, or stays for a period of at least 12 hours, at a relevant household."

Section 2 says:


“relevant household” means a household or other place—
(a)where a child resides or stays, and
(b)to which the public do not have access (whether for payment or not)."

That seems to agree with the Unlock information. PPU won't tell you about this requirement, as the question should be asked every time you register, and they should then tell you to notify them if any of the information you have given them changes.

Thanks, Supremebeing. You seem to be a Suprmebeing as you are a goldmine of information on questions like mine.


Hello, here I am again. Thanks once again for your continued advice. As I mentioned before I was going to attend a Polygraph Test which I did. The questions were asked similar to those you mentioned that I might be asked. At the end of the test, the examiner said that that she did not believe that I had no unsupervised contacts with children u/16, which I never even I had nor was there any court order placed on me not to have any contacts with u/16. She was accompanied by a Police Officer who stayed outside the test room. However, at the end of the test, the examiner asked me to wait as she was going to see if the police officer who had come with her had any questions to ask, which she decided not to. I was given a sheet of the examiner and the police officer phone numbers if I had any questions had to ask later on. After coming back home I phoned the police officer asking that if that the examiner's comments would affect my SOR Removal application, which was going to be reconsidered. She was very sympathetic saying not to worry too much about it that just only the test results would have not have too much impact on me my reconsidered SOR removal application. The PPU Superintendent took this action when I had pointed out to my investigating officer that there were some fatal mistakes in the original determination. So my first worry is that if the examiner's comments would affect my SOR second review? Please, What are your comments about this issue?
2. I told the examiner that I had a resiprical visit every 3-4 months with a family friend coming with children but except Saying a Hello, I that hardly ever spoke to them and they are very shy anyway and there were always parents present there. However, I added that at one occasion the father went outside for about 20 minutes so I left the sitting room and went upstairs in case the mother popped into the kitchen. She asked what would I do if that happened again, I told that I would go out with him.
My second worry is that examiner would report these visits to the Police and they might alert the Social Services and they would be visiting with the Police to my friend’s house and the Social Service asking to sign an undertaking with them for not have any contact with me when there are their children are present. They are our very close friends and us, and especially, my wife won’t like to lose contact with them. If the Police ask me their address, am I under any legal obligation to do so, as I have no order placed on me for not to have any contact with u/16 years old children?
All the advice on these issues will be highly appreciated

There's something like this going on in a separate discussion. The problem is that the police define unsupervised as "not supervised by one of the police, probation or social services". The fact that the parents are present is not always taken into account.

  Thanks for your guidance. I approached the site you mention. However, I notice the word SOR (I have bolded it) though this person is not on SOPO. Is it a mistake or not? Could you please clarify

"This isn't overriding the SHPO, it's something different. They said it wasn't a breach of the SHPO, because it wasn't. However, the one-size-fits-all approach means nobody on the SOR can have contact with children regardless of what might be on their SHPO/SOPO, which is a matter for the police to pass to child services to consider. These situations can sometimes require written consent from the parent/guardian."


There is nothing in the notification requirements of being on the SOR that says you have to report all contact with any child. However, the police has a separate duty of safeguarding, and this is one they can pass to social services, so they can always say they're just doing their job. Because they see everyone on the SOR as all being the same, they will probably report any contact with an under-18 to social services, even if the person's offence involved a much older person of a different gender. They would see it in the same light as a report from a "concerned neighbour" about child neglect or cruelty, except in this case they don't have to do any investigation themselves.

  I'm having difficulty in posting the following, so I will try again.
Dear Suprembeing. I am sorry to bother you once again, as I found the advice and information you have been giving me. Incidentally, I made a small contribution to Unlock about two weeks ago and intend to make more in the near future. 
Firstly re my friendship with a family friend who have young children;  the PPU and Social Services visited my friend’s house but he was not in so they left a card to phone them which he did as soon as he came back home, ( soon afterwards they came), and he answered satisfactorily to all the question the PPU officer asked and they said that they would o longer be contacting them.  
Now a request on another matter  As I previously mentioned that the PPU Superintendent is reconsidering my SOR removal application as in his original determination there were a few fatal mistakes. When I pointed it out, he accepted at least one mistake and decided to reconsider my application but invited to attend a voluntary Polygraph Test.  Its result will have an impact on my case. But I will have to wait for up to 28 days to get a copy of it. So I won’t have a chance to defend myself against any negative polygraph report’s comments, as my reconsideration will already be underway. Only I can guess that the examiner said I was being dishonest when I said NO  to the question that if I ever had any unsupervised contact a with children u/16. I pointed her out that I was telling the truth and anyway I have no restrictions on me to not have any unsupervised contact.  Also, she mentioned out that the test was 85 t0 95 per cent correct. In reply, I commented that in school and colleges the students can pass a test with flying colours even when they get 75 to 80 per cent answers correct. To this comment, she concluded as that I had I lied at least once.
In addition to my original application to come off the reregister, which was declined, I want to send an additional application commenting on Grounds the PPU Superintendent gave for the rejection. But I won’t have a chance to say in my defence to any adverse comments made on the Polygraph results.  Could  I please have our advice on this matter?


Hi
I wasn't sure if you was asking AB2014 for further advice but I thought I'd reply on my info.
I am pleased the SS outcome was as you hoped and I hope your friend and his family remain that, supportive friends. A bit of advice I would give is that you ensure you manage any future "scenarios" in a way that protects you . Always bear in mine what someone else might suggest when viewing the interaction from a distance.
On the "poly test", I am assuming they offered that as a deterrent; not only being vindictive because you highlighted their errors, but also thinking you wouldn't want to take one. I always remember listening to others saying how they would answer the question "do you love children? Yes or No". When you have been through the turmoil many of us have, you start to think of 101 ways your answer could be misunderstood.

I understand why you replied quoting the "student exams pass marks"  but I feel they can take comments like that in the same way they say someone is in "denial" when they quote mitigation reasons. As an excuse to hide something. I would suggest not to speak those type of replies in future. Remember they have probably undertook the test many times and heard everything before and could be cynical.
In regards to commenting on the errors made by the Police in your previous application, remember there is always the possibility that they could be taken as you suggesting they are incompetent and therefore not received well. The use of a solicitor would be wise to highlight those issues, as their words are received in a more acceptable manner. In fact they may even suggest you do not bother mentioning it and then you may get a more sympathetic reaction from them due to you not trying to embarrass them to the Judge.  
Finally on not knowing the results of the test,  the use of a solicitor may gain the support for holding the hearing after the test results have been made. Otherwise I would just word a sentence in a positive manner for example: I willingly accepted the offer of a poly test to demonstrate my rehabilitation and positive character . Or something like that. Again I would not chastise the use of them lach I am suggesting. You need their support more if you are alone; hence why something as important as this I have / are using a solicitor. Understanding that the financial restrictions of some, does make this a quality of life v financial balancing decision though.

I wish you luck and look forward to reading other advice to you.

 
Thank you very much for such a piece of long comprehensive advice. I have not even though about the advice you have given.  I made my original application through a  Manchester solicitor whose firm was advertising as a specialist in the sex offences case. But I felt very disappointed with this solicitor. Though my offending manager had informed through an email that my case would be decided within the 3 months period, so is mentioned on a Government website, but he PPU took more than two years to give me a decision.  I tried to contact this solicitor through phone and emails to chase the PPU to expedite. But over the two years from him, I did not receive any phone calls or emails from him. When I would phone his secretary, she would say that she would pass my message on to the solicitor.
Previously I was approached from my then Offending PPU officer, who had drafted the letter and my SOPO was Varied from 5 prohibitions to a single one, and to his own words to a MANAGEABLE LEVEL.   Two years later I got my SOPO discharged totally unopposed by the PPU solicitor, but by some hesitation by the court the magistrates.  Though I had used a local Solicitor, who had admitted that he had not dealt before with any Sex Offences cases, but he would seek advice, if necessary, from his colleagues. So in both cases, he had hardly any work to do. If even now I am not removed from the register, I do not intend to appeal. This is because I might get any press adverse press publicity. I have moved to a new area, and would not like my growing-up child to be told that his father is a paedophile. He is four and a half years old and is my from the second marriage. From my previous marriage, I have 6 grown-up children who have moved far afield where I live. Incidentally in my previous cases, as mentioned above, there was no press reporter in the courtroom, where my csas were decided. But I may not be that lucky third time. And even if the PPU allows me to remove me from the register, I wonder, if the PPU ever find that I have been in contact with children, supervised or unsupervised, they would alert the children services.
And this is not a big deal to remain on the register as I have only to inform at a police station of my foreign travel (which I do once a year) and give my bank and passport details which are almost the same from the day one. I have not ever stayed in a house for more than a few hours, whether there are children present or not.  
As, perhaps, you may have guessed that English is not my first language. I am not as eloquent as you would expect from a native speaker with good qualifications. So,  I will not write directly to any such higher authorities such an important letter. As I have always done previously done I will use a  solicitor, and in the present case to just write a letter.
Thank you once again your continued support with such valuable advice.
PS: I could not read your reply yesterday as I was in the hospital all day and when I came I felt so tired that I went to bed early.


  27 March. Thanks for your another prompt reply.
I forgot to tell you that the PPU visits had reduced to about once a year. When my first review was rejected, the investigating officer had told me that the police visits would stop, they would only contact me now and then over the phone.  As she went back and checked and confirmed that I had only one SOPO breach only in 2005, and not several breaches and that the last was not one in 2015. The breach was for attending a local gym, for which I was given a lighter sentence of rehabilitation order for which the Probation Services had recommended I had to attend a two years sexual offending programme, which I completed successfully.  Had I I not pointed out this factor, I would have remained on SOR on rather easy terms. Now they would not be as kind.   As you mentioned that if you challenge them they could Ivindictive. So that they invited me to attend Polygraph Interview. Also have you any idea what kind of press publicity can I expect t if I appeal in a magistrate the court,  which I want to avoid at any cost. Incidentally, my children with me when I was sentenced. Thanks for giving me details of a competent lawyer, at whose Office I am going to phone tomorrow and asking Andrew to write a letter on my behalf to the  Police Superandent.  
Thanks again for your continued immensely valuable advice.


Hi The unkown,
I have written previously that my sentencing/appeal Court has decided all applications are held in open court with media restrictions whether your appeal is supported or not supported by the Police.
My initial SOPO conditions removal applications were supported by the Police and so I did not have to appear in Court. However my last application concerned 1 and was supported but the Court now requires an appearance to be required. As your application is for the SOR I think you would appear, sorry.
I did contact the Court officers about the media and they suggested as my case was old, they did not think the media would attend.
I would suggest you contact the Court Office and ask them the question about media.
Good luck

Thanks for some more useful information. This morning I went to my local Police Station asking them to get my polygraph results but they had no clue. They said they have never been approached for this for such information. I took from them the Manchester Police Station Phone Number, who have arranged this test at the Chorley Police Station. I was told by the Poly Examiner, who had told me quite categorically to go to my local Police Station and asked them to obtain this information. I took from them the Manchester Phone No. When I phoned Manchester they had no clue either. I phoned back to my investigating officer and she suggested to get more information from the Lancashire Police Constabulary internet website. There were two women involved in Poly Test and I contacted both of them on the phone their was no reply, so I have left the text messages. About 4 hours have gone but I have not received any reply from them. I want to get this sorted out before 4 March as I am flying abroad to stay there for a month. My investigating officer has got the Poly test results but she won't give it to me saying she is not authorised to do so. My worry is that to see if I could make any comments to any negative information before my SOR second review is considered. On the advice of the investigating officer, I have emailed her my concerns with a copy to the Detective Sub-inspector. Until to-date I have not received any reply from them. Usually, they send replies to my queries within the 24 hours. I need your advice as what I can do now before they make a fresh decision on my original application. I don’t expect them to be as quick as they took over two years to reach to their determination to my original application. But you never know.


JASB
JASB
Supreme Being
Supreme Being (14K reputation)Supreme Being (14K reputation)Supreme Being (14K reputation)Supreme Being (14K reputation)Supreme Being (14K reputation)Supreme Being (14K reputation)Supreme Being (14K reputation)Supreme Being (14K reputation)Supreme Being (14K reputation)

Group: Awaiting Activation
Posts: 493, Visits: 747
Theunknown - 28 Feb 20 4:48 PM
JASB - 28 Feb 20 2:36 PM
Theunknown - 27 Feb 20 8:57 PM
Theunknown - 27 Feb 20 12:28 PM
JASB - 26 Feb 20 2:45 PM
Theunknown - 25 Feb 20 6:32 PM
AB2014 - 13 Feb 20 3:15 PM
Theunknown - 13 Feb 20 2:38 PM
AB2014 - 13 Feb 20 11:41 AM
Theunknown - 13 Feb 20 11:11 AM
Theunknown - 6 Feb 20 12:41 PM
AB2014 - 6 Feb 20 8:59 AM
Theunknown - 5 Feb 20 7:24 PM
JASB - 5 Feb 20 3:01 PM
Theunknown - 5 Feb 20 10:51 AM
If you are on SOR, as noted from the NARO website, one of the following requirements is:
“If you are living with a child or staying in a household where a child lives for at least 12 hours each day”
However on the Unlock website says that a person on Sex Offender should inform the police if he has stayed in a household for more than 12 hours where a child u/18 lives.
Which one is correct?
Also the PPU has never informed me about this requirement? I was put on SOR in 1999.

Polygraph Interview.  My application for SOR discharge was rejected by the PPU HQ giving false reasons. When I pointed out this to them, the PPU HQ invalidated their decision admitting the mistakes and have decided to reconsider, No apologies, but has made it more difficult for me by INVITING me to attend a polygraph interview. Note: Polygraph tests, being very unreliable,(a report from Wikipedia) are not admissible in the UK Criminal Courts. But can carry some weight in a civil court setting in a criminal court, which could apply in my case. 
I feel very nervous about it and suffer many medical conditions which can affect the test. I have informed the PPQ HQ about these conditions. A week has gone, still, I have not received a reply, Shall I go ahead with the test, bearing in mind I am not required to take the polygraph interview. 
A reply to the above two questions will be highly appreciated.


Hi,
First and most important the fact is that websites are not always up to date and like many aspects of legal life, it is the writers interpretation of the legal wording - unless it is a cut and paste from a government document and than as long as that is the latest version lol.
A SOPO condition does not have to be in place as it comes under the term of "public protection", and as interviews are not recorded, there is no constraining of their questions if they wish. Its is suggested that these sort of questions come under the heading of "risk assessment" as well.
In my experience any sex offender when visited will be asked about family and relationships. If either or both exist, the conversation is expanded to include contact with children, even if they are extended family members.
As mentioned, Social Services would be contacted unless the PPU felt there was no risk. Be aware that from my experience, that decision can differ between PPU officers and constabularies.
If you have always ensured you have not broken any of their rules and kept the PPU informed of your consequences, then you should not worry.

Polygraph:
I would seek legal advice.
The Government / Media response after the Jeremy Kyle escapade, highlighted the concern that many psychologists are strongly opinionated about there accuracy as many are stating they are not. The same concerns have also been raised - after the recent terrorist atrocities - by the Government and experts.  
You have mentioned you informed them of your medical health concerns, which could be seen as a avoidance tactic so why not take a positive and co-operative approach?
Possibly consider / offer to undertake an independent psychologists assessment instead because of the expert accuracy concerns.

I hope this helps in some small way - keeps us informed and wish you success.
“As advised by you in the first paragraph of your post, I have gone through the Govt. Website but I can't find anywhere having resided/stayed for more than 12 hours where a child under 18 lives. Kindly correct me if I have misunderstood their information
  http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/42/part/2/crossheading/notification-requirements
Changes to legislation:
Sexual Offences Act 2003, Cross Heading: Notificationrequirements is up to date with all changes known to be in force on or before05 February 2020. There are changes that may be brought into force at a future date. Changes that have been made appear in the content and are referenced with annotations.
his having resided or stayed, for a qualifying period, at any premises in the United Kingdom the address of which has not been notified to the police under section 83(1), this subsection, or section 2 of the SexOffenders Act 1997,
 (6)In this section, “qualifying period” means—
(a)a period of 7 days, or
(b)two or more periods, in any period of 12 months, which taken together amount to 7 days.




Well, the Sexual Offences Act 2003 was updated by The Sexual Offences Act 2003 (Notification Requirements) (England and Wales) Regulations 2012. Section 10 of those regulations says that:

"10.—(1) The information set out in paragraph (2) is prescribed for the purposes of section 83(5)(h) of the 2003 Act in a case where a relevant offender (R) resides, or stays for a period of at least 12 hours, at a relevant household."

Section 2 says:


“relevant household” means a household or other place—
(a)where a child resides or stays, and
(b)to which the public do not have access (whether for payment or not)."

That seems to agree with the Unlock information. PPU won't tell you about this requirement, as the question should be asked every time you register, and they should then tell you to notify them if any of the information you have given them changes.

Thanks, Supremebeing. You seem to be a Suprmebeing as you are a goldmine of information on questions like mine.


Hello, here I am again. Thanks once again for your continued advice. As I mentioned before I was going to attend a Polygraph Test which I did. The questions were asked similar to those you mentioned that I might be asked. At the end of the test, the examiner said that that she did not believe that I had no unsupervised contacts with children u/16, which I never even I had nor was there any court order placed on me not to have any contacts with u/16. She was accompanied by a Police Officer who stayed outside the test room. However, at the end of the test, the examiner asked me to wait as she was going to see if the police officer who had come with her had any questions to ask, which she decided not to. I was given a sheet of the examiner and the police officer phone numbers if I had any questions had to ask later on. After coming back home I phoned the police officer asking that if that the examiner's comments would affect my SOR Removal application, which was going to be reconsidered. She was very sympathetic saying not to worry too much about it that just only the test results would have not have too much impact on me my reconsidered SOR removal application. The PPU Superintendent took this action when I had pointed out to my investigating officer that there were some fatal mistakes in the original determination. So my first worry is that if the examiner's comments would affect my SOR second review? Please, What are your comments about this issue?
2. I told the examiner that I had a resiprical visit every 3-4 months with a family friend coming with children but except Saying a Hello, I that hardly ever spoke to them and they are very shy anyway and there were always parents present there. However, I added that at one occasion the father went outside for about 20 minutes so I left the sitting room and went upstairs in case the mother popped into the kitchen. She asked what would I do if that happened again, I told that I would go out with him.
My second worry is that examiner would report these visits to the Police and they might alert the Social Services and they would be visiting with the Police to my friend’s house and the Social Service asking to sign an undertaking with them for not have any contact with me when there are their children are present. They are our very close friends and us, and especially, my wife won’t like to lose contact with them. If the Police ask me their address, am I under any legal obligation to do so, as I have no order placed on me for not to have any contact with u/16 years old children?
All the advice on these issues will be highly appreciated

There's something like this going on in a separate discussion. The problem is that the police define unsupervised as "not supervised by one of the police, probation or social services". The fact that the parents are present is not always taken into account.

