Hi'

I have a SOPO, now with 3 conditions left as I have managed to remove the rest.
My offence was paying for sexual services of a female under 18, so linked to prostitution and as the Court and CPS stated; no grooming, predatory actions violence etc and completely unknown to me before the offence.
Condition 1: not allowed contact with the female involved plus another female I do not know? However the PPU have agreed for this to be removed as it is now not relative.
Condition 2: is to do with supervision of under 16 year olds and notifying parents or guardians so does not say I cannot, I just have to inform them of my offence.
Condition 3: is staying in a household overnight where under 16 year olds may also be, again I just have to tell the parent or guardian not that I cannot.

Confusion that arises:
Condition one is who is the 2nd female but really now that is not relevant as they agree for it's removal when I apply but why was it there: I have that in writing
Condition 2 seems to logically contradict the statement made by the Court and CPS in that they agree I was approached by a working female not me to her!
Condition 3 I have argued is illogical partly in the same manner as No 2 and as the offence took place outside any house.

The 'argument' placed by the PPU/ force solicitor when I informed them I was applying for their removal was that they would contest 2 and 3 because females would be in my 'target' age group.
When i verbally spoke to them about this and reminded them of the statements in Court by the Judge and CPS, and that why does both include males, they said 'target' was a poor choice of word and refused any further comment.

However even though I have NO internet offences, note all my media and computers were checked for over 6 months on arrest with no concerns, they now focus on why I do use Privzer software to clean all history etc. Reminding them I have been an IT consultant since 1989 and have security concerns does me no favors.

I have (had) to agree not to delete any internet history until my next visit, when they will bring hardware/software to run on my laptop. They deny trying to catch me out; not that I have any concerns, but will not arrange a meeting date and time. Is it my sense of humour. 
I will not continue with this lack of personal security past the check or allow any software to monitor me because I have not committed an internet related offence.
Finally in regard to lie detector tests, I fully agree that it is a "media entertainment" attraction for individuals who want the focus to be on others. If I am asked to undertake a test I will refuse, partly because of my previous words BUT more importantly because on my arrest I stated 3 points as an explanation for my offence and I was willing to take a lie detector test to prove my honesty/word. My request was ignored/discarded as a gimmick and nothing more! So why should I take one now?

Keep safe, work with your PPU, believe in rehabilitation and remember constructive questions are not wrong, it is blind criticism that is not supportive to your / our case.

Hi xdanx the case law to get the first point removed is R v Smith & Others (2011) [EWCA Crim 1772]. In summary, the Court of Appeal ruled or confirmed the following;

• SOPOs should not duplicate other regimes designed to offer public protection. For example, there is little point in making an order banning an individual from certain types of activity if such a ban is already in place as a result of the provisions of the Safeguarding Vulnerable Groups Act 2006;
• SOPOs are not generally appropriate in the cases of those subject to indeterminate sentences (Life or IPP) as the licence conditions attached to such individuals offer a much more reflexive approach to managing risk where appropriate;
• That SOPOs should run in tandem with the normal duration of the notification requirements and should not be used to extend notification requirements beyond the point normally prescribed by law (i.e. those whose sentences warrant a determinate period on the ‘register’ should not be made the subject of an indeterminate SOPO);
• Blanket prohibitions on computer or internet use are not appropriate. Rather a prohibition should prevent the subject from refusing the police access to a computer in order to inspect it upon request;
• Prohibitions on unsupervised contact with children should not be included in the case of those convicted of internet-based offences ‘just in case’ they progress to contact offences. Instead “There must be identifiable risk of contact offences before this kind of prohibition can be justified”;
• Police and prosecutors should provide a draft of a proposed order at least two days in advance of any hearing and certainly not on the day of the hearing itself.

that also covers your last point of refusal entry to home this is covered under the Sexual offences act and being on the register

one of those conditions is you can’t refuse reasonable entry to PPU

hope this helps stay safe

On the making point, you are right that it sounds worse, to the public, but you don't get a longer sentence for making a copy by downloading. Making, in that sense, is treated as possession, for sentencing purposes. I agree that sentencing guidelines are written to imply that making is the same as production and it's true that production is treated as a much worse offence than possession. But the judges all know that making a copy is to be treated as possession, when they pass sentence. My barrister made exactly that point, to the judge, just to remind him.

I hope you don't mind me saying so, but you seem very aggreived. Angry at your legal team, the police, the law etc. I felt much the same emotions, after being arrested and convicted. I think it was really just anger at myself, for getting caught. Those feelings will pass, with time. The stress of the whole process, the trauma of the arrest, the fear I felt while waiting for sentencing, the intrusive visits from PPU etc. is immense and like you, my head wasn't in the right place, a lot of the time. My emotions were all over the place and from a mental health perspective, the effects are a lot like PTSD. You feel like the whole world is against you. But there are people on your side, like the guys on this forum for example. I wish you all the best, for the future. Take care.

