The whole premise of our justice system can be reduced to saying that an individual serves their sentence and then starts off with a clean slate.
This is fine in principle but in practice it isn’t. It would be okay if those that went into prison were magically rehabilitated and re-emerged model citizens – but they do not.
God knows how many rehabilitation programmes have been tried and had money spent on them across the Western world. There may be some minor successes in a few cases but for the most part the idea that you can turn bad into good by way of prison + some Government programmes is obviously naive.
It doesn’t work, it never has and it never will.
It is said the true definition of insanity is to do the same things over and over and expect a different result. How many years have we been spent sending people to prison on the myth that there is some sort of rehabilitation going on? It’s a myth with a cost as well – all those Government programmes that have been tried inside of prison don’t come cheap.
There are mainly two groups that hold steadfast to the myth of rehabilitation against all facts and logic. The Government are that first group. Why? Consider the quandary that a Government would be in if they fell in line with the facts and reason and stated outright that a large % of criminals and prisoners were literally beyond rehabilitation.
The moment a PM or Government said that then it would beg the the question – what are they going to do about it then? This in turn would cause an even bigger problem for Government since they would now have to think what to do with the untold number of people that they had now admitted were beyond rehabilitation. We’re not talking here of the criminal class already considered beyond rehabilitation (like Peter Sutcliffe). Nope. We’re speaking here about individuals who are typically getting anything from tagging orders to a year in prison.
The Peter Sutcliffes are a rare breed.
The Frankish and Picard types are by no means a rare breed at all. Were a Government to deem their actions as equating to them being beyond all rational rehabilitation then they couldn’t let them go – ever. They’d have to let them go on one hand – these are not life sentences of course. But on the other hand they could not let them go if they were also taking a new position of saying they’d always be a danger to the public and nothing anyone can do would change them.
That would be the quandary they’d find themselves in if they stopped bluffing and just told the truth.
By feeding into the rehabilitation myth they never have to confront this reality and problem. No Government wants to tell that truth and take on that position because then it would lead them down a real rabbit hole. People might start thinking that if such flukes of nature could not be rehabilitated and if them being at large would always present a serious threat that its maybe best to suck it up and start removing them from the gene pool.
We all see how quickly European Governments wet their panties at the very mention of a death penalty – and that’s when you are speaking of child killers. I dread to think how many Tena’s they’d get through if someone said that there are certain types of people who (sadly) cannot be rehabilitated and would always remain a serious danger and that logically they should be euthenised.
To be blunt, I know for a fact that its a gigantic facade and waste of time even trying to change people with a certain pathology and who commit certain acts. Call me pessimistic and a hard nosed authoritarian but I just cannot see how any rational person could believe you could be making torture videos at 20 and by 30 you’d be a loving father, two kids, respected for your community efforts etc. Its just NOT going to happen.
There is also no way I can be convinced that someone like Picard can be making and sharing material involving baby rape and dogs and in 5 years time he will have totally normal and reasonable sexual inclinations. It is simply NOT going to happen.
Aside from the Government the other group who want to keep feeding the rehabilitation myth are corduroy wearing, Citroen 2CV driving, Guardian reading “do gooders”.
They can always be relied upon to rush to the defence of any minority – even a bestial one. Its what seems to define them, makes them feel like ‘good’ people. They seem to exist in some sort of fantasy world where freaks just need to be understood and we just need to work out how to give them more free stuff and hey presto – you’ll turn a dog torturer or paedophile into a leading oncologist in no time at all.
The problem with the fantasy world this demographic live in is that its everyone else’s nightmare. Try telling the next victim of a freak that they can’t really be a victim because the perpetrator had been ‘rehabilitated’. I’m sure that would be a comfort.
The toes of this group do not curl at the data you produce that show all the victims. Their toes would only curl if you started suggesting that it was time to accept that certain classes of criminal could never logically be changed and therefore had to be put down. Maybe deep down some of them worry they might be on the wrong end of such a dramatic policy change.