  Thanks for your guidance. I approached the site you mention. However, I notice the word SOR (I have bolded it) though this person is not on SOPO. Is it a mistake or not? Could you please clarify

"This isn't overriding the SHPO, it's something different. They said it wasn't a breach of the SHPO, because it wasn't. However, the one-size-fits-all approach means nobody on the SOR can have contact with children regardless of what might be on their SHPO/SOPO, which is a matter for the police to pass to child services to consider. These situations can sometimes require written consent from the parent/guardian."


There is nothing in the notification requirements of being on the SOR that says you have to report all contact with any child. However, the police has a separate duty of safeguarding, and this is one they can pass to social services, so they can always say they're just doing their job. Because they see everyone on the SOR as all being the same, they will probably report any contact with an under-18 to social services, even if the person's offence involved a much older person of a different gender. They would see it in the same light as a report from a "concerned neighbour" about child neglect or cruelty, except in this case they don't have to do any investigation themselves.

  I'm having difficulty in posting the following, so I will try again.
Dear Suprembeing. I am sorry to bother you once again, as I found the advice and information you have been giving me. Incidentally, I made a small contribution to Unlock about two weeks ago and intend to make more in the near future. 
Firstly re my friendship with a family friend who have young children;  the PPU and Social Services visited my friend’s house but he was not in so they left a card to phone them which he did as soon as he came back home, ( soon afterwards they came), and he answered satisfactorily to all the question the PPU officer asked and they said that they would o longer be contacting them.  
Now a request on another matter  As I previously mentioned that the PPU Superintendent is reconsidering my SOR removal application as in his original determination there were a few fatal mistakes. When I pointed it out, he accepted at least one mistake and decided to reconsider my application but invited to attend a voluntary Polygraph Test.  Its result will have an impact on my case. But I will have to wait for up to 28 days to get a copy of it. So I won’t have a chance to defend myself against any negative polygraph report’s comments, as my reconsideration will already be underway. Only I can guess that the examiner said I was being dishonest when I said NO  to the question that if I ever had any unsupervised contact a with children u/16. I pointed her out that I was telling the truth and anyway I have no restrictions on me to not have any unsupervised contact.  Also, she mentioned out that the test was 85 t0 95 per cent correct. In reply, I commented that in school and colleges the students can pass a test with flying colours even when they get 75 to 80 per cent answers correct. To this comment, she concluded as that I had I lied at least once.
In addition to my original application to come off the reregister, which was declined, I want to send an additional application commenting on Grounds the PPU Superintendent gave for the rejection. But I won’t have a chance to say in my defence to any adverse comments made on the Polygraph results.  Could  I please have our advice on this matter?


Hi
I wasn't sure if you was asking AB2014 for further advice but I thought I'd reply on my info.
I am pleased the SS outcome was as you hoped and I hope your friend and his family remain that, supportive friends. A bit of advice I would give is that you ensure you manage any future "scenarios" in a way that protects you . Always bear in mine what someone else might suggest when viewing the interaction from a distance.
On the "poly test", I am assuming they offered that as a deterrent; not only being vindictive because you highlighted their errors, but also thinking you wouldn't want to take one. I always remember listening to others saying how they would answer the question "do you love children? Yes or No". When you have been through the turmoil many of us have, you start to think of 101 ways your answer could be misunderstood.

I understand why you replied quoting the "student exams pass marks"  but I feel they can take comments like that in the same way they say someone is in "denial" when they quote mitigation reasons. As an excuse to hide something. I would suggest not to speak those type of replies in future. Remember they have probably undertook the test many times and heard everything before and could be cynical.
In regards to commenting on the errors made by the Police in your previous application, remember there is always the possibility that they could be taken as you suggesting they are incompetent and therefore not received well. The use of a solicitor would be wise to highlight those issues, as their words are received in a more acceptable manner. In fact they may even suggest you do not bother mentioning it and then you may get a more sympathetic reaction from them due to you not trying to embarrass them to the Judge.  
Finally on not knowing the results of the test,  the use of a solicitor may gain the support for holding the hearing after the test results have been made. Otherwise I would just word a sentence in a positive manner for example: I willingly accepted the offer of a poly test to demonstrate my rehabilitation and positive character . Or something like that. Again I would not chastise the use of them lach I am suggesting. You need their support more if you are alone; hence why something as important as this I have / are using a solicitor. Understanding that the financial restrictions of some, does make this a quality of life v financial balancing decision though.

I wish you luck and look forward to reading other advice to you.

 
Thank you very much for such a piece of long comprehensive advice. I have not even though about the advice you have given.  I made my original application through a  Manchester solicitor whose firm was advertising as a specialist in the sex offences case. But I felt very disappointed with this solicitor. Though my offending manager had informed through an email that my case would be decided within the 3 months period, so is mentioned on a Government website, but he PPU took more than two years to give me a decision.  I tried to contact this solicitor through phone and emails to chase the PPU to expedite. But over the two years from him, I did not receive any phone calls or emails from him. When I would phone his secretary, she would say that she would pass my message on to the solicitor.
Previously I was approached from my then Offending PPU officer, who had drafted the letter and my SOPO was Varied from 5 prohibitions to a single one, and to his own words to a MANAGEABLE LEVEL.   Two years later I got my SOPO discharged totally unopposed by the PPU solicitor, but by some hesitation by the court the magistrates.  Though I had used a local Solicitor, who had admitted that he had not dealt before with any Sex Offences cases, but he would seek advice, if necessary, from his colleagues. So in both cases, he had hardly any work to do. If even now I am not removed from the register, I do not intend to appeal. This is because I might get any press adverse press publicity. I have moved to a new area, and would not like my growing-up child to be told that his father is a paedophile. He is four and a half years old and is my from the second marriage. From my previous marriage, I have 6 grown-up children who have moved far afield where I live. Incidentally in my previous cases, as mentioned above, there was no press reporter in the courtroom, where my csas were decided. But I may not be that lucky third time. And even if the PPU allows me to remove me from the register, I wonder, if the PPU ever find that I have been in contact with children, supervised or unsupervised, they would alert the children services.
And this is not a big deal to remain on the register as I have only to inform at a police station of my foreign travel (which I do once a year) and give my bank and passport details which are almost the same from the day one. I have not ever stayed in a house for more than a few hours, whether there are children present or not.  
As, perhaps, you may have guessed that English is not my first language. I am not as eloquent as you would expect from a native speaker with good qualifications. So,  I will not write directly to any such higher authorities such an important letter. As I have always done previously done I will use a  solicitor, and in the present case to just write a letter.
Thank you once again your continued support with such valuable advice.
PS: I could not read your reply yesterday as I was in the hospital all day and when I came I felt so tired that I went to bed early.


  27 March. Thanks for your another prompt reply.
I forgot to tell you that the PPU visits had reduced to about once a year. When my first review was rejected, the investigating officer had told me that the police visits would stop, they would only contact me now and then over the phone.  As she went back and checked and confirmed that I had only one SOPO breach only in 2005, and not several breaches and that the last was not one in 2015. The breach was for attending a local gym, for which I was given a lighter sentence of rehabilitation order for which the Probation Services had recommended I had to attend a two years sexual offending programme, which I completed successfully.  Had I I not pointed out this factor, I would have remained on SOR on rather easy terms. Now they would not be as kind.   As you mentioned that if you challenge them they could Ivindictive. So that they invited me to attend Polygraph Interview. Also have you any idea what kind of press publicity can I expect t if I appeal in a magistrate the court,  which I want to avoid at any cost. Incidentally, my children with me when I was sentenced. Thanks for giving me details of a competent lawyer, at whose Office I am going to phone tomorrow and asking Andrew to write a letter on my behalf to the  Police Superandent.  
Thanks again for your continued immensely valuable advice.


Hi The unkown,
I have written previously that my sentencing/appeal Court has decided all applications are held in open court with media restrictions whether your appeal is supported or not supported by the Police.
My initial SOPO conditions removal applications were supported by the Police and so I did not have to appear in Court. However my last application concerned 1 and was supported but the Court now requires an appearance to be required. As your application is for the SOR I think you would appear, sorry.
I did contact the Court officers about the media and they suggested as my case was old, they did not think the media would attend.
I would suggest you contact the Court Office and ask them the question about media.
Good luck

JASB - 28 Feb 20 2:36 PM
Theunknown - 27 Feb 20 8:57 PM
Theunknown - 27 Feb 20 12:28 PM
JASB - 26 Feb 20 2:45 PM
Theunknown - 25 Feb 20 6:32 PM
AB2014 - 13 Feb 20 3:15 PM
Theunknown - 13 Feb 20 2:38 PM
AB2014 - 13 Feb 20 11:41 AM
Theunknown - 13 Feb 20 11:11 AM
Theunknown - 6 Feb 20 12:41 PM
AB2014 - 6 Feb 20 8:59 AM
Theunknown - 5 Feb 20 7:24 PM
JASB - 5 Feb 20 3:01 PM
Theunknown - 5 Feb 20 10:51 AM
If you are on SOR, as noted from the NARO website, one of the following requirements is:
“If you are living with a child or staying in a household where a child lives for at least 12 hours each day”
However on the Unlock website says that a person on Sex Offender should inform the police if he has stayed in a household for more than 12 hours where a child u/18 lives.
Which one is correct?
Also the PPU has never informed me about this requirement? I was put on SOR in 1999.

Polygraph Interview.  My application for SOR discharge was rejected by the PPU HQ giving false reasons. When I pointed out this to them, the PPU HQ invalidated their decision admitting the mistakes and have decided to reconsider, No apologies, but has made it more difficult for me by INVITING me to attend a polygraph interview. Note: Polygraph tests, being very unreliable,(a report from Wikipedia) are not admissible in the UK Criminal Courts. But can carry some weight in a civil court setting in a criminal court, which could apply in my case. 
I feel very nervous about it and suffer many medical conditions which can affect the test. I have informed the PPQ HQ about these conditions. A week has gone, still, I have not received a reply, Shall I go ahead with the test, bearing in mind I am not required to take the polygraph interview. 
A reply to the above two questions will be highly appreciated.


Hi,
First and most important the fact is that websites are not always up to date and like many aspects of legal life, it is the writers interpretation of the legal wording - unless it is a cut and paste from a government document and than as long as that is the latest version lol.
A SOPO condition does not have to be in place as it comes under the term of "public protection", and as interviews are not recorded, there is no constraining of their questions if they wish. Its is suggested that these sort of questions come under the heading of "risk assessment" as well.
In my experience any sex offender when visited will be asked about family and relationships. If either or both exist, the conversation is expanded to include contact with children, even if they are extended family members.
As mentioned, Social Services would be contacted unless the PPU felt there was no risk. Be aware that from my experience, that decision can differ between PPU officers and constabularies.
If you have always ensured you have not broken any of their rules and kept the PPU informed of your consequences, then you should not worry.

Polygraph:
I would seek legal advice.
The Government / Media response after the Jeremy Kyle escapade, highlighted the concern that many psychologists are strongly opinionated about there accuracy as many are stating they are not. The same concerns have also been raised - after the recent terrorist atrocities - by the Government and experts.  
You have mentioned you informed them of your medical health concerns, which could be seen as a avoidance tactic so why not take a positive and co-operative approach?
Possibly consider / offer to undertake an independent psychologists assessment instead because of the expert accuracy concerns.

I hope this helps in some small way - keeps us informed and wish you success.
“As advised by you in the first paragraph of your post, I have gone through the Govt. Website but I can't find anywhere having resided/stayed for more than 12 hours where a child under 18 lives. Kindly correct me if I have misunderstood their information
  http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/42/part/2/crossheading/notification-requirements
Changes to legislation:
Sexual Offences Act 2003, Cross Heading: Notificationrequirements is up to date with all changes known to be in force on or before05 February 2020. There are changes that may be brought into force at a future date. Changes that have been made appear in the content and are referenced with annotations.
his having resided or stayed, for a qualifying period, at any premises in the United Kingdom the address of which has not been notified to the police under section 83(1), this subsection, or section 2 of the SexOffenders Act 1997,
 (6)In this section, “qualifying period” means—
(a)a period of 7 days, or
(b)two or more periods, in any period of 12 months, which taken together amount to 7 days.




Well, the Sexual Offences Act 2003 was updated by The Sexual Offences Act 2003 (Notification Requirements) (England and Wales) Regulations 2012. Section 10 of those regulations says that:

"10.—(1) The information set out in paragraph (2) is prescribed for the purposes of section 83(5)(h) of the 2003 Act in a case where a relevant offender (R) resides, or stays for a period of at least 12 hours, at a relevant household."

Section 2 says:


“relevant household” means a household or other place—
(a)where a child resides or stays, and
(b)to which the public do not have access (whether for payment or not)."

That seems to agree with the Unlock information. PPU won't tell you about this requirement, as the question should be asked every time you register, and they should then tell you to notify them if any of the information you have given them changes.

Thanks, Supremebeing. You seem to be a Suprmebeing as you are a goldmine of information on questions like mine.


Hello, here I am again. Thanks once again for your continued advice. As I mentioned before I was going to attend a Polygraph Test which I did. The questions were asked similar to those you mentioned that I might be asked. At the end of the test, the examiner said that that she did not believe that I had no unsupervised contacts with children u/16, which I never even I had nor was there any court order placed on me not to have any contacts with u/16. She was accompanied by a Police Officer who stayed outside the test room. However, at the end of the test, the examiner asked me to wait as she was going to see if the police officer who had come with her had any questions to ask, which she decided not to. I was given a sheet of the examiner and the police officer phone numbers if I had any questions had to ask later on. After coming back home I phoned the police officer asking that if that the examiner's comments would affect my SOR Removal application, which was going to be reconsidered. She was very sympathetic saying not to worry too much about it that just only the test results would have not have too much impact on me my reconsidered SOR removal application. The PPU Superintendent took this action when I had pointed out to my investigating officer that there were some fatal mistakes in the original determination. So my first worry is that if the examiner's comments would affect my SOR second review? Please, What are your comments about this issue?
2. I told the examiner that I had a resiprical visit every 3-4 months with a family friend coming with children but except Saying a Hello, I that hardly ever spoke to them and they are very shy anyway and there were always parents present there. However, I added that at one occasion the father went outside for about 20 minutes so I left the sitting room and went upstairs in case the mother popped into the kitchen. She asked what would I do if that happened again, I told that I would go out with him.
My second worry is that examiner would report these visits to the Police and they might alert the Social Services and they would be visiting with the Police to my friend’s house and the Social Service asking to sign an undertaking with them for not have any contact with me when there are their children are present. They are our very close friends and us, and especially, my wife won’t like to lose contact with them. If the Police ask me their address, am I under any legal obligation to do so, as I have no order placed on me for not to have any contact with u/16 years old children?
All the advice on these issues will be highly appreciated

There's something like this going on in a separate discussion. The problem is that the police define unsupervised as "not supervised by one of the police, probation or social services". The fact that the parents are present is not always taken into account.

  Thanks for your guidance. I approached the site you mention. However, I notice the word SOR (I have bolded it) though this person is not on SOPO. Is it a mistake or not? Could you please clarify

"This isn't overriding the SHPO, it's something different. They said it wasn't a breach of the SHPO, because it wasn't. However, the one-size-fits-all approach means nobody on the SOR can have contact with children regardless of what might be on their SHPO/SOPO, which is a matter for the police to pass to child services to consider. These situations can sometimes require written consent from the parent/guardian."


There is nothing in the notification requirements of being on the SOR that says you have to report all contact with any child. However, the police has a separate duty of safeguarding, and this is one they can pass to social services, so they can always say they're just doing their job. Because they see everyone on the SOR as all being the same, they will probably report any contact with an under-18 to social services, even if the person's offence involved a much older person of a different gender. They would see it in the same light as a report from a "concerned neighbour" about child neglect or cruelty, except in this case they don't have to do any investigation themselves.

  I'm having difficulty in posting the following, so I will try again.
Dear Suprembeing. I am sorry to bother you once again, as I found the advice and information you have been giving me. Incidentally, I made a small contribution to Unlock about two weeks ago and intend to make more in the near future. 
Firstly re my friendship with a family friend who have young children;  the PPU and Social Services visited my friend’s house but he was not in so they left a card to phone them which he did as soon as he came back home, ( soon afterwards they came), and he answered satisfactorily to all the question the PPU officer asked and they said that they would o longer be contacting them.  
Now a request on another matter  As I previously mentioned that the PPU Superintendent is reconsidering my SOR removal application as in his original determination there were a few fatal mistakes. When I pointed it out, he accepted at least one mistake and decided to reconsider my application but invited to attend a voluntary Polygraph Test.  Its result will have an impact on my case. But I will have to wait for up to 28 days to get a copy of it. So I won’t have a chance to defend myself against any negative polygraph report’s comments, as my reconsideration will already be underway. Only I can guess that the examiner said I was being dishonest when I said NO  to the question that if I ever had any unsupervised contact a with children u/16. I pointed her out that I was telling the truth and anyway I have no restrictions on me to not have any unsupervised contact.  Also, she mentioned out that the test was 85 t0 95 per cent correct. In reply, I commented that in school and colleges the students can pass a test with flying colours even when they get 75 to 80 per cent answers correct. To this comment, she concluded as that I had I lied at least once.
In addition to my original application to come off the reregister, which was declined, I want to send an additional application commenting on Grounds the PPU Superintendent gave for the rejection. But I won’t have a chance to say in my defence to any adverse comments made on the Polygraph results.  Could  I please have our advice on this matter?


