The Truth About IPP Sentences

Are the British really a nation of sex offenders?

Britain - a nation of perverts?

Britain – a nation of perverts?

After the report into the apparent sexual offending of Jimmy Savile, the Director of Public Prosecutions, Kier Starmer, has effectively announced that the prosecution of those accused of sexual offences against children is to be made even easier by further lowering the bar – or ’level of proof’ – required before police can be authorised to charge alleged offenders.

If the charities are to be believed, Britain seems to be a nation of perverts – but rather than the British really being pre-disposed to sexual offending, is it actually the law which is wrong?

The DPP, deeply embarrassed at failings within the Crown Prosecution Service’s handling of allegations against Savile, has been forced to respond to the joint investigation by police and the statutorily gifted NSPCC into the now dead BBC presenter.

However, neither Starmer or the NSPCC are prepared to address the issue that believes really matters:

“Why are there apparently so many sex offenders in Britain?”

Perhaps the first question to be asked however, is whether or not so many people really are guilty of sexual offending – particularly against children – or whether, as one barrister recently told us:

 “It is now so easy to make allegations without the need for any corroborating evidence, that it is impossible to defend anyone from an accusation of sexual offending, particularly accusations involving children.“

For the last 30 years, successive UK governments have jumped on the child protection band wagon, seeing it as an easy route to cheap, populist-driven votes; always conscious of pressure from the tabloid media and feminist-driven lobby groups.

The House of Lords removed the need for corroboration of evidence in child sex offence cases in the 1980s and did the same for offences against adults in the early 90s.

It is no coincidence that it was at about that time when the “protection industry” took off in the UK, largely driven by American public opinion and the realisation that most people and politicians are much too afraid to speak out against possibly false allegations of abuse for fear of being criticised.

The police and CPS were next to join the band wagon, cashing in on the fact that in child sex abuse cases in particular, juries were far more likely to convict than acquit, mainly on the basis that it was better to “err on the side of caution”.

Child protection groups in particular have consistently made it clear that in their view, it is of no consequence if innocent people, mainly men, are convicted if it means that the guilty never go free.

Huge numbers of UK jobs – and a not insignificant amount of income – are dependent on the public being encouraged to report sexual offending, real or not, whether that be current offending or offences from 60 years ago.

Reading a few published stories is more than sufficient to come to the conclusion that as all children “must now be believed”, even if there is no evidence, anyone in Britain who is accused of sexual abuse is likely to end up in jail.

If on the other hand all the accusations really are true, one has to ask why so many men and women in Britain are prone to sexual offending, especially against children?

The first thing to consider is whether or not someone over 16 years of age but under 18 should in fact be described as a ‘child’. After all, at 16 one can leave school, have sex, have children, get married, join the armed forces, pay tax and get a full time job.

In other EU countries, where for example the age of consent can be as low as 13 but the age of criminal responsibility is higher than the 10 years of age in the UK, those under 18 are regarded as “minors”; mainly for the purposes of tax, benefits, cigarette and alcohol consumption.

The second question asked by is whether there is something in the repression visited upon the British people for the last 500 years that causes them to take it out on children.

We exclude ‘women’ from this question as they are only ‘women’ once they have attained the age of 18 years; until then, they are regarded as ‘children’.

Mr Starmer, the police, the CPS and the NSPCC are only interested in protecting those under 18 it would seem.

The British ‘Public School’ system is often cited as a breeding ground of depravity; but that would surely result in half the MPs in the Commons and peers in the Lords having been arrested and charged by now.

The Catholic Church has similarly been accused of producing perverts – but so has the Church of England and the Army.

Could it be then – dare one even suggest such a thing – that in reality, there are no more sexual predators in the UK than in any other country; just more benefit available to those who make and enforce the law and who run the multi-million pound organisations that purport to protect us all?

Although neither the current government or its predecessors have openly said so, the fact that any child making any accusation must now automatically be believed to be telling the truth also means that by definition, any adult charged with a sexual offence against someone under 18 years of age must now be presumed guilty; something that is totally against not only the principles of British law but also against the very law itself.

In the same way, anyone making an accusation that they were sexually assaulted 60 years ago – even if there is no evidence – must also be automatically believed to be telling the truth.

The fact that many of these accusers – often young and coerced by their opportunistic family or even the authorities and who may logically expect the inevitable monetary reward that will almost certainly be forthcoming from the state or the accused individual – may not be telling the truth, seems to play no part in the reasoning of those allegedly only interested in their ‘protection’.

Police officers giving statements from the steps of a court after (not too difficult) successful prosecutions have been instructed to always praise the ‘brave’ victims and to encourage others to come forward.

Parents are warned that even their own children could be sexually abusing their siblings and that all men are a threat to their offspring.

In schools, all children are now taught that there is a paedophile on every corner; the NSPCC continues to claim that 25% of all children are abused and the police maintain that hundreds of children have ‘been protected’ when in fact, there was neither evidence nor charges brought against individuals in the first place. does not believe that Britain is in fact a nation full of perverts seeking to attack children.

We are certain however that Britain believes that it is such a country and society.

This is hardly surprising when one considers the endless, fear producing drip-feeding of the population that is encouraged by opportunistic politicians, charities and newspaper editors alike.