I also think wider society would be somewhat uneasy accepting this truth as well. If the public consensus was that there are certain classes of criminal who can NEVER be rehabilitated and who would ALWAYS remain a serious risk then it would invite an uncomfortable choice for them – do they want to keep going along with the myth and all of its consequences (because they could not emotionally tolerate what would be a not insignificant purge)? Or do they quit thinking emotionally and break the illusion that these people can ever be made into something ‘good’?
If they went with the latter then it would follow that they’d have to want to literally eliminate all those who fell into certain classes of criminal. They’d either have to accept them all being executed or they’d have to be prepared to hold them on some sort of off shore penal colony – forever.
This is why no one really wants to break rank and admit that in reality certain types of people can never be fined into changing, educated into changing or even jailed into changing.
None of it ever works.
It is all a huge self delusion that it does. These types of offenders are always serial offenders or they move on to even more grave offences. If Andrew Picard grew up, got married and had children – he’d almost certain abuse them. If Andrew or Dan Frankish got married and had kids and a family dog – it would end in tragedy.
We want to believe that somehow and against all laws of nature, that we can create a ‘system’ that can over ride their pathology and even their genetics. There is no such system that has existed that has ever done this – anywhere.
There never will be.
Your choice is to ultimately keep holding onto the lie because it is easier and less uncomfortable or to let go of the lie and accept the reality that maybe we just need to eliminate such people by law. “But what if a mistake is made” is the cry. Let’s be honest here. In their case (for example), how could anyone make a ‘mistake’? There was simply no margin for error. Its also the same with victims of child abuse, there is often a mountain of evidence against the abuser and not just some local whisper.
Let’s put it to the test though. Who was the last person convicted of animal torture who later proved to be totally innocent? Who was the last person to be convicted of raping kids that later proved totally innocent? I can’t think of any and I doubt there are many. Why not? Because animals cannot lie and children are highly unlikely to just all get together and happen to tell the same lie about the same person.
Adult rape may be a different matter since it is not unknown for there to be false rape allegations and it really does enter the mind of some screwed up people to make such claims after a night of regret sex or something. But I’ve yet to see the dog that faked its own torture and I’ve yet to see the toddler with the capacity of revenge lying.
I think that for now we are going to be stuck with playing along with the myth for the foreseeable future. I think we’re still stuck in this weird phase of preferring to run the risk of 100 more victims if it meansnot having to execute one perpetrator. This is apparently more ‘moral’ and ‘civlised’ of course. I’d consider it more moral to eliminate the one bad seed to save 100 more victims but then I am at odds with modern thinking.
As an aside, I have heard it asked many times how someone “can do this(sic)” to an innocent child or animal. I don’t think they are actually expecting an answer when they ask this question, its more an expression of how incredulous they are.
But just in case they are after an answer I will give one – the clue is in their question, its the innocence that the perpetrator seeks to destroy.
For some reason there are a % of people who literally despise anything innocent so much that they literally devote their entire life to destroying it. It becomes an addiction to them. What do they get from that though? My observations and understanding of it is that it literally feeds them. It seems that they are so absent of anything that their destruction of that which is most innocent defines them and becomes their everything.
I’ve read long interviews done with serial killers and a common theme is that they will say that in the moment of the murder they never felt more alive. I guess you could say that as they drain the life from a victim they are given life force as it were.
You can call all such people ‘vampires’ in fact. It was probably people of that sort who inspired old European mythology about vampires. Note that the victim in vampire mythology was a virgin – a symbol of that innocence I spoke of.
You could fill ten libraries with books that break their pathology down. No book has ever cured such a person, no book has ever prevented the next victim. Academia and intellectualising these freaks of nature solves nothing. Oh but it “helps us understand” is the rebuttal. So? Understand what? What is there to understand and how can this understanding be applied to either cure the perpetrator or prevent another victim?