Hi
I wasn't sure if you was asking AB2014 for further advice but I thought I'd reply on my info.
I am pleased the SS outcome was as you hoped and I hope your friend and his family remain that, supportive friends. A bit of advice I would give is that you ensure you manage any future "scenarios" in a way that protects you . Always bear in mine what someone else might suggest when viewing the interaction from a distance.
On the "poly test", I am assuming they offered that as a deterrent; not only being vindictive because you highlighted their errors, but also thinking you wouldn't want to take one. I always remember listening to others saying how they would answer the question "do you love children? Yes or No". When you have been through the turmoil many of us have, you start to think of 101 ways your answer could be misunderstood.

I understand why you replied quoting the "student exams pass marks"  but I feel they can take comments like that in the same way they say someone is in "denial" when they quote mitigation reasons. As an excuse to hide something. I would suggest not to speak those type of replies in future. Remember they have probably undertook the test many times and heard everything before and could be cynical.
In regards to commenting on the errors made by the Police in your previous application, remember there is always the possibility that they could be taken as you suggesting they are incompetent and therefore not received well. The use of a solicitor would be wise to highlight those issues, as their words are received in a more acceptable manner. In fact they may even suggest you do not bother mentioning it and then you may get a more sympathetic reaction from them due to you not trying to embarrass them to the Judge.  
Finally on not knowing the results of the test,  the use of a solicitor may gain the support for holding the hearing after the test results have been made. Otherwise I would just word a sentence in a positive manner for example: I willingly accepted the offer of a poly test to demonstrate my rehabilitation and positive character . Or something like that. Again I would not chastise the use of them lach I am suggesting. You need their support more if you are alone; hence why something as important as this I have / are using a solicitor. Understanding that the financial restrictions of some, does make this a quality of life v financial balancing decision though.

I wish you luck and look forward to reading other advice to you.

 
Thank you very much for such a piece of long comprehensive advice. I have not even though about the advice you have given.  I made my original application through a  Manchester solicitor whose firm was advertising as a specialist in the sex offences case. But I felt very disappointed with this solicitor. Though my offending manager had informed through an email that my case would be decided within the 3 months period, so is mentioned on a Government website, but he PPU took more than two years to give me a decision.  I tried to contact this solicitor through phone and emails to chase the PPU to expedite. But over the two years from him, I did not receive any phone calls or emails from him. When I would phone his secretary, she would say that she would pass my message on to the solicitor.
Previously I was approached from my then Offending PPU officer, who had drafted the letter and my SOPO was Varied from 5 prohibitions to a single one, and to his own words to a MANAGEABLE LEVEL.   Two years later I got my SOPO discharged totally unopposed by the PPU solicitor, but by some hesitation by the court the magistrates.  Though I had used a local Solicitor, who had admitted that he had not dealt before with any Sex Offences cases, but he would seek advice, if necessary, from his colleagues. So in both cases, he had hardly any work to do. If even now I am not removed from the register, I do not intend to appeal. This is because I might get any press adverse press publicity. I have moved to a new area, and would not like my growing-up child to be told that his father is a paedophile. He is four and a half years old and is my from the second marriage. From my previous marriage, I have 6 grown-up children who have moved far afield where I live. Incidentally in my previous cases, as mentioned above, there was no press reporter in the courtroom, where my csas were decided. But I may not be that lucky third time. And even if the PPU allows me to remove me from the register, I wonder, if the PPU ever find that I have been in contact with children, supervised or unsupervised, they would alert the children services.
And this is not a big deal to remain on the register as I have only to inform at a police station of my foreign travel (which I do once a year) and give my bank and passport details which are almost the same from the day one. I have not ever stayed in a house for more than a few hours, whether there are children present or not.  
As, perhaps, you may have guessed that English is not my first language. I am not as eloquent as you would expect from a native speaker with good qualifications. So,  I will not write directly to any such higher authorities such an important letter. As I have always done previously done I will use a  solicitor, and in the present case to just write a letter.
Thank you once again your continued support with such valuable advice.
PS: I could not read your reply yesterday as I was in the hospital all day and when I came I felt so tired that I went to bed early.


  27 March. Thanks for your another prompt reply.
I forgot to tell you that the PPU visits had reduced to about once a year. When my first review was rejected, the investigating officer had told me that the police visits would stop, they would only contact me now and then over the phone.  As she went back and checked and confirmed that I had only one SOPO breach only in 2005, and not several breaches and that the last was not one in 2015. The breach was for attending a local gym, for which I was given a lighter sentence of rehabilitation order for which the Probation Services had recommended I had to attend a two years sexual offending programme, which I completed successfully.  Had I I not pointed out this factor, I would have remained on SOR on rather easy terms. Now they would not be as kind.   As you mentioned that if you challenge them they could Ivindictive. So that they invited me to attend Polygraph Interview. Also have you any idea what kind of press publicity can I expect t if I appeal in a magistrate the court,  which I want to avoid at any cost. Incidentally, my children with me when I was sentenced. Thanks for giving me details of a competent lawyer, at whose Office I am going to phone tomorrow and asking Andrew to write a letter on my behalf to the  Police Superandent.  
Thanks again for your continued immensely valuable advice.


Hi The unkown,
I have written previously that my sentencing/appeal Court has decided all applications are held in open court with media restrictions whether your appeal is supported or not supported by the Police.
My initial SOPO conditions removal applications were supported by the Police and so I did not have to appear in Court. However my last application concerned 1 and was supported but the Court now requires an appearance to be required. As your application is for the SOR I think you would appear, sorry.
I did contact the Court officers about the media and they suggested as my case was old, they did not think the media would attend.
I would suggest you contact the Court Office and ask them the question about media.
Good luck

Thanks for some more useful information. This morning I went to my local Police Station asking them to get my polygraph results but they had no clue. They said they have never been approached for this for such information. I took from them the Manchester Police Station Phone Number, who have arranged this test at the Chorley Police Station. I was told by the Poly Examiner, who had told me quite categorically to go to my local Police Station and asked them to obtain this information. I took from them the Manchester Phone No. When I phoned Manchester they had no clue either. I phoned back to my investigating officer and she suggested to get more information from the Lancashire Police Constabulary internet website. There were two women involved in Poly Test and I contacted both of them on the phone their was no reply, so I have left the text messages. About 4 hours have gone but I have not received any reply from them. I want to get this sorted out before 4 March as I am flying abroad to stay there for a month. My investigating officer has got the Poly test results but she won't give it to me saying she is not authorised to do so. My worry is that to see if I could make any comments to any negative information before my SOR second review is considered. On the advice of the investigating officer, I have emailed her my concerns with a copy to the Detective Sub-inspector. Until to-date I have not received any reply from them. Usually, they send replies to my queries within the 24 hours. I need your advice as what I can do now before they make a fresh decision on my original application. I don’t expect them to be as quick as they took over two years to reach to their determination to my original application. But you never know.


Hi,
I think you have done most of what you can do as you have documented your concerns and reasons for the feedback. In the end this documentation could possibly support you if an appeal / complaint is necessary.
One bit of advice I was given at the start of my journey was that you must forget about response timeframes when dealing with the authorities .
Example: A PPU officer stopped responding to my emails concerning a discussion we had been having. I subsequently sent weekly emails asking for an update and referring to my past emails that had not been replied to. After 3 months I called his office to be told he had retire some months before. It took another 2 months for my new PPU officer to contact me and he did not know anything about the issue. I accepted this was not his fault and our interactions started on a good standing.

You could ask a solicitor, but they may say the same as I mentioned above or will write a letter. This again, seeings as you have only just emailed them, might be received by them in a manner not intended by you.

You do not have a date for the decision as yet and you do not know if there is any negative remarks so please consider the advice above on timeframes.
Plan your holiday and make the arrangements. Ensure you have notified them of your travel details and any contact details. Focus on your own well being as this means you are controlling your own responsibilities.
At times all we can do is wait and consider sending requests for updates at reasonable periods, i.e. every fortnight.
 



Learn from yesterday, live for today, hope is for tomorrow else what is left if you remove a mans hope.
Theunknown
Theunknown
Supreme Being
Supreme Being (1.2K reputation)Supreme Being (1.2K reputation)Supreme Being (1.2K reputation)Supreme Being (1.2K reputation)Supreme Being (1.2K reputation)Supreme Being (1.2K reputation)Supreme Being (1.2K reputation)Supreme Being (1.2K reputation)Supreme Being (1.2K reputation)

Group: Forum Members
Posts: 24, Visits: 36
JASB - 28 Feb 20 5:25 PM
Theunknown - 28 Feb 20 4:48 PM
JASB - 28 Feb 20 2:36 PM
Theunknown - 27 Feb 20 8:57 PM
Theunknown - 27 Feb 20 12:28 PM
JASB - 26 Feb 20 2:45 PM
Theunknown - 25 Feb 20 6:32 PM
AB2014 - 13 Feb 20 3:15 PM
Theunknown - 13 Feb 20 2:38 PM
AB2014 - 13 Feb 20 11:41 AM
Theunknown - 13 Feb 20 11:11 AM
Theunknown - 6 Feb 20 12:41 PM
AB2014 - 6 Feb 20 8:59 AM
Theunknown - 5 Feb 20 7:24 PM
JASB - 5 Feb 20 3:01 PM
Theunknown - 5 Feb 20 10:51 AM
If you are on SOR, as noted from the NARO website, one of the following requirements is:
“If you are living with a child or staying in a household where a child lives for at least 12 hours each day”
However on the Unlock website says that a person on Sex Offender should inform the police if he has stayed in a household for more than 12 hours where a child u/18 lives.
Which one is correct?
Also the PPU has never informed me about this requirement? I was put on SOR in 1999.

Polygraph Interview.  My application for SOR discharge was rejected by the PPU HQ giving false reasons. When I pointed out this to them, the PPU HQ invalidated their decision admitting the mistakes and have decided to reconsider, No apologies, but has made it more difficult for me by INVITING me to attend a polygraph interview. Note: Polygraph tests, being very unreliable,(a report from Wikipedia) are not admissible in the UK Criminal Courts. But can carry some weight in a civil court setting in a criminal court, which could apply in my case. 
I feel very nervous about it and suffer many medical conditions which can affect the test. I have informed the PPQ HQ about these conditions. A week has gone, still, I have not received a reply, Shall I go ahead with the test, bearing in mind I am not required to take the polygraph interview. 
A reply to the above two questions will be highly appreciated.


Hi,
First and most important the fact is that websites are not always up to date and like many aspects of legal life, it is the writers interpretation of the legal wording - unless it is a cut and paste from a government document and than as long as that is the latest version lol.
A SOPO condition does not have to be in place as it comes under the term of "public protection", and as interviews are not recorded, there is no constraining of their questions if they wish. Its is suggested that these sort of questions come under the heading of "risk assessment" as well.
In my experience any sex offender when visited will be asked about family and relationships. If either or both exist, the conversation is expanded to include contact with children, even if they are extended family members.
As mentioned, Social Services would be contacted unless the PPU felt there was no risk. Be aware that from my experience, that decision can differ between PPU officers and constabularies.
If you have always ensured you have not broken any of their rules and kept the PPU informed of your consequences, then you should not worry.

Polygraph:
I would seek legal advice.
The Government / Media response after the Jeremy Kyle escapade, highlighted the concern that many psychologists are strongly opinionated about there accuracy as many are stating they are not. The same concerns have also been raised - after the recent terrorist atrocities - by the Government and experts.  
You have mentioned you informed them of your medical health concerns, which could be seen as a avoidance tactic so why not take a positive and co-operative approach?
Possibly consider / offer to undertake an independent psychologists assessment instead because of the expert accuracy concerns.

I hope this helps in some small way - keeps us informed and wish you success.
“As advised by you in the first paragraph of your post, I have gone through the Govt. Website but I can't find anywhere having resided/stayed for more than 12 hours where a child under 18 lives. Kindly correct me if I have misunderstood their information
  http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/42/part/2/crossheading/notification-requirements
Changes to legislation:
Sexual Offences Act 2003, Cross Heading: Notificationrequirements is up to date with all changes known to be in force on or before05 February 2020. There are changes that may be brought into force at a future date. Changes that have been made appear in the content and are referenced with annotations.
his having resided or stayed, for a qualifying period, at any premises in the United Kingdom the address of which has not been notified to the police under section 83(1), this subsection, or section 2 of the SexOffenders Act 1997,
 (6)In this section, “qualifying period” means—
(a)a period of 7 days, or
(b)two or more periods, in any period of 12 months, which taken together amount to 7 days.




Well, the Sexual Offences Act 2003 was updated by The Sexual Offences Act 2003 (Notification Requirements) (England and Wales) Regulations 2012. Section 10 of those regulations says that:

"10.—(1) The information set out in paragraph (2) is prescribed for the purposes of section 83(5)(h) of the 2003 Act in a case where a relevant offender (R) resides, or stays for a period of at least 12 hours, at a relevant household."

Section 2 says:


“relevant household” means a household or other place—
(a)where a child resides or stays, and
(b)to which the public do not have access (whether for payment or not)."

That seems to agree with the Unlock information. PPU won't tell you about this requirement, as the question should be asked every time you register, and they should then tell you to notify them if any of the information you have given them changes.

Thanks, Supremebeing. You seem to be a Suprmebeing as you are a goldmine of information on questions like mine.


Hello, here I am again. Thanks once again for your continued advice. As I mentioned before I was going to attend a Polygraph Test which I did. The questions were asked similar to those you mentioned that I might be asked. At the end of the test, the examiner said that that she did not believe that I had no unsupervised contacts with children u/16, which I never even I had nor was there any court order placed on me not to have any contacts with u/16. She was accompanied by a Police Officer who stayed outside the test room. However, at the end of the test, the examiner asked me to wait as she was going to see if the police officer who had come with her had any questions to ask, which she decided not to. I was given a sheet of the examiner and the police officer phone numbers if I had any questions had to ask later on. After coming back home I phoned the police officer asking that if that the examiner's comments would affect my SOR Removal application, which was going to be reconsidered. She was very sympathetic saying not to worry too much about it that just only the test results would have not have too much impact on me my reconsidered SOR removal application. The PPU Superintendent took this action when I had pointed out to my investigating officer that there were some fatal mistakes in the original determination. So my first worry is that if the examiner's comments would affect my SOR second review? Please, What are your comments about this issue?
2. I told the examiner that I had a resiprical visit every 3-4 months with a family friend coming with children but except Saying a Hello, I that hardly ever spoke to them and they are very shy anyway and there were always parents present there. However, I added that at one occasion the father went outside for about 20 minutes so I left the sitting room and went upstairs in case the mother popped into the kitchen. She asked what would I do if that happened again, I told that I would go out with him.
My second worry is that examiner would report these visits to the Police and they might alert the Social Services and they would be visiting with the Police to my friend’s house and the Social Service asking to sign an undertaking with them for not have any contact with me when there are their children are present. They are our very close friends and us, and especially, my wife won’t like to lose contact with them. If the Police ask me their address, am I under any legal obligation to do so, as I have no order placed on me for not to have any contact with u/16 years old children?
All the advice on these issues will be highly appreciated

There's something like this going on in a separate discussion. The problem is that the police define unsupervised as "not supervised by one of the police, probation or social services". The fact that the parents are present is not always taken into account.

  Thanks for your guidance. I approached the site you mention. However, I notice the word SOR (I have bolded it) though this person is not on SOPO. Is it a mistake or not? Could you please clarify

"This isn't overriding the SHPO, it's something different. They said it wasn't a breach of the SHPO, because it wasn't. However, the one-size-fits-all approach means nobody on the SOR can have contact with children regardless of what might be on their SHPO/SOPO, which is a matter for the police to pass to child services to consider. These situations can sometimes require written consent from the parent/guardian."


There is nothing in the notification requirements of being on the SOR that says you have to report all contact with any child. However, the police has a separate duty of safeguarding, and this is one they can pass to social services, so they can always say they're just doing their job. Because they see everyone on the SOR as all being the same, they will probably report any contact with an under-18 to social services, even if the person's offence involved a much older person of a different gender. They would see it in the same light as a report from a "concerned neighbour" about child neglect or cruelty, except in this case they don't have to do any investigation themselves.

  I'm having difficulty in posting the following, so I will try again.
Dear Suprembeing. I am sorry to bother you once again, as I found the advice and information you have been giving me. Incidentally, I made a small contribution to Unlock about two weeks ago and intend to make more in the near future. 
Firstly re my friendship with a family friend who have young children;  the PPU and Social Services visited my friend’s house but he was not in so they left a card to phone them which he did as soon as he came back home, ( soon afterwards they came), and he answered satisfactorily to all the question the PPU officer asked and they said that they would o longer be contacting them.  
Now a request on another matter  As I previously mentioned that the PPU Superintendent is reconsidering my SOR removal application as in his original determination there were a few fatal mistakes. When I pointed it out, he accepted at least one mistake and decided to reconsider my application but invited to attend a voluntary Polygraph Test.  Its result will have an impact on my case. But I will have to wait for up to 28 days to get a copy of it. So I won’t have a chance to defend myself against any negative polygraph report’s comments, as my reconsideration will already be underway. Only I can guess that the examiner said I was being dishonest when I said NO  to the question that if I ever had any unsupervised contact a with children u/16. I pointed her out that I was telling the truth and anyway I have no restrictions on me to not have any unsupervised contact.  Also, she mentioned out that the test was 85 t0 95 per cent correct. In reply, I commented that in school and colleges the students can pass a test with flying colours even when they get 75 to 80 per cent answers correct. To this comment, she concluded as that I had I lied at least once.
In addition to my original application to come off the reregister, which was declined, I want to send an additional application commenting on Grounds the PPU Superintendent gave for the rejection. But I won’t have a chance to say in my defence to any adverse comments made on the Polygraph results.  Could  I please have our advice on this matter?


Hi
I wasn't sure if you was asking AB2014 for further advice but I thought I'd reply on my info.
I am pleased the SS outcome was as you hoped and I hope your friend and his family remain that, supportive friends. A bit of advice I would give is that you ensure you manage any future "scenarios" in a way that protects you . Always bear in mine what someone else might suggest when viewing the interaction from a distance.
On the "poly test", I am assuming they offered that as a deterrent; not only being vindictive because you highlighted their errors, but also thinking you wouldn't want to take one. I always remember listening to others saying how they would answer the question "do you love children? Yes or No". When you have been through the turmoil many of us have, you start to think of 101 ways your answer could be misunderstood.