I find it interesting that your barrister reminded the judge of the guidelines regarding, mine did nothing of the sort. I had no idea until I started doing my own research which I have shared. you are right in thinking that I am aggrieved and angry not only at my solicitor / police, but the whole system. I am angry because police have twisted and reworded reports to fit their narrative, claimed all of my devices tested positive which I know to be untrue, but refuse to give me details. They claim my offence dates back 10+years which is also untrue plus impossible and has fallen on deaf ears. My solicitor despite many requests never informed me or allowed me any chance to review and dispute evidence later claiming it would be illegal, he simply told me to plead guilty and I would not go to prison which I did when brought to Magistrates. Even to this day I have little knowledge or understanding of what I have pleaded guilty to and they are still refusing to give me this information. I argued the charge of making with solicitor and said it should be possession but did nothing to change or even understand this. In short everyone I was involved with in my case have simply not done their jobs and I have felt for some years mistreated and a victim of negligence. I have struggled with my mental health over the years even before all this started, it is difficult to let go of how all this has made me feel but I can say I am using those feelings in a positive way to keep strong and fight for what I know is wrong.

Hi xDanx
I wonder if you could give a bit more detail about your situation? You can tell me to mind my own business, if you want. I won't be offended.
What sentence did you actually get?
Do you think it's unfair that you were given an SHPO at all, or is just that you think some of it's terms are disproportionate to the offence?
Do you deny the offence completely? In other words, are you saying that you never had any illegal images, on any of your devices, at any time?

Thanks

In terms of my situation are you asking for details which resulted in my arrest and offence? As in what I did and why? Its difficult to talk about as at this time I was already heavily depressed and at times felt suicidal due to many issues I was facing. I don't want to make the whole mental health excuse either, but in short I was simply to stupid at the time to understand what I was getting myself involved in online and what was being downloaded.

I was sentenced to 10 months suspended for 2 years for making of indecent images, given a community order where I had to complete rehabilitation program for 30 days.

I think given the offence I understand a SHPO would need to be in place, but I do feel I have been unfairly treated in terms of being kept in the dark of my legal rights and do feel the conditions are disproportionate to my offence.

I do not deny my offence entirely, I accept it being possible things that I had downloaded had the potential of being illegal, but as far as I was aware I had only kept what I thought was adult material. But that is as far as my offence goes, there is no evidence of distribution, nor any evidence that I have committed any physical harm to any person. So why have I been given the wrong charge and disproportionate conditions?

Hi xdanx

i think we all understand, we have all been there, 

i guess you were charged with possession and also making, under the SOA making refers to downloading of indecent images, not taking.

when your in court it is the job of the cps on behalf of the public to show you for the worst that you are and present the evidence in that way. It is the job of your defence counsel to counter those arguments and to show you are not the bad person that the cps made out and that you have had issues.

In regards to the shpo i think i have already answered this in another post, and if there are items on yours that current case law state should not then you need to apply to haver it varied, and you will need to present evidence to the judge as to why the identified points should not be there.

stay safe 

As far as I am aware, I was charged for making, but based on how I am being treated I feel I am being charged for further offences in which are not outlined in any of the paper work. Social services however seem to think I am guilty of everything including taking, permitting to take, distribution which there is no evidence of and accuse me of "minimizing" my convictions when I correct them. They say this information was given to them "verbally" by a police officer who attended a meeting with them and there is no actual written document. So in all honesty, I really am not sure what I am even guilty of anymore because the only thing these services are good at is keeping me in the dark to turn me into a statistic.

I will be looking into my SHPO and having it varied but I am half tempted to explore an appeal of my sentence. Problem is locally everyone I have spoke to about these issues simply do not care and do not know how to do their jobs and have turned me away.

Hi Dan, if you have been found guilty in court, then you would have been given a document confirming what offences you are guilty of and the sentence imposed. THis would also show on your SHPO paperwork 

As a recently convicted sex offender you will have social services crawling all over you if you have access to children under the age of 18yrs of age. All they have to go on is the report they receive from the court and from MAPPA. (As a convicted sex offender you will be known to your local MAPPA team, this team consists of a number of agencies including the police, social services, the local council, local housing rep etc and also a lay member of the public.

it is your job to show social services that you are not a risk

You might find these useful to read 

https://hub.unlock.org.uk/knowledgebase/mappa/

https://hub.unlock.org.uk/knowledgebase/information-relationships-children-dealing-social-services/

there is a lot to take in i understand that, and all that have messaged you on here have been in your shoes, i have read over a number of the posts you have made, and please dont take this the wrong way, there is no ill intent, but the sooner you start to accept the conviction and the sentence (Suspended) (Your lucky in that regards i got three years prison back in 2007) the better this will start to work out. Having just been convicted you have a lot of work to do to prove to these people that you are not a risk, and you will find it a lot lot easier to work with instead of against them, as working against them they will just see a person that is not willing to address his offending and change, dont get me wrong dont let them take you for a ride, know your rights and what is and not allowed but as time goes on it does get easier. We have all been there