We don’t lack studies about such people – we’ve had too many studies and for too long. It is a dead end. Good for academics and professors and bad for the reality and everyone else.
Here’s food for thought though. I know things are far from perfect but at least child abusers and animal torturers aren’t held in high esteem. They have been in history though and in some cultures/parts of the World. I am not remotely religious in any supernatural sense, but out of interest I have read large extracts from the Old Testament, the Koran and the Talmud. Let’s just say that in all three works neither children nor animals come off very well.
In fact the almost casual abuse documented in those three works makes what we see today seem mild. Back then you had people offering up animal and child sacrifice to please something or someone. Not to mention the small question of what age were the girls who were married during those times and who do you think was protecting minors from abusers back then? No one and nothing just like there was no one or nothing protecting the status of animals.
You can see from this that the exploitation of the innocent has been going on a LONG time and that in the past it would not even have been seen as exploitation, abuse or cruel. Its only seen as that because we have applied those values to such matters over time and over here!
Even then there is still ritual slaughter of animals in some parts of the West. The US in particular is very liberal about public displays of mass chicken torture. I kid you not. It is NOT done with the primary motive of eating the meat. The primary motive is all about the ritual. The chickens (not making this up) are swung around the head several times and (I swear this is true), the sins of the person are meant to “transfer to the chicken”.
Even leaving the cruelly aspect to one side – do you SEE how fucking demented these people must be to be still following this sadistic BS in 2016 and do you see how surreal it is for a modern Western nation to permit it… in PUBLIC?
I know you are going to think I must be on the magic mushrooms and I am making this stuff up. But no. Here we go with the chicken swinging thing – like I said.
You think those brothers are mental? How collectively insane do you have to be to first swing live chickens over your head and then slaughter them – all in public?
I’d say that is a pretty good sign of psychosis, esp when you throw in the whole thing about their sins being put on to the chicken.
Who actually sat down and made this shit up? At what point did someone stroll in and say “Listen, good idea to deal with our sin problem. Let’s swing a live chicken around our head. Then kill it. We can’t eat the meat though as it is full of sin”.
If I popped down the pub and suggested that as a thing they would think I was utterly fucking bonkers.
Imagine walking down the street with your children and seeing that in public? I have never seen it here so I have no idea if its banned or not, but the US needs to have a word with itself if they are permitting THAT as an “expression of religious freedom”.
Crossing yourself or saying grace is an expression of religious freedom (that I have no issue with). Twirling live chickens around your head because you think you can put your sins into it and kill it is … definitely insanity.
I’ll end how I began – speaking about forgiveness. There can never be any for people like Frankish and only a naive fool would offer any. You are not legally obligated to give them any at all, regardless of their sentence.
They are not remotely deserving of it and never have been. Not merely due to what they did but due to all that they have not done in the time since.
There is not one single shred of evidence of any remorse on their part. On the contrary, three years after doing it he was on line joking about it and treating it all like some game.
People like him have had their day. The body politic and legal system are going to have to catch up or be left behind by public momentum. People aren’t stupid. They are starting to see how insane it is that they are taxed to pay for a legal system that is designed to favour those like Frankish.
What has happened to them since April should serve as an example to all those like them. Please understand that while we cannot use or advocate brute force against them, that we will never let them dupe anyone again. They won’t be able to just move on, find a girl that doesn’t know their past, find an employer that wont be aware of what he has taken on, there wont be a landlord in all of Britain that won’t eventually get to know what he has in his or her house.
That is their future.
Their future is increasingly degraded guest houses, isolation, exposure, constant reminders, no chance of ever having children without the mother knowing what she is pregnant to, no chance of dating someone without her parents being aware, no chance of work unless the employer doesn’t mind the negative feedback it causes, no chance of … anything.
We do not require to lay a single glove on them to achieve that. We do not even require to break the law.
We only need keep telling the truth and using our right of free speech.
Laugh that one off, bitches.