I understand why you replied quoting the "student exams pass marks"  but I feel they can take comments like that in the same way they say someone is in "denial" when they quote mitigation reasons. As an excuse to hide something. I would suggest not to speak those type of replies in future. Remember they have probably undertook the test many times and heard everything before and could be cynical.
In regards to commenting on the errors made by the Police in your previous application, remember there is always the possibility that they could be taken as you suggesting they are incompetent and therefore not received well. The use of a solicitor would be wise to highlight those issues, as their words are received in a more acceptable manner. In fact they may even suggest you do not bother mentioning it and then you may get a more sympathetic reaction from them due to you not trying to embarrass them to the Judge.  
Finally on not knowing the results of the test,  the use of a solicitor may gain the support for holding the hearing after the test results have been made. Otherwise I would just word a sentence in a positive manner for example: I willingly accepted the offer of a poly test to demonstrate my rehabilitation and positive character . Or something like that. Again I would not chastise the use of them lach I am suggesting. You need their support more if you are alone; hence why something as important as this I have / are using a solicitor. Understanding that the financial restrictions of some, does make this a quality of life v financial balancing decision though.

I wish you luck and look forward to reading other advice to you.

 
Thank you very much for such a piece of long comprehensive advice. I have not even though about the advice you have given.  I made my original application through a  Manchester solicitor whose firm was advertising as a specialist in the sex offences case. But I felt very disappointed with this solicitor. Though my offending manager had informed through an email that my case would be decided within the 3 months period, so is mentioned on a Government website, but he PPU took more than two years to give me a decision.  I tried to contact this solicitor through phone and emails to chase the PPU to expedite. But over the two years from him, I did not receive any phone calls or emails from him. When I would phone his secretary, she would say that she would pass my message on to the solicitor.
Previously I was approached from my then Offending PPU officer, who had drafted the letter and my SOPO was Varied from 5 prohibitions to a single one, and to his own words to a MANAGEABLE LEVEL.   Two years later I got my SOPO discharged totally unopposed by the PPU solicitor, but by some hesitation by the court the magistrates.  Though I had used a local Solicitor, who had admitted that he had not dealt before with any Sex Offences cases, but he would seek advice, if necessary, from his colleagues. So in both cases, he had hardly any work to do. If even now I am not removed from the register, I do not intend to appeal. This is because I might get any press adverse press publicity. I have moved to a new area, and would not like my growing-up child to be told that his father is a paedophile. He is four and a half years old and is my from the second marriage. From my previous marriage, I have 6 grown-up children who have moved far afield where I live. Incidentally in my previous cases, as mentioned above, there was no press reporter in the courtroom, where my csas were decided. But I may not be that lucky third time. And even if the PPU allows me to remove me from the register, I wonder, if the PPU ever find that I have been in contact with children, supervised or unsupervised, they would alert the children services.
And this is not a big deal to remain on the register as I have only to inform at a police station of my foreign travel (which I do once a year) and give my bank and passport details which are almost the same from the day one. I have not ever stayed in a house for more than a few hours, whether there are children present or not.  
As, perhaps, you may have guessed that English is not my first language. I am not as eloquent as you would expect from a native speaker with good qualifications. So,  I will not write directly to any such higher authorities such an important letter. As I have always done previously done I will use a  solicitor, and in the present case to just write a letter.
Thank you once again your continued support with such valuable advice.
PS: I could not read your reply yesterday as I was in the hospital all day and when I came I felt so tired that I went to bed early.


  27 March. Thanks for your another prompt reply.
I forgot to tell you that the PPU visits had reduced to about once a year. When my first review was rejected, the investigating officer had told me that the police visits would stop, they would only contact me now and then over the phone.  As she went back and checked and confirmed that I had only one SOPO breach only in 2005, and not several breaches and that the last was not one in 2015. The breach was for attending a local gym, for which I was given a lighter sentence of rehabilitation order for which the Probation Services had recommended I had to attend a two years sexual offending programme, which I completed successfully.  Had I I not pointed out this factor, I would have remained on SOR on rather easy terms. Now they would not be as kind.   As you mentioned that if you challenge them they could Ivindictive. So that they invited me to attend Polygraph Interview. Also have you any idea what kind of press publicity can I expect t if I appeal in a magistrate the court,  which I want to avoid at any cost. Incidentally, my children with me when I was sentenced. Thanks for giving me details of a competent lawyer, at whose Office I am going to phone tomorrow and asking Andrew to write a letter on my behalf to the  Police Superandent.  
Thanks again for your continued immensely valuable advice.


Hi The unkown,
I have written previously that my sentencing/appeal Court has decided all applications are held in open court with media restrictions whether your appeal is supported or not supported by the Police.
My initial SOPO conditions removal applications were supported by the Police and so I did not have to appear in Court. However my last application concerned 1 and was supported but the Court now requires an appearance to be required. As your application is for the SOR I think you would appear, sorry.
I did contact the Court officers about the media and they suggested as my case was old, they did not think the media would attend.
I would suggest you contact the Court Office and ask them the question about media.
Good luck

JASB - 28 Feb 20 2:36 PM
Theunknown - 27 Feb 20 8:57 PM
Theunknown - 27 Feb 20 12:28 PM
JASB - 26 Feb 20 2:45 PM
Theunknown - 25 Feb 20 6:32 PM
AB2014 - 13 Feb 20 3:15 PM
Theunknown - 13 Feb 20 2:38 PM
AB2014 - 13 Feb 20 11:41 AM
Theunknown - 13 Feb 20 11:11 AM
Theunknown - 6 Feb 20 12:41 PM
AB2014 - 6 Feb 20 8:59 AM
Theunknown - 5 Feb 20 7:24 PM
JASB - 5 Feb 20 3:01 PM
Theunknown - 5 Feb 20 10:51 AM
If you are on SOR, as noted from the NARO website, one of the following requirements is:
“If you are living with a child or staying in a household where a child lives for at least 12 hours each day”
However on the Unlock website says that a person on Sex Offender should inform the police if he has stayed in a household for more than 12 hours where a child u/18 lives.
Which one is correct?
Also the PPU has never informed me about this requirement? I was put on SOR in 1999.

Polygraph Interview.  My application for SOR discharge was rejected by the PPU HQ giving false reasons. When I pointed out this to them, the PPU HQ invalidated their decision admitting the mistakes and have decided to reconsider, No apologies, but has made it more difficult for me by INVITING me to attend a polygraph interview. Note: Polygraph tests, being very unreliable,(a report from Wikipedia) are not admissible in the UK Criminal Courts. But can carry some weight in a civil court setting in a criminal court, which could apply in my case. 
I feel very nervous about it and suffer many medical conditions which can affect the test. I have informed the PPQ HQ about these conditions. A week has gone, still, I have not received a reply, Shall I go ahead with the test, bearing in mind I am not required to take the polygraph interview. 
A reply to the above two questions will be highly appreciated.


Hi,
First and most important the fact is that websites are not always up to date and like many aspects of legal life, it is the writers interpretation of the legal wording - unless it is a cut and paste from a government document and than as long as that is the latest version lol.
A SOPO condition does not have to be in place as it comes under the term of "public protection", and as interviews are not recorded, there is no constraining of their questions if they wish. Its is suggested that these sort of questions come under the heading of "risk assessment" as well.
In my experience any sex offender when visited will be asked about family and relationships. If either or both exist, the conversation is expanded to include contact with children, even if they are extended family members.
As mentioned, Social Services would be contacted unless the PPU felt there was no risk. Be aware that from my experience, that decision can differ between PPU officers and constabularies.
If you have always ensured you have not broken any of their rules and kept the PPU informed of your consequences, then you should not worry.

Polygraph:
I would seek legal advice.
The Government / Media response after the Jeremy Kyle escapade, highlighted the concern that many psychologists are strongly opinionated about there accuracy as many are stating they are not. The same concerns have also been raised - after the recent terrorist atrocities - by the Government and experts.  
You have mentioned you informed them of your medical health concerns, which could be seen as a avoidance tactic so why not take a positive and co-operative approach?
Possibly consider / offer to undertake an independent psychologists assessment instead because of the expert accuracy concerns.

I hope this helps in some small way - keeps us informed and wish you success.
“As advised by you in the first paragraph of your post, I have gone through the Govt. Website but I can't find anywhere having resided/stayed for more than 12 hours where a child under 18 lives. Kindly correct me if I have misunderstood their information
  http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/42/part/2/crossheading/notification-requirements
Changes to legislation:
Sexual Offences Act 2003, Cross Heading: Notificationrequirements is up to date with all changes known to be in force on or before05 February 2020. There are changes that may be brought into force at a future date. Changes that have been made appear in the content and are referenced with annotations.
his having resided or stayed, for a qualifying period, at any premises in the United Kingdom the address of which has not been notified to the police under section 83(1), this subsection, or section 2 of the SexOffenders Act 1997,
 (6)In this section, “qualifying period” means—
(a)a period of 7 days, or
(b)two or more periods, in any period of 12 months, which taken together amount to 7 days.




Well, the Sexual Offences Act 2003 was updated by The Sexual Offences Act 2003 (Notification Requirements) (England and Wales) Regulations 2012. Section 10 of those regulations says that:

"10.—(1) The information set out in paragraph (2) is prescribed for the purposes of section 83(5)(h) of the 2003 Act in a case where a relevant offender (R) resides, or stays for a period of at least 12 hours, at a relevant household."

Section 2 says:


“relevant household” means a household or other place—
(a)where a child resides or stays, and
(b)to which the public do not have access (whether for payment or not)."

That seems to agree with the Unlock information. PPU won't tell you about this requirement, as the question should be asked every time you register, and they should then tell you to notify them if any of the information you have given them changes.

Thanks, Supremebeing. You seem to be a Suprmebeing as you are a goldmine of information on questions like mine.


Hello, here I am again. Thanks once again for your continued advice. As I mentioned before I was going to attend a Polygraph Test which I did. The questions were asked similar to those you mentioned that I might be asked. At the end of the test, the examiner said that that she did not believe that I had no unsupervised contacts with children u/16, which I never even I had nor was there any court order placed on me not to have any contacts with u/16. She was accompanied by a Police Officer who stayed outside the test room. However, at the end of the test, the examiner asked me to wait as she was going to see if the police officer who had come with her had any questions to ask, which she decided not to. I was given a sheet of the examiner and the police officer phone numbers if I had any questions had to ask later on. After coming back home I phoned the police officer asking that if that the examiner's comments would affect my SOR Removal application, which was going to be reconsidered. She was very sympathetic saying not to worry too much about it that just only the test results would have not have too much impact on me my reconsidered SOR removal application. The PPU Superintendent took this action when I had pointed out to my investigating officer that there were some fatal mistakes in the original determination. So my first worry is that if the examiner's comments would affect my SOR second review? Please, What are your comments about this issue?
2. I told the examiner that I had a resiprical visit every 3-4 months with a family friend coming with children but except Saying a Hello, I that hardly ever spoke to them and they are very shy anyway and there were always parents present there. However, I added that at one occasion the father went outside for about 20 minutes so I left the sitting room and went upstairs in case the mother popped into the kitchen. She asked what would I do if that happened again, I told that I would go out with him.
My second worry is that examiner would report these visits to the Police and they might alert the Social Services and they would be visiting with the Police to my friend’s house and the Social Service asking to sign an undertaking with them for not have any contact with me when there are their children are present. They are our very close friends and us, and especially, my wife won’t like to lose contact with them. If the Police ask me their address, am I under any legal obligation to do so, as I have no order placed on me for not to have any contact with u/16 years old children?
All the advice on these issues will be highly appreciated

There's something like this going on in a separate discussion. The problem is that the police define unsupervised as "not supervised by one of the police, probation or social services". The fact that the parents are present is not always taken into account.

  Thanks for your guidance. I approached the site you mention. However, I notice the word SOR (I have bolded it) though this person is not on SOPO. Is it a mistake or not? Could you please clarify

"This isn't overriding the SHPO, it's something different. They said it wasn't a breach of the SHPO, because it wasn't. However, the one-size-fits-all approach means nobody on the SOR can have contact with children regardless of what might be on their SHPO/SOPO, which is a matter for the police to pass to child services to consider. These situations can sometimes require written consent from the parent/guardian."


There is nothing in the notification requirements of being on the SOR that says you have to report all contact with any child. However, the police has a separate duty of safeguarding, and this is one they can pass to social services, so they can always say they're just doing their job. Because they see everyone on the SOR as all being the same, they will probably report any contact with an under-18 to social services, even if the person's offence involved a much older person of a different gender. They would see it in the same light as a report from a "concerned neighbour" about child neglect or cruelty, except in this case they don't have to do any investigation themselves.

  I'm having difficulty in posting the following, so I will try again.
Dear Suprembeing. I am sorry to bother you once again, as I found the advice and information you have been giving me. Incidentally, I made a small contribution to Unlock about two weeks ago and intend to make more in the near future. 
Firstly re my friendship with a family friend who have young children;  the PPU and Social Services visited my friend’s house but he was not in so they left a card to phone them which he did as soon as he came back home, ( soon afterwards they came), and he answered satisfactorily to all the question the PPU officer asked and they said that they would o longer be contacting them.  
Now a request on another matter  As I previously mentioned that the PPU Superintendent is reconsidering my SOR removal application as in his original determination there were a few fatal mistakes. When I pointed it out, he accepted at least one mistake and decided to reconsider my application but invited to attend a voluntary Polygraph Test.  Its result will have an impact on my case. But I will have to wait for up to 28 days to get a copy of it. So I won’t have a chance to defend myself against any negative polygraph report’s comments, as my reconsideration will already be underway. Only I can guess that the examiner said I was being dishonest when I said NO  to the question that if I ever had any unsupervised contact a with children u/16. I pointed her out that I was telling the truth and anyway I have no restrictions on me to not have any unsupervised contact.  Also, she mentioned out that the test was 85 t0 95 per cent correct. In reply, I commented that in school and colleges the students can pass a test with flying colours even when they get 75 to 80 per cent answers correct. To this comment, she concluded as that I had I lied at least once.
In addition to my original application to come off the reregister, which was declined, I want to send an additional application commenting on Grounds the PPU Superintendent gave for the rejection. But I won’t have a chance to say in my defence to any adverse comments made on the Polygraph results.  Could  I please have our advice on this matter?


Hi
I wasn't sure if you was asking AB2014 for further advice but I thought I'd reply on my info.
I am pleased the SS outcome was as you hoped and I hope your friend and his family remain that, supportive friends. A bit of advice I would give is that you ensure you manage any future "scenarios" in a way that protects you . Always bear in mine what someone else might suggest when viewing the interaction from a distance.
On the "poly test", I am assuming they offered that as a deterrent; not only being vindictive because you highlighted their errors, but also thinking you wouldn't want to take one. I always remember listening to others saying how they would answer the question "do you love children? Yes or No". When you have been through the turmoil many of us have, you start to think of 101 ways your answer could be misunderstood.

I understand why you replied quoting the "student exams pass marks"  but I feel they can take comments like that in the same way they say someone is in "denial" when they quote mitigation reasons. As an excuse to hide something. I would suggest not to speak those type of replies in future. Remember they have probably undertook the test many times and heard everything before and could be cynical.
In regards to commenting on the errors made by the Police in your previous application, remember there is always the possibility that they could be taken as you suggesting they are incompetent and therefore not received well. The use of a solicitor would be wise to highlight those issues, as their words are received in a more acceptable manner. In fact they may even suggest you do not bother mentioning it and then you may get a more sympathetic reaction from them due to you not trying to embarrass them to the Judge.  
Finally on not knowing the results of the test,  the use of a solicitor may gain the support for holding the hearing after the test results have been made. Otherwise I would just word a sentence in a positive manner for example: I willingly accepted the offer of a poly test to demonstrate my rehabilitation and positive character . Or something like that. Again I would not chastise the use of them lach I am suggesting. You need their support more if you are alone; hence why something as important as this I have / are using a solicitor. Understanding that the financial restrictions of some, does make this a quality of life v financial balancing decision though.

I wish you luck and look forward to reading other advice to you.

 
Thank you very much for such a piece of long comprehensive advice. I have not even though about the advice you have given.  I made my original application through a  Manchester solicitor whose firm was advertising as a specialist in the sex offences case. But I felt very disappointed with this solicitor. Though my offending manager had informed through an email that my case would be decided within the 3 months period, so is mentioned on a Government website, but he PPU took more than two years to give me a decision.  I tried to contact this solicitor through phone and emails to chase the PPU to expedite. But over the two years from him, I did not receive any phone calls or emails from him. When I would phone his secretary, she would say that she would pass my message on to the solicitor.
Previously I was approached from my then Offending PPU officer, who had drafted the letter and my SOPO was Varied from 5 prohibitions to a single one, and to his own words to a MANAGEABLE LEVEL.   Two years later I got my SOPO discharged totally unopposed by the PPU solicitor, but by some hesitation by the court the magistrates.  Though I had used a local Solicitor, who had admitted that he had not dealt before with any Sex Offences cases, but he would seek advice, if necessary, from his colleagues. So in both cases, he had hardly any work to do. If even now I am not removed from the register, I do not intend to appeal. This is because I might get any press adverse press publicity. I have moved to a new area, and would not like my growing-up child to be told that his father is a paedophile. He is four and a half years old and is my from the second marriage. From my previous marriage, I have 6 grown-up children who have moved far afield where I live. Incidentally in my previous cases, as mentioned above, there was no press reporter in the courtroom, where my csas were decided. But I may not be that lucky third time. And even if the PPU allows me to remove me from the register, I wonder, if the PPU ever find that I have been in contact with children, supervised or unsupervised, they would alert the children services.
And this is not a big deal to remain on the register as I have only to inform at a police station of my foreign travel (which I do once a year) and give my bank and passport details which are almost the same from the day one. I have not ever stayed in a house for more than a few hours, whether there are children present or not.  
As, perhaps, you may have guessed that English is not my first language. I am not as eloquent as you would expect from a native speaker with good qualifications. So,  I will not write directly to any such higher authorities such an important letter. As I have always done previously done I will use a  solicitor, and in the present case to just write a letter.
Thank you once again your continued support with such valuable advice.
PS: I could not read your reply yesterday as I was in the hospital all day and when I came I felt so tired that I went to bed early.


  27 March. Thanks for your another prompt reply.
I forgot to tell you that the PPU visits had reduced to about once a year. When my first review was rejected, the investigating officer had told me that the police visits would stop, they would only contact me now and then over the phone.  As she went back and checked and confirmed that I had only one SOPO breach only in 2005, and not several breaches and that the last was not one in 2015. The breach was for attending a local gym, for which I was given a lighter sentence of rehabilitation order for which the Probation Services had recommended I had to attend a two years sexual offending programme, which I completed successfully.  Had I I not pointed out this factor, I would have remained on SOR on rather easy terms. Now they would not be as kind.   As you mentioned that if you challenge them they could Ivindictive. So that they invited me to attend Polygraph Interview. Also have you any idea what kind of press publicity can I expect t if I appeal in a magistrate the court,  which I want to avoid at any cost. Incidentally, my children with me when I was sentenced. Thanks for giving me details of a competent lawyer, at whose Office I am going to phone tomorrow and asking Andrew to write a letter on my behalf to the  Police Superandent.  
Thanks again for your continued immensely valuable advice.


Hi The unkown,
I have written previously that my sentencing/appeal Court has decided all applications are held in open court with media restrictions whether your appeal is supported or not supported by the Police.
My initial SOPO conditions removal applications were supported by the Police and so I did not have to appear in Court. However my last application concerned 1 and was supported but the Court now requires an appearance to be required. As your application is for the SOR I think you would appear, sorry.
I did contact the Court officers about the media and they suggested as my case was old, they did not think the media would attend.
I would suggest you contact the Court Office and ask them the question about media.
Good luck

Thanks for some more useful information. This morning I went to my local Police Station asking them to get my polygraph results but they had no clue. They said they have never been approached for this for such information. I took from them the Manchester Police Station Phone Number, who have arranged this test at the Chorley Police Station. I was told by the Poly Examiner, who had told me quite categorically to go to my local Police Station and asked them to obtain this information. I took from them the Manchester Phone No. When I phoned Manchester they had no clue either. I phoned back to my investigating officer and she suggested to get more information from the Lancashire Police Constabulary internet website. There were two women involved in Poly Test and I contacted both of them on the phone their was no reply, so I have left the text messages. About 4 hours have gone but I have not received any reply from them. I want to get this sorted out before 4 March as I am flying abroad to stay there for a month. My investigating officer has got the Poly test results but she won't give it to me saying she is not authorised to do so. My worry is that to see if I could make any comments to any negative information before my SOR second review is considered. On the advice of the investigating officer, I have emailed her my concerns with a copy to the Detective Sub-inspector. Until to-date I have not received any reply from them. Usually, they send replies to my queries within the 24 hours. I need your advice as what I can do now before they make a fresh decision on my original application. I don’t expect them to be as quick as they took over two years to reach to their determination to my original application. But you never know.


Hi,
I think you have done most of what you can do as you have documented your concerns and reasons for the feedback. In the end this documentation could possibly support you if an appeal / complaint is necessary.
One bit of advice I was given at the start of my journey was that you must forget about response timeframes when dealing with the authorities .
Example: A PPU officer stopped responding to my emails concerning a discussion we had been having. I subsequently sent weekly emails asking for an update and referring to my past emails that had not been replied to. After 3 months I called his office to be told he had retire some months before. It took another 2 months for my new PPU officer to contact me and he did not know anything about the issue. I accepted this was not his fault and our interactions started on a good standing.

You could ask a solicitor, but they may say the same as I mentioned above or will write a letter. This again, seeings as you have only just emailed them, might be received by them in a manner not intended by you.

You do not have a date for the decision as yet and you do not know if there is any negative remarks so please consider the advice above on timeframes.
Plan your holiday and make the arrangements. Ensure you have notified them of your travel details and any contact details. Focus on your own well being as this means you are controlling your own responsibilities.
At times all we can do is wait and consider sending requests for updates at reasonable periods, i.e. every fortnight.
 




Theunknown
Theunknown
Supreme Being
Supreme Being (1.2K reputation)Supreme Being (1.2K reputation)Supreme Being (1.2K reputation)Supreme Being (1.2K reputation)Supreme Being (1.2K reputation)Supreme Being (1.2K reputation)Supreme Being (1.2K reputation)Supreme Being (1.2K reputation)Supreme Being (1.2K reputation)

Group: Forum Members
Posts: 24, Visits: 36
JASB - 28 Feb 20 5:25 PM
Theunknown - 28 Feb 20 4:48 PM
JASB - 28 Feb 20 2:36 PM
Theunknown - 27 Feb 20 8:57 PM
Theunknown - 27 Feb 20 12:28 PM
JASB - 26 Feb 20 2:45 PM
Theunknown - 25 Feb 20 6:32 PM
AB2014 - 13 Feb 20 3:15 PM
Theunknown - 13 Feb 20 2:38 PM
AB2014 - 13 Feb 20 11:41 AM
Theunknown - 13 Feb 20 11:11 AM
Theunknown - 6 Feb 20 12:41 PM
AB2014 - 6 Feb 20 8:59 AM
Theunknown - 5 Feb 20 7:24 PM
JASB - 5 Feb 20 3:01 PM
Theunknown - 5 Feb 20 10:51 AM
If you are on SOR, as noted from the NARO website, one of the following requirements is:
“If you are living with a child or staying in a household where a child lives for at least 12 hours each day”
However on the Unlock website says that a person on Sex Offender should inform the police if he has stayed in a household for more than 12 hours where a child u/18 lives.
Which one is correct?
Also the PPU has never informed me about this requirement? I was put on SOR in 1999.

Polygraph Interview.  My application for SOR discharge was rejected by the PPU HQ giving false reasons. When I pointed out this to them, the PPU HQ invalidated their decision admitting the mistakes and have decided to reconsider, No apologies, but has made it more difficult for me by INVITING me to attend a polygraph interview. Note: Polygraph tests, being very unreliable,(a report from Wikipedia) are not admissible in the UK Criminal Courts. But can carry some weight in a civil court setting in a criminal court, which could apply in my case. 
I feel very nervous about it and suffer many medical conditions which can affect the test. I have informed the PPQ HQ about these conditions. A week has gone, still, I have not received a reply, Shall I go ahead with the test, bearing in mind I am not required to take the polygraph interview. 
A reply to the above two questions will be highly appreciated.


Hi,
First and most important the fact is that websites are not always up to date and like many aspects of legal life, it is the writers interpretation of the legal wording - unless it is a cut and paste from a government document and than as long as that is the latest version lol.
A SOPO condition does not have to be in place as it comes under the term of "public protection", and as interviews are not recorded, there is no constraining of their questions if they wish. Its is suggested that these sort of questions come under the heading of "risk assessment" as well.
In my experience any sex offender when visited will be asked about family and relationships. If either or both exist, the conversation is expanded to include contact with children, even if they are extended family members.
As mentioned, Social Services would be contacted unless the PPU felt there was no risk. Be aware that from my experience, that decision can differ between PPU officers and constabularies.
If you have always ensured you have not broken any of their rules and kept the PPU informed of your consequences, then you should not worry.

Polygraph:
I would seek legal advice.
The Government / Media response after the Jeremy Kyle escapade, highlighted the concern that many psychologists are strongly opinionated about there accuracy as many are stating they are not. The same concerns have also been raised - after the recent terrorist atrocities - by the Government and experts.  
You have mentioned you informed them of your medical health concerns, which could be seen as a avoidance tactic so why not take a positive and co-operative approach?
Possibly consider / offer to undertake an independent psychologists assessment instead because of the expert accuracy concerns.

I hope this helps in some small way - keeps us informed and wish you success.
“As advised by you in the first paragraph of your post, I have gone through the Govt. Website but I can't find anywhere having resided/stayed for more than 12 hours where a child under 18 lives. Kindly correct me if I have misunderstood their information
  http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/42/part/2/crossheading/notification-requirements
Changes to legislation:
Sexual Offences Act 2003, Cross Heading: Notificationrequirements is up to date with all changes known to be in force on or before05 February 2020. There are changes that may be brought into force at a future date. Changes that have been made appear in the content and are referenced with annotations.
his having resided or stayed, for a qualifying period, at any premises in the United Kingdom the address of which has not been notified to the police under section 83(1), this subsection, or section 2 of the SexOffenders Act 1997,
 (6)In this section, “qualifying period” means—
(a)a period of 7 days, or
(b)two or more periods, in any period of 12 months, which taken together amount to 7 days.




Well, the Sexual Offences Act 2003 was updated by The Sexual Offences Act 2003 (Notification Requirements) (England and Wales) Regulations 2012. Section 10 of those regulations says that:

"10.—(1) The information set out in paragraph (2) is prescribed for the purposes of section 83(5)(h) of the 2003 Act in a case where a relevant offender (R) resides, or stays for a period of at least 12 hours, at a relevant household."

Section 2 says:


“relevant household” means a household or other place—
(a)where a child resides or stays, and
(b)to which the public do not have access (whether for payment or not)."

That seems to agree with the Unlock information. PPU won't tell you about this requirement, as the question should be asked every time you register, and they should then tell you to notify them if any of the information you have given them changes.

Thanks, Supremebeing. You seem to be a Suprmebeing as you are a goldmine of information on questions like mine.


Hello, here I am again. Thanks once again for your continued advice. As I mentioned before I was going to attend a Polygraph Test which I did. The questions were asked similar to those you mentioned that I might be asked. At the end of the test, the examiner said that that she did not believe that I had no unsupervised contacts with children u/16, which I never even I had nor was there any court order placed on me not to have any contacts with u/16. She was accompanied by a Police Officer who stayed outside the test room. However, at the end of the test, the examiner asked me to wait as she was going to see if the police officer who had come with her had any questions to ask, which she decided not to. I was given a sheet of the examiner and the police officer phone numbers if I had any questions had to ask later on. After coming back home I phoned the police officer asking that if that the examiner's comments would affect my SOR Removal application, which was going to be reconsidered. She was very sympathetic saying not to worry too much about it that just only the test results would have not have too much impact on me my reconsidered SOR removal application. The PPU Superintendent took this action when I had pointed out to my investigating officer that there were some fatal mistakes in the original determination. So my first worry is that if the examiner's comments would affect my SOR second review? Please, What are your comments about this issue?
2. I told the examiner that I had a resiprical visit every 3-4 months with a family friend coming with children but except Saying a Hello, I that hardly ever spoke to them and they are very shy anyway and there were always parents present there. However, I added that at one occasion the father went outside for about 20 minutes so I left the sitting room and went upstairs in case the mother popped into the kitchen. She asked what would I do if that happened again, I told that I would go out with him.
My second worry is that examiner would report these visits to the Police and they might alert the Social Services and they would be visiting with the Police to my friend’s house and the Social Service asking to sign an undertaking with them for not have any contact with me when there are their children are present. They are our very close friends and us, and especially, my wife won’t like to lose contact with them. If the Police ask me their address, am I under any legal obligation to do so, as I have no order placed on me for not to have any contact with u/16 years old children?
All the advice on these issues will be highly appreciated

There's something like this going on in a separate discussion. The problem is that the police define unsupervised as "not supervised by one of the police, probation or social services". The fact that the parents are present is not always taken into account.

  Thanks for your guidance. I approached the site you mention. However, I notice the word SOR (I have bolded it) though this person is not on SOPO. Is it a mistake or not? Could you please clarify

"This isn't overriding the SHPO, it's something different. They said it wasn't a breach of the SHPO, because it wasn't. However, the one-size-fits-all approach means nobody on the SOR can have contact with children regardless of what might be on their SHPO/SOPO, which is a matter for the police to pass to child services to consider. These situations can sometimes require written consent from the parent/guardian."


There is nothing in the notification requirements of being on the SOR that says you have to report all contact with any child. However, the police has a separate duty of safeguarding, and this is one they can pass to social services, so they can always say they're just doing their job. Because they see everyone on the SOR as all being the same, they will probably report any contact with an under-18 to social services, even if the person's offence involved a much older person of a different gender. They would see it in the same light as a report from a "concerned neighbour" about child neglect or cruelty, except in this case they don't have to do any investigation themselves.

  I'm having difficulty in posting the following, so I will try again.
Dear Suprembeing. I am sorry to bother you once again, as I found the advice and information you have been giving me. Incidentally, I made a small contribution to Unlock about two weeks ago and intend to make more in the near future. 
Firstly re my friendship with a family friend who have young children;  the PPU and Social Services visited my friend’s house but he was not in so they left a card to phone them which he did as soon as he came back home, ( soon afterwards they came), and he answered satisfactorily to all the question the PPU officer asked and they said that they would o longer be contacting them.  
Now a request on another matter  As I previously mentioned that the PPU Superintendent is reconsidering my SOR removal application as in his original determination there were a few fatal mistakes. When I pointed it out, he accepted at least one mistake and decided to reconsider my application but invited to attend a voluntary Polygraph Test.  Its result will have an impact on my case. But I will have to wait for up to 28 days to get a copy of it. So I won’t have a chance to defend myself against any negative polygraph report’s comments, as my reconsideration will already be underway. Only I can guess that the examiner said I was being dishonest when I said NO  to the question that if I ever had any unsupervised contact a with children u/16. I pointed her out that I was telling the truth and anyway I have no restrictions on me to not have any unsupervised contact.  Also, she mentioned out that the test was 85 t0 95 per cent correct. In reply, I commented that in school and colleges the students can pass a test with flying colours even when they get 75 to 80 per cent answers correct. To this comment, she concluded as that I had I lied at least once.
In addition to my original application to come off the reregister, which was declined, I want to send an additional application commenting on Grounds the PPU Superintendent gave for the rejection. But I won’t have a chance to say in my defence to any adverse comments made on the Polygraph results.  Could  I please have our advice on this matter?


Hi
I wasn't sure if you was asking AB2014 for further advice but I thought I'd reply on my info.
I am pleased the SS outcome was as you hoped and I hope your friend and his family remain that, supportive friends. A bit of advice I would give is that you ensure you manage any future "scenarios" in a way that protects you . Always bear in mine what someone else might suggest when viewing the interaction from a distance.
On the "poly test", I am assuming they offered that as a deterrent; not only being vindictive because you highlighted their errors, but also thinking you wouldn't want to take one. I always remember listening to others saying how they would answer the question "do you love children? Yes or No". When you have been through the turmoil many of us have, you start to think of 101 ways your answer could be misunderstood.

I understand why you replied quoting the "student exams pass marks"  but I feel they can take comments like that in the same way they say someone is in "denial" when they quote mitigation reasons. As an excuse to hide something. I would suggest not to speak those type of replies in future. Remember they have probably undertook the test many times and heard everything before and could be cynical.
In regards to commenting on the errors made by the Police in your previous application, remember there is always the possibility that they could be taken as you suggesting they are incompetent and therefore not received well. The use of a solicitor would be wise to highlight those issues, as their words are received in a more acceptable manner. In fact they may even suggest you do not bother mentioning it and then you may get a more sympathetic reaction from them due to you not trying to embarrass them to the Judge.  
Finally on not knowing the results of the test,  the use of a solicitor may gain the support for holding the hearing after the test results have been made. Otherwise I would just word a sentence in a positive manner for example: I willingly accepted the offer of a poly test to demonstrate my rehabilitation and positive character . Or something like that. Again I would not chastise the use of them lach I am suggesting. You need their support more if you are alone; hence why something as important as this I have / are using a solicitor. Understanding that the financial restrictions of some, does make this a quality of life v financial balancing decision though.

I wish you luck and look forward to reading other advice to you.

 
Thank you very much for such a piece of long comprehensive advice. I have not even though about the advice you have given.  I made my original application through a  Manchester solicitor whose firm was advertising as a specialist in the sex offences case. But I felt very disappointed with this solicitor. Though my offending manager had informed through an email that my case would be decided within the 3 months period, so is mentioned on a Government website, but he PPU took more than two years to give me a decision.  I tried to contact this solicitor through phone and emails to chase the PPU to expedite. But over the two years from him, I did not receive any phone calls or emails from him. When I would phone his secretary, she would say that she would pass my message on to the solicitor.
Previously I was approached from my then Offending PPU officer, who had drafted the letter and my SOPO was Varied from 5 prohibitions to a single one, and to his own words to a MANAGEABLE LEVEL.   Two years later I got my SOPO discharged totally unopposed by the PPU solicitor, but by some hesitation by the court the magistrates.  Though I had used a local Solicitor, who had admitted that he had not dealt before with any Sex Offences cases, but he would seek advice, if necessary, from his colleagues. So in both cases, he had hardly any work to do. If even now I am not removed from the register, I do not intend to appeal. This is because I might get any press adverse press publicity. I have moved to a new area, and would not like my growing-up child to be told that his father is a paedophile. He is four and a half years old and is my from the second marriage. From my previous marriage, I have 6 grown-up children who have moved far afield where I live. Incidentally in my previous cases, as mentioned above, there was no press reporter in the courtroom, where my csas were decided. But I may not be that lucky third time. And even if the PPU allows me to remove me from the register, I wonder, if the PPU ever find that I have been in contact with children, supervised or unsupervised, they would alert the children services.
And this is not a big deal to remain on the register as I have only to inform at a police station of my foreign travel (which I do once a year) and give my bank and passport details which are almost the same from the day one. I have not ever stayed in a house for more than a few hours, whether there are children present or not.  
As, perhaps, you may have guessed that English is not my first language. I am not as eloquent as you would expect from a native speaker with good qualifications. So,  I will not write directly to any such higher authorities such an important letter. As I have always done previously done I will use a  solicitor, and in the present case to just write a letter.
Thank you once again your continued support with such valuable advice.
PS: I could not read your reply yesterday as I was in the hospital all day and when I came I felt so tired that I went to bed early.


  27 March. Thanks for your another prompt reply.
I forgot to tell you that the PPU visits had reduced to about once a year. When my first review was rejected, the investigating officer had told me that the police visits would stop, they would only contact me now and then over the phone.  As she went back and checked and confirmed that I had only one SOPO breach only in 2005, and not several breaches and that the last was not one in 2015. The breach was for attending a local gym, for which I was given a lighter sentence of rehabilitation order for which the Probation Services had recommended I had to attend a two years sexual offending programme, which I completed successfully.  Had I I not pointed out this factor, I would have remained on SOR on rather easy terms. Now they would not be as kind.   As you mentioned that if you challenge them they could Ivindictive. So that they invited me to attend Polygraph Interview. Also have you any idea what kind of press publicity can I expect t if I appeal in a magistrate the court,  which I want to avoid at any cost. Incidentally, my children with me when I was sentenced. Thanks for giving me details of a competent lawyer, at whose Office I am going to phone tomorrow and asking Andrew to write a letter on my behalf to the  Police Superandent.  
Thanks again for your continued immensely valuable advice.


Hi The unkown,
I have written previously that my sentencing/appeal Court has decided all applications are held in open court with media restrictions whether your appeal is supported or not supported by the Police.
My initial SOPO conditions removal applications were supported by the Police and so I did not have to appear in Court. However my last application concerned 1 and was supported but the Court now requires an appearance to be required. As your application is for the SOR I think you would appear, sorry.
I did contact the Court officers about the media and they suggested as my case was old, they did not think the media would attend.
I would suggest you contact the Court Office and ask them the question about media.
Good luck

JASB - 28 Feb 20 2:36 PM
Theunknown - 27 Feb 20 8:57 PM
Theunknown - 27 Feb 20 12:28 PM
JASB - 26 Feb 20 2:45 PM
Theunknown - 25 Feb 20 6:32 PM
AB2014 - 13 Feb 20 3:15 PM
Theunknown - 13 Feb 20 2:38 PM
AB2014 - 13 Feb 20 11:41 AM
Theunknown - 13 Feb 20 11:11 AM
Theunknown - 6 Feb 20 12:41 PM
AB2014 - 6 Feb 20 8:59 AM
Theunknown - 5 Feb 20 7:24 PM
JASB - 5 Feb 20 3:01 PM
Theunknown - 5 Feb 20 10:51 AM
If you are on SOR, as noted from the NARO website, one of the following requirements is:
“If you are living with a child or staying in a household where a child lives for at least 12 hours each day”
However on the Unlock website says that a person on Sex Offender should inform the police if he has stayed in a household for more than 12 hours where a child u/18 lives.
Which one is correct?
Also the PPU has never informed me about this requirement? I was put on SOR in 1999.

Polygraph Interview.  My application for SOR discharge was rejected by the PPU HQ giving false reasons. When I pointed out this to them, the PPU HQ invalidated their decision admitting the mistakes and have decided to reconsider, No apologies, but has made it more difficult for me by INVITING me to attend a polygraph interview. Note: Polygraph tests, being very unreliable,(a report from Wikipedia) are not admissible in the UK Criminal Courts. But can carry some weight in a civil court setting in a criminal court, which could apply in my case. 
I feel very nervous about it and suffer many medical conditions which can affect the test. I have informed the PPQ HQ about these conditions. A week has gone, still, I have not received a reply, Shall I go ahead with the test, bearing in mind I am not required to take the polygraph interview. 
A reply to the above two questions will be highly appreciated.


Hi,
First and most important the fact is that websites are not always up to date and like many aspects of legal life, it is the writers interpretation of the legal wording - unless it is a cut and paste from a government document and than as long as that is the latest version lol.
A SOPO condition does not have to be in place as it comes under the term of "public protection", and as interviews are not recorded, there is no constraining of their questions if they wish. Its is suggested that these sort of questions come under the heading of "risk assessment" as well.
In my experience any sex offender when visited will be asked about family and relationships. If either or both exist, the conversation is expanded to include contact with children, even if they are extended family members.
As mentioned, Social Services would be contacted unless the PPU felt there was no risk. Be aware that from my experience, that decision can differ between PPU officers and constabularies.
If you have always ensured you have not broken any of their rules and kept the PPU informed of your consequences, then you should not worry.

Polygraph:
I would seek legal advice.
The Government / Media response after the Jeremy Kyle escapade, highlighted the concern that many psychologists are strongly opinionated about there accuracy as many are stating they are not. The same concerns have also been raised - after the recent terrorist atrocities - by the Government and experts.  
You have mentioned you informed them of your medical health concerns, which could be seen as a avoidance tactic so why not take a positive and co-operative approach?
Possibly consider / offer to undertake an independent psychologists assessment instead because of the expert accuracy concerns.

I hope this helps in some small way - keeps us informed and wish you success.
“As advised by you in the first paragraph of your post, I have gone through the Govt. Website but I can't find anywhere having resided/stayed for more than 12 hours where a child under 18 lives. Kindly correct me if I have misunderstood their information
  http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/42/part/2/crossheading/notification-requirements
Changes to legislation:
Sexual Offences Act 2003, Cross Heading: Notificationrequirements is up to date with all changes known to be in force on or before05 February 2020. There are changes that may be brought into force at a future date. Changes that have been made appear in the content and are referenced with annotations.
his having resided or stayed, for a qualifying period, at any premises in the United Kingdom the address of which has not been notified to the police under section 83(1), this subsection, or section 2 of the SexOffenders Act 1997,
 (6)In this section, “qualifying period” means—
(a)a period of 7 days, or
(b)two or more periods, in any period of 12 months, which taken together amount to 7 days.




Well, the Sexual Offences Act 2003 was updated by The Sexual Offences Act 2003 (Notification Requirements) (England and Wales) Regulations 2012. Section 10 of those regulations says that:

"10.—(1) The information set out in paragraph (2) is prescribed for the purposes of section 83(5)(h) of the 2003 Act in a case where a relevant offender (R) resides, or stays for a period of at least 12 hours, at a relevant household."

Section 2 says:


“relevant household” means a household or other place—
(a)where a child resides or stays, and
(b)to which the public do not have access (whether for payment or not)."

That seems to agree with the Unlock information. PPU won't tell you about this requirement, as the question should be asked every time you register, and they should then tell you to notify them if any of the information you have given them changes.

Thanks, Supremebeing. You seem to be a Suprmebeing as you are a goldmine of information on questions like mine.


Hello, here I am again. Thanks once again for your continued advice. As I mentioned before I was going to attend a Polygraph Test which I did. The questions were asked similar to those you mentioned that I might be asked. At the end of the test, the examiner said that that she did not believe that I had no unsupervised contacts with children u/16, which I never even I had nor was there any court order placed on me not to have any contacts with u/16. She was accompanied by a Police Officer who stayed outside the test room. However, at the end of the test, the examiner asked me to wait as she was going to see if the police officer who had come with her had any questions to ask, which she decided not to. I was given a sheet of the examiner and the police officer phone numbers if I had any questions had to ask later on. After coming back home I phoned the police officer asking that if that the examiner's comments would affect my SOR Removal application, which was going to be reconsidered. She was very sympathetic saying not to worry too much about it that just only the test results would have not have too much impact on me my reconsidered SOR removal application. The PPU Superintendent took this action when I had pointed out to my investigating officer that there were some fatal mistakes in the original determination. So my first worry is that if the examiner's comments would affect my SOR second review? Please, What are your comments about this issue?
2. I told the examiner that I had a resiprical visit every 3-4 months with a family friend coming with children but except Saying a Hello, I that hardly ever spoke to them and they are very shy anyway and there were always parents present there. However, I added that at one occasion the father went outside for about 20 minutes so I left the sitting room and went upstairs in case the mother popped into the kitchen. She asked what would I do if that happened again, I told that I would go out with him.
My second worry is that examiner would report these visits to the Police and they might alert the Social Services and they would be visiting with the Police to my friend’s house and the Social Service asking to sign an undertaking with them for not have any contact with me when there are their children are present. They are our very close friends and us, and especially, my wife won’t like to lose contact with them. If the Police ask me their address, am I under any legal obligation to do so, as I have no order placed on me for not to have any contact with u/16 years old children?
All the advice on these issues will be highly appreciated

There's something like this going on in a separate discussion. The problem is that the police define unsupervised as "not supervised by one of the police, probation or social services". The fact that the parents are present is not always taken into account.

  Thanks for your guidance. I approached the site you mention. However, I notice the word SOR (I have bolded it) though this person is not on SOPO. Is it a mistake or not? Could you please clarify

"This isn't overriding the SHPO, it's something different. They said it wasn't a breach of the SHPO, because it wasn't. However, the one-size-fits-all approach means nobody on the SOR can have contact with children regardless of what might be on their SHPO/SOPO, which is a matter for the police to pass to child services to consider. These situations can sometimes require written consent from the parent/guardian."


There is nothing in the notification requirements of being on the SOR that says you have to report all contact with any child. However, the police has a separate duty of safeguarding, and this is one they can pass to social services, so they can always say they're just doing their job. Because they see everyone on the SOR as all being the same, they will probably report any contact with an under-18 to social services, even if the person's offence involved a much older person of a different gender. They would see it in the same light as a report from a "concerned neighbour" about child neglect or cruelty, except in this case they don't have to do any investigation themselves.

  I'm having difficulty in posting the following, so I will try again.
Dear Suprembeing. I am sorry to bother you once again, as I found the advice and information you have been giving me. Incidentally, I made a small contribution to Unlock about two weeks ago and intend to make more in the near future. 
Firstly re my friendship with a family friend who have young children;  the PPU and Social Services visited my friend’s house but he was not in so they left a card to phone them which he did as soon as he came back home, ( soon afterwards they came), and he answered satisfactorily to all the question the PPU officer asked and they said that they would o longer be contacting them.  
Now a request on another matter  As I previously mentioned that the PPU Superintendent is reconsidering my SOR removal application as in his original determination there were a few fatal mistakes. When I pointed it out, he accepted at least one mistake and decided to reconsider my application but invited to attend a voluntary Polygraph Test.  Its result will have an impact on my case. But I will have to wait for up to 28 days to get a copy of it. So I won’t have a chance to defend myself against any negative polygraph report’s comments, as my reconsideration will already be underway. Only I can guess that the examiner said I was being dishonest when I said NO  to the question that if I ever had any unsupervised contact a with children u/16. I pointed her out that I was telling the truth and anyway I have no restrictions on me to not have any unsupervised contact.  Also, she mentioned out that the test was 85 t0 95 per cent correct. In reply, I commented that in school and colleges the students can pass a test with flying colours even when they get 75 to 80 per cent answers correct. To this comment, she concluded as that I had I lied at least once.
In addition to my original application to come off the reregister, which was declined, I want to send an additional application commenting on Grounds the PPU Superintendent gave for the rejection. But I won’t have a chance to say in my defence to any adverse comments made on the Polygraph results.  Could  I please have our advice on this matter?


Hi
I wasn't sure if you was asking AB2014 for further advice but I thought I'd reply on my info.
I am pleased the SS outcome was as you hoped and I hope your friend and his family remain that, supportive friends. A bit of advice I would give is that you ensure you manage any future "scenarios" in a way that protects you . Always bear in mine what someone else might suggest when viewing the interaction from a distance.
On the "poly test", I am assuming they offered that as a deterrent; not only being vindictive because you highlighted their errors, but also thinking you wouldn't want to take one. I always remember listening to others saying how they would answer the question "do you love children? Yes or No". When you have been through the turmoil many of us have, you start to think of 101 ways your answer could be misunderstood.

I understand why you replied quoting the "student exams pass marks"  but I feel they can take comments like that in the same way they say someone is in "denial" when they quote mitigation reasons. As an excuse to hide something. I would suggest not to speak those type of replies in future. Remember they have probably undertook the test many times and heard everything before and could be cynical.
In regards to commenting on the errors made by the Police in your previous application, remember there is always the possibility that they could be taken as you suggesting they are incompetent and therefore not received well. The use of a solicitor would be wise to highlight those issues, as their words are received in a more acceptable manner. In fact they may even suggest you do not bother mentioning it and then you may get a more sympathetic reaction from them due to you not trying to embarrass them to the Judge.  
Finally on not knowing the results of the test,  the use of a solicitor may gain the support for holding the hearing after the test results have been made. Otherwise I would just word a sentence in a positive manner for example: I willingly accepted the offer of a poly test to demonstrate my rehabilitation and positive character . Or something like that. Again I would not chastise the use of them lach I am suggesting. You need their support more if you are alone; hence why something as important as this I have / are using a solicitor. Understanding that the financial restrictions of some, does make this a quality of life v financial balancing decision though.

I wish you luck and look forward to reading other advice to you.

 
Thank you very much for such a piece of long comprehensive advice. I have not even though about the advice you have given.  I made my original application through a  Manchester solicitor whose firm was advertising as a specialist in the sex offences case. But I felt very disappointed with this solicitor. Though my offending manager had informed through an email that my case would be decided within the 3 months period, so is mentioned on a Government website, but he PPU took more than two years to give me a decision.  I tried to contact this solicitor through phone and emails to chase the PPU to expedite. But over the two years from him, I did not receive any phone calls or emails from him. When I would phone his secretary, she would say that she would pass my message on to the solicitor.
Previously I was approached from my then Offending PPU officer, who had drafted the letter and my SOPO was Varied from 5 prohibitions to a single one, and to his own words to a MANAGEABLE LEVEL.   Two years later I got my SOPO discharged totally unopposed by the PPU solicitor, but by some hesitation by the court the magistrates.  Though I had used a local Solicitor, who had admitted that he had not dealt before with any Sex Offences cases, but he would seek advice, if necessary, from his colleagues. So in both cases, he had hardly any work to do. If even now I am not removed from the register, I do not intend to appeal. This is because I might get any press adverse press publicity. I have moved to a new area, and would not like my growing-up child to be told that his father is a paedophile. He is four and a half years old and is my from the second marriage. From my previous marriage, I have 6 grown-up children who have moved far afield where I live. Incidentally in my previous cases, as mentioned above, there was no press reporter in the courtroom, where my csas were decided. But I may not be that lucky third time. And even if the PPU allows me to remove me from the register, I wonder, if the PPU ever find that I have been in contact with children, supervised or unsupervised, they would alert the children services.
And this is not a big deal to remain on the register as I have only to inform at a police station of my foreign travel (which I do once a year) and give my bank and passport details which are almost the same from the day one. I have not ever stayed in a house for more than a few hours, whether there are children present or not.  
As, perhaps, you may have guessed that English is not my first language. I am not as eloquent as you would expect from a native speaker with good qualifications. So,  I will not write directly to any such higher authorities such an important letter. As I have always done previously done I will use a  solicitor, and in the present case to just write a letter.
Thank you once again your continued support with such valuable advice.
PS: I could not read your reply yesterday as I was in the hospital all day and when I came I felt so tired that I went to bed early.


  27 March. Thanks for your another prompt reply.
I forgot to tell you that the PPU visits had reduced to about once a year. When my first review was rejected, the investigating officer had told me that the police visits would stop, they would only contact me now and then over the phone.  As she went back and checked and confirmed that I had only one SOPO breach only in 2005, and not several breaches and that the last was not one in 2015. The breach was for attending a local gym, for which I was given a lighter sentence of rehabilitation order for which the Probation Services had recommended I had to attend a two years sexual offending programme, which I completed successfully.  Had I I not pointed out this factor, I would have remained on SOR on rather easy terms. Now they would not be as kind.   As you mentioned that if you challenge them they could Ivindictive. So that they invited me to attend Polygraph Interview. Also have you any idea what kind of press publicity can I expect t if I appeal in a magistrate the court,  which I want to avoid at any cost. Incidentally, my children with me when I was sentenced. Thanks for giving me details of a competent lawyer, at whose Office I am going to phone tomorrow and asking Andrew to write a letter on my behalf to the  Police Superandent.  
Thanks again for your continued immensely valuable advice.


Hi The unkown,
I have written previously that my sentencing/appeal Court has decided all applications are held in open court with media restrictions whether your appeal is supported or not supported by the Police.
My initial SOPO conditions removal applications were supported by the Police and so I did not have to appear in Court. However my last application concerned 1 and was supported but the Court now requires an appearance to be required. As your application is for the SOR I think you would appear, sorry.
I did contact the Court officers about the media and they suggested as my case was old, they did not think the media would attend.
I would suggest you contact the Court Office and ask them the question about media.
Good luck

Thanks for some more useful information. This morning I went to my local Police Station asking them to get my polygraph results but they had no clue. They said they have never been approached for this for such information. I took from them the Manchester Police Station Phone Number, who have arranged this test at the Chorley Police Station. I was told by the Poly Examiner, who had told me quite categorically to go to my local Police Station and asked them to obtain this information. I took from them the Manchester Phone No. When I phoned Manchester they had no clue either. I phoned back to my investigating officer and she suggested to get more information from the Lancashire Police Constabulary internet website. There were two women involved in Poly Test and I contacted both of them on the phone their was no reply, so I have left the text messages. About 4 hours have gone but I have not received any reply from them. I want to get this sorted out before 4 March as I am flying abroad to stay there for a month. My investigating officer has got the Poly test results but she won't give it to me saying she is not authorised to do so. My worry is that to see if I could make any comments to any negative information before my SOR second review is considered. On the advice of the investigating officer, I have emailed her my concerns with a copy to the Detective Sub-inspector. Until to-date I have not received any reply from them. Usually, they send replies to my queries within the 24 hours. I need your advice as what I can do now before they make a fresh decision on my original application. I don’t expect them to be as quick as they took over two years to reach to their determination to my original application. But you never know.


Hi,
I think you have done most of what you can do as you have documented your concerns and reasons for the feedback. In the end this documentation could possibly support you if an appeal / complaint is necessary.
One bit of advice I was given at the start of my journey was that you must forget about response timeframes when dealing with the authorities .
Example: A PPU officer stopped responding to my emails concerning a discussion we had been having. I subsequently sent weekly emails asking for an update and referring to my past emails that had not been replied to. After 3 months I called his office to be told he had retire some months before. It took another 2 months for my new PPU officer to contact me and he did not know anything about the issue. I accepted this was not his fault and our interactions started on a good standing.

You could ask a solicitor, but they may say the same as I mentioned above or will write a letter. This again, seeings as you have only just emailed them, might be received by them in a manner not intended by you.

You do not have a date for the decision as yet and you do not know if there is any negative remarks so please consider the advice above on timeframes.
Plan your holiday and make the arrangements. Ensure you have notified them of your travel details and any contact details. Focus on your own well being as this means you are controlling your own responsibilities.
At times all we can do is wait and consider sending requests for updates at reasonable periods, i.e. every fortnight.
 


Thanks, Supremebeing, you have put my mind to rest. I wish I would have used Unlock before. 
Although I have made a nominal contribution to the Charity, I will pay at least £20 when I return from abroad. I have informed at my local police station about my visit and at the same time given then the required Annual Notification. As you suggested, if I don't get a reply to my request from the PPU I will send them a fortnightly reminder.  I wish if I could at bring a personal present for you and your family and post at a private address. .Many Thaks.
AB2014
AB2014
Supreme Being
Supreme Being (57K reputation)Supreme Being (57K reputation)Supreme Being (57K reputation)Supreme Being (57K reputation)Supreme Being (57K reputation)Supreme Being (57K reputation)Supreme Being (57K reputation)Supreme Being (57K reputation)Supreme Being (57K reputation)

Group: Forum Members
Posts: 599, Visits: 4K
Theunknown - 2 Mar 20 10:52 AM
JASB - 28 Feb 20 5:25 PM
Theunknown - 28 Feb 20 4:48 PM
JASB - 28 Feb 20 2:36 PM
Theunknown - 27 Feb 20 8:57 PM
Theunknown - 27 Feb 20 12:28 PM
JASB - 26 Feb 20 2:45 PM
Theunknown - 25 Feb 20 6:32 PM
AB2014 - 13 Feb 20 3:15 PM
Theunknown - 13 Feb 20 2:38 PM
AB2014 - 13 Feb 20 11:41 AM
Theunknown - 13 Feb 20 11:11 AM
Theunknown - 6 Feb 20 12:41 PM
AB2014 - 6 Feb 20 8:59 AM
Theunknown - 5 Feb 20 7:24 PM
JASB - 5 Feb 20 3:01 PM
Theunknown - 5 Feb 20 10:51 AM
If you are on SOR, as noted from the NARO website, one of the following requirements is:
“If you are living with a child or staying in a household where a child lives for at least 12 hours each day”
However on the Unlock website says that a person on Sex Offender should inform the police if he has stayed in a household for more than 12 hours where a child u/18 lives.
Which one is correct?
Also the PPU has never informed me about this requirement? I was put on SOR in 1999.

Polygraph Interview.  My application for SOR discharge was rejected by the PPU HQ giving false reasons. When I pointed out this to them, the PPU HQ invalidated their decision admitting the mistakes and have decided to reconsider, No apologies, but has made it more difficult for me by INVITING me to attend a polygraph interview. Note: Polygraph tests, being very unreliable,(a report from Wikipedia) are not admissible in the UK Criminal Courts. But can carry some weight in a civil court setting in a criminal court, which could apply in my case. 
I feel very nervous about it and suffer many medical conditions which can affect the test. I have informed the PPQ HQ about these conditions. A week has gone, still, I have not received a reply, Shall I go ahead with the test, bearing in mind I am not required to take the polygraph interview. 
A reply to the above two questions will be highly appreciated.


Hi,
First and most important the fact is that websites are not always up to date and like many aspects of legal life, it is the writers interpretation of the legal wording - unless it is a cut and paste from a government document and than as long as that is the latest version lol.
A SOPO condition does not have to be in place as it comes under the term of "public protection", and as interviews are not recorded, there is no constraining of their questions if they wish. Its is suggested that these sort of questions come under the heading of "risk assessment" as well.
In my experience any sex offender when visited will be asked about family and relationships. If either or both exist, the conversation is expanded to include contact with children, even if they are extended family members.
As mentioned, Social Services would be contacted unless the PPU felt there was no risk. Be aware that from my experience, that decision can differ between PPU officers and constabularies.
If you have always ensured you have not broken any of their rules and kept the PPU informed of your consequences, then you should not worry.

Polygraph:
I would seek legal advice.
The Government / Media response after the Jeremy Kyle escapade, highlighted the concern that many psychologists are strongly opinionated about there accuracy as many are stating they are not. The same concerns have also been raised - after the recent terrorist atrocities - by the Government and experts.  
You have mentioned you informed them of your medical health concerns, which could be seen as a avoidance tactic so why not take a positive and co-operative approach?
Possibly consider / offer to undertake an independent psychologists assessment instead because of the expert accuracy concerns.

I hope this helps in some small way - keeps us informed and wish you success.
“As advised by you in the first paragraph of your post, I have gone through the Govt. Website but I can't find anywhere having resided/stayed for more than 12 hours where a child under 18 lives. Kindly correct me if I have misunderstood their information
  http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/42/part/2/crossheading/notification-requirements
Changes to legislation:
Sexual Offences Act 2003, Cross Heading: Notificationrequirements is up to date with all changes known to be in force on or before05 February 2020. There are changes that may be brought into force at a future date. Changes that have been made appear in the content and are referenced with annotations.
his having resided or stayed, for a qualifying period, at any premises in the United Kingdom the address of which has not been notified to the police under section 83(1), this subsection, or section 2 of the SexOffenders Act 1997,
 (6)In this section, “qualifying period” means—
(a)a period of 7 days, or
(b)two or more periods, in any period of 12 months, which taken together amount to 7 days.




Well, the Sexual Offences Act 2003 was updated by The Sexual Offences Act 2003 (Notification Requirements) (England and Wales) Regulations 2012. Section 10 of those regulations says that:

"10.—(1) The information set out in paragraph (2) is prescribed for the purposes of section 83(5)(h) of the 2003 Act in a case where a relevant offender (R) resides, or stays for a period of at least 12 hours, at a relevant household."

Section 2 says:


“relevant household” means a household or other place—
(a)where a child resides or stays, and
(b)to which the public do not have access (whether for payment or not)."

That seems to agree with the Unlock information. PPU won't tell you about this requirement, as the question should be asked every time you register, and they should then tell you to notify them if any of the information you have given them changes.

Thanks, Supremebeing. You seem to be a Suprmebeing as you are a goldmine of information on questions like mine.


Hello, here I am again. Thanks once again for your continued advice. As I mentioned before I was going to attend a Polygraph Test which I did. The questions were asked similar to those you mentioned that I might be asked. At the end of the test, the examiner said that that she did not believe that I had no unsupervised contacts with children u/16, which I never even I had nor was there any court order placed on me not to have any contacts with u/16. She was accompanied by a Police Officer who stayed outside the test room. However, at the end of the test, the examiner asked me to wait as she was going to see if the police officer who had come with her had any questions to ask, which she decided not to. I was given a sheet of the examiner and the police officer phone numbers if I had any questions had to ask later on. After coming back home I phoned the police officer asking that if that the examiner's comments would affect my SOR Removal application, which was going to be reconsidered. She was very sympathetic saying not to worry too much about it that just only the test results would have not have too much impact on me my reconsidered SOR removal application. The PPU Superintendent took this action when I had pointed out to my investigating officer that there were some fatal mistakes in the original determination. So my first worry is that if the examiner's comments would affect my SOR second review? Please, What are your comments about this issue?
2. I told the examiner that I had a resiprical visit every 3-4 months with a family friend coming with children but except Saying a Hello, I that hardly ever spoke to them and they are very shy anyway and there were always parents present there. However, I added that at one occasion the father went outside for about 20 minutes so I left the sitting room and went upstairs in case the mother popped into the kitchen. She asked what would I do if that happened again, I told that I would go out with him.
My second worry is that examiner would report these visits to the Police and they might alert the Social Services and they would be visiting with the Police to my friend’s house and the Social Service asking to sign an undertaking with them for not have any contact with me when there are their children are present. They are our very close friends and us, and especially, my wife won’t like to lose contact with them. If the Police ask me their address, am I under any legal obligation to do so, as I have no order placed on me for not to have any contact with u/16 years old children?
All the advice on these issues will be highly appreciated

There's something like this going on in a separate discussion. The problem is that the police define unsupervised as "not supervised by one of the police, probation or social services". The fact that the parents are present is not always taken into account.

  Thanks for your guidance. I approached the site you mention. However, I notice the word SOR (I have bolded it) though this person is not on SOPO. Is it a mistake or not? Could you please clarify

"This isn't overriding the SHPO, it's something different. They said it wasn't a breach of the SHPO, because it wasn't. However, the one-size-fits-all approach means nobody on the SOR can have contact with children regardless of what might be on their SHPO/SOPO, which is a matter for the police to pass to child services to consider. These situations can sometimes require written consent from the parent/guardian."


There is nothing in the notification requirements of being on the SOR that says you have to report all contact with any child. However, the police has a separate duty of safeguarding, and this is one they can pass to social services, so they can always say they're just doing their job. Because they see everyone on the SOR as all being the same, they will probably report any contact with an under-18 to social services, even if the person's offence involved a much older person of a different gender. They would see it in the same light as a report from a "concerned neighbour" about child neglect or cruelty, except in this case they don't have to do any investigation themselves.

  I'm having difficulty in posting the following, so I will try again.
Dear Suprembeing. I am sorry to bother you once again, as I found the advice and information you have been giving me. Incidentally, I made a small contribution to Unlock about two weeks ago and intend to make more in the near future. 
Firstly re my friendship with a family friend who have young children;  the PPU and Social Services visited my friend’s house but he was not in so they left a card to phone them which he did as soon as he came back home, ( soon afterwards they came), and he answered satisfactorily to all the question the PPU officer asked and they said that they would o longer be contacting them.  
Now a request on another matter  As I previously mentioned that the PPU Superintendent is reconsidering my SOR removal application as in his original determination there were a few fatal mistakes. When I pointed it out, he accepted at least one mistake and decided to reconsider my application but invited to attend a voluntary Polygraph Test.  Its result will have an impact on my case. But I will have to wait for up to 28 days to get a copy of it. So I won’t have a chance to defend myself against any negative polygraph report’s comments, as my reconsideration will already be underway. Only I can guess that the examiner said I was being dishonest when I said NO  to the question that if I ever had any unsupervised contact a with children u/16. I pointed her out that I was telling the truth and anyway I have no restrictions on me to not have any unsupervised contact.  Also, she mentioned out that the test was 85 t0 95 per cent correct. In reply, I commented that in school and colleges the students can pass a test with flying colours even when they get 75 to 80 per cent answers correct. To this comment, she concluded as that I had I lied at least once.
In addition to my original application to come off the reregister, which was declined, I want to send an additional application commenting on Grounds the PPU Superintendent gave for the rejection. But I won’t have a chance to say in my defence to any adverse comments made on the Polygraph results.  Could  I please have our advice on this matter?


Hi
I wasn't sure if you was asking AB2014 for further advice but I thought I'd reply on my info.
I am pleased the SS outcome was as you hoped and I hope your friend and his family remain that, supportive friends. A bit of advice I would give is that you ensure you manage any future "scenarios" in a way that protects you . Always bear in mine what someone else might suggest when viewing the interaction from a distance.
On the "poly test", I am assuming they offered that as a deterrent; not only being vindictive because you highlighted their errors, but also thinking you wouldn't want to take one. I always remember listening to others saying how they would answer the question "do you love children? Yes or No". When you have been through the turmoil many of us have, you start to think of 101 ways your answer could be misunderstood.

I understand why you replied quoting the "student exams pass marks"  but I feel they can take comments like that in the same way they say someone is in "denial" when they quote mitigation reasons. As an excuse to hide something. I would suggest not to speak those type of replies in future. Remember they have probably undertook the test many times and heard everything before and could be cynical.
In regards to commenting on the errors made by the Police in your previous application, remember there is always the possibility that they could be taken as you suggesting they are incompetent and therefore not received well. The use of a solicitor would be wise to highlight those issues, as their words are received in a more acceptable manner. In fact they may even suggest you do not bother mentioning it and then you may get a more sympathetic reaction from them due to you not trying to embarrass them to the Judge.  
Finally on not knowing the results of the test,  the use of a solicitor may gain the support for holding the hearing after the test results have been made. Otherwise I would just word a sentence in a positive manner for example: I willingly accepted the offer of a poly test to demonstrate my rehabilitation and positive character . Or something like that. Again I would not chastise the use of them lach I am suggesting. You need their support more if you are alone; hence why something as important as this I have / are using a solicitor. Understanding that the financial restrictions of some, does make this a quality of life v financial balancing decision though.

I wish you luck and look forward to reading other advice to you.

 
Thank you very much for such a piece of long comprehensive advice. I have not even though about the advice you have given.  I made my original application through a  Manchester solicitor whose firm was advertising as a specialist in the sex offences case. But I felt very disappointed with this solicitor. Though my offending manager had informed through an email that my case would be decided within the 3 months period, so is mentioned on a Government website, but he PPU took more than two years to give me a decision.  I tried to contact this solicitor through phone and emails to chase the PPU to expedite. But over the two years from him, I did not receive any phone calls or emails from him. When I would phone his secretary, she would say that she would pass my message on to the solicitor.
Previously I was approached from my then Offending PPU officer, who had drafted the letter and my SOPO was Varied from 5 prohibitions to a single one, and to his own words to a MANAGEABLE LEVEL.   Two years later I got my SOPO discharged totally unopposed by the PPU solicitor, but by some hesitation by the court the magistrates.  Though I had used a local Solicitor, who had admitted that he had not dealt before with any Sex Offences cases, but he would seek advice, if necessary, from his colleagues. So in both cases, he had hardly any work to do. If even now I am not removed from the register, I do not intend to appeal. This is because I might get any press adverse press publicity. I have moved to a new area, and would not like my growing-up child to be told that his father is a paedophile. He is four and a half years old and is my from the second marriage. From my previous marriage, I have 6 grown-up children who have moved far afield where I live. Incidentally in my previous cases, as mentioned above, there was no press reporter in the courtroom, where my csas were decided. But I may not be that lucky third time. And even if the PPU allows me to remove me from the register, I wonder, if the PPU ever find that I have been in contact with children, supervised or unsupervised, they would alert the children services.
And this is not a big deal to remain on the register as I have only to inform at a police station of my foreign travel (which I do once a year) and give my bank and passport details which are almost the same from the day one. I have not ever stayed in a house for more than a few hours, whether there are children present or not.  
As, perhaps, you may have guessed that English is not my first language. I am not as eloquent as you would expect from a native speaker with good qualifications. So,  I will not write directly to any such higher authorities such an important letter. As I have always done previously done I will use a  solicitor, and in the present case to just write a letter.
Thank you once again your continued support with such valuable advice.
PS: I could not read your reply yesterday as I was in the hospital all day and when I came I felt so tired that I went to bed early.


  27 March. Thanks for your another prompt reply.
I forgot to tell you that the PPU visits had reduced to about once a year. When my first review was rejected, the investigating officer had told me that the police visits would stop, they would only contact me now and then over the phone.  As she went back and checked and confirmed that I had only one SOPO breach only in 2005, and not several breaches and that the last was not one in 2015. The breach was for attending a local gym, for which I was given a lighter sentence of rehabilitation order for which the Probation Services had recommended I had to attend a two years sexual offending programme, which I completed successfully.  Had I I not pointed out this factor, I would have remained on SOR on rather easy terms. Now they would not be as kind.   As you mentioned that if you challenge them they could Ivindictive. So that they invited me to attend Polygraph Interview. Also have you any idea what kind of press publicity can I expect t if I appeal in a magistrate the court,  which I want to avoid at any cost. Incidentally, my children with me when I was sentenced. Thanks for giving me details of a competent lawyer, at whose Office I am going to phone tomorrow and asking Andrew to write a letter on my behalf to the  Police Superandent.  
Thanks again for your continued immensely valuable advice.


Hi The unkown,
I have written previously that my sentencing/appeal Court has decided all applications are held in open court with media restrictions whether your appeal is supported or not supported by the Police.
My initial SOPO conditions removal applications were supported by the Police and so I did not have to appear in Court. However my last application concerned 1 and was supported but the Court now requires an appearance to be required. As your application is for the SOR I think you would appear, sorry.
I did contact the Court officers about the media and they suggested as my case was old, they did not think the media would attend.
I would suggest you contact the Court Office and ask them the question about media.
Good luck

JASB - 28 Feb 20 2:36 PM
Theunknown - 27 Feb 20 8:57 PM
Theunknown - 27 Feb 20 12:28 PM
JASB - 26 Feb 20 2:45 PM
Theunknown - 25 Feb 20 6:32 PM
AB2014 - 13 Feb 20 3:15 PM
Theunknown - 13 Feb 20 2:38 PM
AB2014 - 13 Feb 20 11:41 AM
Theunknown - 13 Feb 20 11:11 AM
Theunknown - 6 Feb 20 12:41 PM
AB2014 - 6 Feb 20 8:59 AM
Theunknown - 5 Feb 20 7:24 PM
JASB - 5 Feb 20 3:01 PM
Theunknown - 5 Feb 20 10:51 AM
If you are on SOR, as noted from the NARO website, one of the following requirements is:
“If you are living with a child or staying in a household where a child lives for at least 12 hours each day”
However on the Unlock website says that a person on Sex Offender should inform the police if he has stayed in a household for more than 12 hours where a child u/18 lives.
Which one is correct?
Also the PPU has never informed me about this requirement? I was put on SOR in 1999.

Polygraph Interview.  My application for SOR discharge was rejected by the PPU HQ giving false reasons. When I pointed out this to them, the PPU HQ invalidated their decision admitting the mistakes and have decided to reconsider, No apologies, but has made it more difficult for me by INVITING me to attend a polygraph interview. Note: Polygraph tests, being very unreliable,(a report from Wikipedia) are not admissible in the UK Criminal Courts. But can carry some weight in a civil court setting in a criminal court, which could apply in my case. 
I feel very nervous about it and suffer many medical conditions which can affect the test. I have informed the PPQ HQ about these conditions. A week has gone, still, I have not received a reply, Shall I go ahead with the test, bearing in mind I am not required to take the polygraph interview. 
A reply to the above two questions will be highly appreciated.


Hi,
First and most important the fact is that websites are not always up to date and like many aspects of legal life, it is the writers interpretation of the legal wording - unless it is a cut and paste from a government document and than as long as that is the latest version lol.
A SOPO condition does not have to be in place as it comes under the term of "public protection", and as interviews are not recorded, there is no constraining of their questions if they wish. Its is suggested that these sort of questions come under the heading of "risk assessment" as well.
In my experience any sex offender when visited will be asked about family and relationships. If either or both exist, the conversation is expanded to include contact with children, even if they are extended family members.
As mentioned, Social Services would be contacted unless the PPU felt there was no risk. Be aware that from my experience, that decision can differ between PPU officers and constabularies.
If you have always ensured you have not broken any of their rules and kept the PPU informed of your consequences, then you should not worry.

Polygraph:
I would seek legal advice.
The Government / Media response after the Jeremy Kyle escapade, highlighted the concern that many psychologists are strongly opinionated about there accuracy as many are stating they are not. The same concerns have also been raised - after the recent terrorist atrocities - by the Government and experts.  
You have mentioned you informed them of your medical health concerns, which could be seen as a avoidance tactic so why not take a positive and co-operative approach?
Possibly consider / offer to undertake an independent psychologists assessment instead because of the expert accuracy concerns.

I hope this helps in some small way - keeps us informed and wish you success.
“As advised by you in the first paragraph of your post, I have gone through the Govt. Website but I can't find anywhere having resided/stayed for more than 12 hours where a child under 18 lives. Kindly correct me if I have misunderstood their information
  http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/42/part/2/crossheading/notification-requirements
Changes to legislation:
Sexual Offences Act 2003, Cross Heading: Notificationrequirements is up to date with all changes known to be in force on or before05 February 2020. There are changes that may be brought into force at a future date. Changes that have been made appear in the content and are referenced with annotations.
his having resided or stayed, for a qualifying period, at any premises in the United Kingdom the address of which has not been notified to the police under section 83(1), this subsection, or section 2 of the SexOffenders Act 1997,
 (6)In this section, “qualifying period” means—
(a)a period of 7 days, or
(b)two or more periods, in any period of 12 months, which taken together amount to 7 days.




Well, the Sexual Offences Act 2003 was updated by The Sexual Offences Act 2003 (Notification Requirements) (England and Wales) Regulations 2012. Section 10 of those regulations says that:

"10.—(1) The information set out in paragraph (2) is prescribed for the purposes of section 83(5)(h) of the 2003 Act in a case where a relevant offender (R) resides, or stays for a period of at least 12 hours, at a relevant household."

Section 2 says:


“relevant household” means a household or other place—
(a)where a child resides or stays, and
(b)to which the public do not have access (whether for payment or not)."

That seems to agree with the Unlock information. PPU won't tell you about this requirement, as the question should be asked every time you register, and they should then tell you to notify them if any of the information you have given them changes.

Thanks, Supremebeing. You seem to be a Suprmebeing as you are a goldmine of information on questions like mine.


Hello, here I am again. Thanks once again for your continued advice. As I mentioned before I was going to attend a Polygraph Test which I did. The questions were asked similar to those you mentioned that I might be asked. At the end of the test, the examiner said that that she did not believe that I had no unsupervised contacts with children u/16, which I never even I had nor was there any court order placed on me not to have any contacts with u/16. She was accompanied by a Police Officer who stayed outside the test room. However, at the end of the test, the examiner asked me to wait as she was going to see if the police officer who had come with her had any questions to ask, which she decided not to. I was given a sheet of the examiner and the police officer phone numbers if I had any questions had to ask later on. After coming back home I phoned the police officer asking that if that the examiner's comments would affect my SOR Removal application, which was going to be reconsidered. She was very sympathetic saying not to worry too much about it that just only the test results would have not have too much impact on me my reconsidered SOR removal application. The PPU Superintendent took this action when I had pointed out to my investigating officer that there were some fatal mistakes in the original determination. So my first worry is that if the examiner's comments would affect my SOR second review? Please, What are your comments about this issue?
2. I told the examiner that I had a resiprical visit every 3-4 months with a family friend coming with children but except Saying a Hello, I that hardly ever spoke to them and they are very shy anyway and there were always parents present there. However, I added that at one occasion the father went outside for about 20 minutes so I left the sitting room and went upstairs in case the mother popped into the kitchen. She asked what would I do if that happened again, I told that I would go out with him.
My second worry is that examiner would report these visits to the Police and they might alert the Social Services and they would be visiting with the Police to my friend’s house and the Social Service asking to sign an undertaking with them for not have any contact with me when there are their children are present. They are our very close friends and us, and especially, my wife won’t like to lose contact with them. If the Police ask me their address, am I under any legal obligation to do so, as I have no order placed on me for not to have any contact with u/16 years old children?
All the advice on these issues will be highly appreciated

There's something like this going on in a separate discussion. The problem is that the police define unsupervised as "not supervised by one of the police, probation or social services". The fact that the parents are present is not always taken into account.

  Thanks for your guidance. I approached the site you mention. However, I notice the word SOR (I have bolded it) though this person is not on SOPO. Is it a mistake or not? Could you please clarify

"This isn't overriding the SHPO, it's something different. They said it wasn't a breach of the SHPO, because it wasn't. However, the one-size-fits-all approach means nobody on the SOR can have contact with children regardless of what might be on their SHPO/SOPO, which is a matter for the police to pass to child services to consider. These situations can sometimes require written consent from the parent/guardian."


There is nothing in the notification requirements of being on the SOR that says you have to report all contact with any child. However, the police has a separate duty of safeguarding, and this is one they can pass to social services, so they can always say they're just doing their job. Because they see everyone on the SOR as all being the same, they will probably report any contact with an under-18 to social services, even if the person's offence involved a much older person of a different gender. They would see it in the same light as a report from a "concerned neighbour" about child neglect or cruelty, except in this case they don't have to do any investigation themselves.

  I'm having difficulty in posting the following, so I will try again.
Dear Suprembeing. I am sorry to bother you once again, as I found the advice and information you have been giving me. Incidentally, I made a small contribution to Unlock about two weeks ago and intend to make more in the near future. 
Firstly re my friendship with a family friend who have young children;  the PPU and Social Services visited my friend’s house but he was not in so they left a card to phone them which he did as soon as he came back home, ( soon afterwards they came), and he answered satisfactorily to all the question the PPU officer asked and they said that they would o longer be contacting them.  
Now a request on another matter  As I previously mentioned that the PPU Superintendent is reconsidering my SOR removal application as in his original determination there were a few fatal mistakes. When I pointed it out, he accepted at least one mistake and decided to reconsider my application but invited to attend a voluntary Polygraph Test.  Its result will have an impact on my case. But I will have to wait for up to 28 days to get a copy of it. So I won’t have a chance to defend myself against any negative polygraph report’s comments, as my reconsideration will already be underway. Only I can guess that the examiner said I was being dishonest when I said NO  to the question that if I ever had any unsupervised contact a with children u/16. I pointed her out that I was telling the truth and anyway I have no restrictions on me to not have any unsupervised contact.  Also, she mentioned out that the test was 85 t0 95 per cent correct. In reply, I commented that in school and colleges the students can pass a test with flying colours even when they get 75 to 80 per cent answers correct. To this comment, she concluded as that I had I lied at least once.
In addition to my original application to come off the reregister, which was declined, I want to send an additional application commenting on Grounds the PPU Superintendent gave for the rejection. But I won’t have a chance to say in my defence to any adverse comments made on the Polygraph results.  Could  I please have our advice on this matter?


Hi
I wasn't sure if you was asking AB2014 for further advice but I thought I'd reply on my info.
I am pleased the SS outcome was as you hoped and I hope your friend and his family remain that, supportive friends. A bit of advice I would give is that you ensure you manage any future "scenarios" in a way that protects you . Always bear in mine what someone else might suggest when viewing the interaction from a distance.
On the "poly test", I am assuming they offered that as a deterrent; not only being vindictive because you highlighted their errors, but also thinking you wouldn't want to take one. I always remember listening to others saying how they would answer the question "do you love children? Yes or No". When you have been through the turmoil many of us have, you start to think of 101 ways your answer could be misunderstood.

I understand why you replied quoting the "student exams pass marks"  but I feel they can take comments like that in the same way they say someone is in "denial" when they quote mitigation reasons. As an excuse to hide something. I would suggest not to speak those type of replies in future. Remember they have probably undertook the test many times and heard everything before and could be cynical.
In regards to commenting on the errors made by the Police in your previous application, remember there is always the possibility that they could be taken as you suggesting they are incompetent and therefore not received well. The use of a solicitor would be wise to highlight those issues, as their words are received in a more acceptable manner. In fact they may even suggest you do not bother mentioning it and then you may get a more sympathetic reaction from them due to you not trying to embarrass them to the Judge.  
Finally on not knowing the results of the test,  the use of a solicitor may gain the support for holding the hearing after the test results have been made. Otherwise I would just word a sentence in a positive manner for example: I willingly accepted the offer of a poly test to demonstrate my rehabilitation and positive character . Or something like that. Again I would not chastise the use of them lach I am suggesting. You need their support more if you are alone; hence why something as important as this I have / are using a solicitor. Understanding that the financial restrictions of some, does make this a quality of life v financial balancing decision though.

I wish you luck and look forward to reading other advice to you.

 
Thank you very much for such a piece of long comprehensive advice. I have not even though about the advice you have given.  I made my original application through a  Manchester solicitor whose firm was advertising as a specialist in the sex offences case. But I felt very disappointed with this solicitor. Though my offending manager had informed through an email that my case would be decided within the 3 months period, so is mentioned on a Government website, but he PPU took more than two years to give me a decision.  I tried to contact this solicitor through phone and emails to chase the PPU to expedite. But over the two years from him, I did not receive any phone calls or emails from him. When I would phone his secretary, she would say that she would pass my message on to the solicitor.
Previously I was approached from my then Offending PPU officer, who had drafted the letter and my SOPO was Varied from 5 prohibitions to a single one, and to his own words to a MANAGEABLE LEVEL.   Two years later I got my SOPO discharged totally unopposed by the PPU solicitor, but by some hesitation by the court the magistrates.  Though I had used a local Solicitor, who had admitted that he had not dealt before with any Sex Offences cases, but he would seek advice, if necessary, from his colleagues. So in both cases, he had hardly any work to do. If even now I am not removed from the register, I do not intend to appeal. This is because I might get any press adverse press publicity. I have moved to a new area, and would not like my growing-up child to be told that his father is a paedophile. He is four and a half years old and is my from the second marriage. From my previous marriage, I have 6 grown-up children who have moved far afield where I live. Incidentally in my previous cases, as mentioned above, there was no press reporter in the courtroom, where my csas were decided. But I may not be that lucky third time. And even if the PPU allows me to remove me from the register, I wonder, if the PPU ever find that I have been in contact with children, supervised or unsupervised, they would alert the children services.
And this is not a big deal to remain on the register as I have only to inform at a police station of my foreign travel (which I do once a year) and give my bank and passport details which are almost the same from the day one. I have not ever stayed in a house for more than a few hours, whether there are children present or not.  
As, perhaps, you may have guessed that English is not my first language. I am not as eloquent as you would expect from a native speaker with good qualifications. So,  I will not write directly to any such higher authorities such an important letter. As I have always done previously done I will use a  solicitor, and in the present case to just write a letter.
Thank you once again your continued support with such valuable advice.
PS: I could not read your reply yesterday as I was in the hospital all day and when I came I felt so tired that I went to bed early.


  27 March. Thanks for your another prompt reply.
I forgot to tell you that the PPU visits had reduced to about once a year. When my first review was rejected, the investigating officer had told me that the police visits would stop, they would only contact me now and then over the phone.  As she went back and checked and confirmed that I had only one SOPO breach only in 2005, and not several breaches and that the last was not one in 2015. The breach was for attending a local gym, for which I was given a lighter sentence of rehabilitation order for which the Probation Services had recommended I had to attend a two years sexual offending programme, which I completed successfully.  Had I I not pointed out this factor, I would have remained on SOR on rather easy terms. Now they would not be as kind.   As you mentioned that if you challenge them they could Ivindictive. So that they invited me to attend Polygraph Interview. Also have you any idea what kind of press publicity can I expect t if I appeal in a magistrate the court,  which I want to avoid at any cost. Incidentally, my children with me when I was sentenced. Thanks for giving me details of a competent lawyer, at whose Office I am going to phone tomorrow and asking Andrew to write a letter on my behalf to the  Police Superandent.  
Thanks again for your continued immensely valuable advice.


Hi The unkown,
I have written previously that my sentencing/appeal Court has decided all applications are held in open court with media restrictions whether your appeal is supported or not supported by the Police.
My initial SOPO conditions removal applications were supported by the Police and so I did not have to appear in Court. However my last application concerned 1 and was supported but the Court now requires an appearance to be required. As your application is for the SOR I think you would appear, sorry.
I did contact the Court officers about the media and they suggested as my case was old, they did not think the media would attend.
I would suggest you contact the Court Office and ask them the question about media.
Good luck

Thanks for some more useful information. This morning I went to my local Police Station asking them to get my polygraph results but they had no clue. They said they have never been approached for this for such information. I took from them the Manchester Police Station Phone Number, who have arranged this test at the Chorley Police Station. I was told by the Poly Examiner, who had told me quite categorically to go to my local Police Station and asked them to obtain this information. I took from them the Manchester Phone No. When I phoned Manchester they had no clue either. I phoned back to my investigating officer and she suggested to get more information from the Lancashire Police Constabulary internet website. There were two women involved in Poly Test and I contacted both of them on the phone their was no reply, so I have left the text messages. About 4 hours have gone but I have not received any reply from them. I want to get this sorted out before 4 March as I am flying abroad to stay there for a month. My investigating officer has got the Poly test results but she won't give it to me saying she is not authorised to do so. My worry is that to see if I could make any comments to any negative information before my SOR second review is considered. On the advice of the investigating officer, I have emailed her my concerns with a copy to the Detective Sub-inspector. Until to-date I have not received any reply from them. Usually, they send replies to my queries within the 24 hours. I need your advice as what I can do now before they make a fresh decision on my original application. I don’t expect them to be as quick as they took over two years to reach to their determination to my original application. But you never know.


Hi,
I think you have done most of what you can do as you have documented your concerns and reasons for the feedback. In the end this documentation could possibly support you if an appeal / complaint is necessary.
One bit of advice I was given at the start of my journey was that you must forget about response timeframes when dealing with the authorities .
Example: A PPU officer stopped responding to my emails concerning a discussion we had been having. I subsequently sent weekly emails asking for an update and referring to my past emails that had not been replied to. After 3 months I called his office to be told he had retire some months before. It took another 2 months for my new PPU officer to contact me and he did not know anything about the issue. I accepted this was not his fault and our interactions started on a good standing.

You could ask a solicitor, but they may say the same as I mentioned above or will write a letter. This again, seeings as you have only just emailed them, might be received by them in a manner not intended by you.

You do not have a date for the decision as yet and you do not know if there is any negative remarks so please consider the advice above on timeframes.
Plan your holiday and make the arrangements. Ensure you have notified them of your travel details and any contact details. Focus on your own well being as this means you are controlling your own responsibilities.
At times all we can do is wait and consider sending requests for updates at reasonable periods, i.e. every fortnight.
 


Thanks, Supremebeing, you have put my mind to rest. I wish I would have used Unlock before. 
Although I have made a nominal contribution to the Charity, I will pay at least £20 when I return from abroad. I have informed at my local police station about my visit and at the same time given then the required Annual Notification. As you suggested, if I don't get a reply to my request from the PPU I will send them a fortnightly reminder.  I wish if I could at bring a personal present for you and your family and post at a private address. .Many Thaks.

Sorry for not replying sooner, but I've been out of circulation (bad cold, not online at home, etc.) Anyway, don't expect a hearing to decide whether you should be removed from the SOR. It's handled internally by the police in line with their local policies and the decision is ultimately the responsibility of the Chief Constable. Any appeal might have to be in the form of a judicial review at the High Court, and it would probably be very hard to win.

In terms of the outcome of the polygraph test, I'm sure all sorts of officers and civilian staff are happy to give you the runaround in the hope that you'll eventually give up. As it's information held on you by the police, you can request details from the Data Protection Officer, who is based at your local force's HQ. If he/she is reluctant to comply, you can point out that it's your information, nobody else's information will be involved, except for the names of the officers who did the polygraph, and they can be blanked out. That should be much quicker than trying to get the locals to answer.

=========================================================
Grrr! Aaargh!

J
J
Supreme Being
Supreme Being (1.6K reputation)Supreme Being (1.6K reputation)Supreme Being (1.6K reputation)Supreme Being (1.6K reputation)Supreme Being (1.6K reputation)Supreme Being (1.6K reputation)Supreme Being (1.6K reputation)Supreme Being (1.6K reputation)Supreme Being (1.6K reputation)

Group: Forum Members
Posts: 115, Visits: 448
Theunknown - 5 Feb 20 10:51 AM
If you are on SOR, as noted from the NARO website, one of the following requirements is:
“If you are living with a child or staying in a household where a child lives for at least 12 hours each day”
However on the Unlock website says that a person on Sex Offender should inform the police if he has stayed in a household for more than 12 hours where a child u/18 lives.
Which one is correct?
Also the PPU has never informed me about this requirement? I was put on SOR in 1999.

Polygraph Interview.  My application for SOR discharge was rejected by the PPU HQ giving false reasons. When I pointed out this to them, the PPU HQ invalidated their decision admitting the mistakes and have decided to reconsider, No apologies, but has made it more difficult for me by INVITING me to attend a polygraph interview. Note: Polygraph tests, being very unreliable,(a report from Wikipedia) are not admissible in the UK Criminal Courts. But can carry some weight in a civil court setting in a criminal court, which could apply in my case. 
I feel very nervous about it and suffer many medical conditions which can affect the test. I have informed the PPQ HQ about these conditions. A week has gone, still, I have not received a reply, Shall I go ahead with the test, bearing in mind I am not required to take the polygraph interview. 
A reply to the above two questions will be highly appreciated.


I worked with americans who had to have polygraph for their clearance (TOP SECRET POLYGRAPH), its an aid not a definitive. I'm told plenty of caffeine / sugar screws the reading...

James
GO


Similar Topics


As a small but national charity, we rely on charitable grants and individual donations to continue running theForum. We do not deliver government services. By being independent, we are able to respond to the needs of the people with convictions. Help us keep theForum going.

Donate Online

Login
Existing Account
Email Address:


Password:


Select a Forum....
























































































































































































theForum


Search