Now that Britain’s chief prosecutor has publicly announced that he too has signed up to the same diatribe, it is a safe bet that any man accused of any offence against a child will end up in jail; guilty or not.

Juries are too afraid not to convict, trial judges are too weak and afraid to properly direct, defence barristers have given up, policemen think they are more powerful than God himself and prosecutors need only to sign the papers in order to attain a conviction.

The response from the DPP is to make it even easier to convict more men without evidence, even for offences from 60 years ago.

As stated, Britain is not – in the view of at least, a nation of child molesting sexual perverts but it does have a serious problem when it comes to being conned and misled by powerful organisations and manipulative authorities.

The NSPCC and other charities have said today:

“We must stop putting the interests of adults first and instead concentrate on children.”

The man who said that on the BBC is a particular kind of self-serving fool. A dangerous fool who fails to realise that the logical conclusion of his reasoning will be that no adult – parents included – will ever feel safe in the presence of their own or other children again.

Where, without the confidence of adults, will his precious “child protection” be then one may ask?

(To discuss this further, join our Members Forum. Click Here)

Tags: , , , ,

10 Responses to Are the British really a nation of sex offenders?

  1. citizen
    March 13, 2017 at 1:22 pm


  2. gioya
    September 29, 2015 at 1:08 pm

    Interesting article, just look after your children !!! Keep your eyes open,is really crazy World out there.

  3. shirley mccarthy
    February 15, 2013 at 10:10 pm

    Thank you for this Article and Well Said,i totally agree,the Law needs changing,so the age of consent is 16 and this gouverment allows children to then have sex. if they are a child till 18 very confusing and a trap i feel

  4. Jenny Richards
    January 16, 2013 at 8:17 pm

    ‘barristers have given up’ – well, not exactly. They still go through the motions even though they know there is no chance of an acquittal. Why? because they still get paid. If they were truly concerned about these wrongful convictions they would refuse to represent the accused, on the grounds that there could not possibly be a fair trial. The ‘justice’ system would then HAVE to do something about it. Unfortunately the barristers are only interested in the money.

    As for MPs, as Ramon1940 says: ‘they don’t want to know’. My own MP has now told me not to write to him again on this subject! (He still wants a payrise though!)

  5. trulysad
    January 13, 2013 at 9:55 pm

    I’m so relieved that I’m not alone in my thinking about this. Apart from false accusations wrecking families I cannot believe that, once he has learnt that there is a victim, a man will not be able to turn himself around to a different life. Of course there are truly nasty people who will hurt on purpose and do not want to change their ways but the majority should be given a chance and not be tarred with the same brush.

  6. pete
    January 11, 2013 at 9:22 pm

    It’s ironic that this truly courageous article has appeared just a few days after the death of Stan Cohen, one of the UK’s most brilliant sociologists and the chronicler of “moral panics”, a term he in fact coined.

    The Savile panic – by which I mean the Establishment’s latest convulsion over its favourite preoccupation, the sexual abuse of children – will go some considerable way to making the UK an even nastier, more paranoid and fearful place to live.

    I have no interest in defending a dead celeb’s reputation. But I can’t help noticing that the police and the NSPCC, and virtually all of the mainstream media, have uncritically referred to those coming forward with accusations (after being massively encouraged to do so) as “victims.” This may seem nit-picking, but I had naively believed I lived in a country where allegations of criminal wrongdoing were first tested rigorously in open, public court. Only then, when all the evidence had been presented and appropriately challenged, and a properly considered verdict had been arrived at, would it be appropriate to talk of victims and perpetrators. Before that point, there are merely plaintiffs and defendants.

    But, thanks to the unappeasable and extremist efforts, over several decades, of a powerful, unelected and unaccountable victims’ advocacy movement, this fundamental tenet of humane law, the presumption of innocence, is no longer applicable when it comes to accusations of sexual abuse. Accusers are immediately assumed to be victims, and the accused presumed guilty by virtue of being accused.

    Those who applaud this development today should fear for their sons, especially; thanks to this latest moral panic, gauche, maladroit, normal adolescent sexual behaviour today is now the historic abuse of tomorrow. Would you feel comfortable about your son being destroyed decades in the future because of an uncorroborated, unprovable allegation dating from forty years ago? If you have even a twinge of anxiety about this, you should be resisting this child protection insanity now with all your fury and all your vigour.

    This is witch hunt fever, not child protection; the only beneficiaries are those who wish to extend their intrusive and punitive “protective” empire into ever more private and intimate spaces.

    When the tiny village of Salem, Massachusetts, was similarly convulsed in an earlier psychotic panic in the seventeenth century (this time over satanic witchcraft), accusation was usually sufficient to result in a death penalty. And this was because the authorities of the day, like our own, were so concerned to eradicate this imaginary evil that they, too, had largely dispensed with the need for real corroborating evidence. They believed it, so it must be so. The official murder eventually stopped because no one – not even the prosecutors and hangmen – was safe from accusation, and no one had a defense once accused.

    Against the mantra of the day – better that an innocent man be destroyed than a witch walk free – one courageous Quaker minister courted his own death by re-affirming the cornerstone of true justice and liberty. In 1695, after the hanging and murderously insane paranoia had abated, Thomas Maule wrote “better that 100 witches should live, than one person be put to death as a witch, which is not a Witch.”

    It’s a measure of how panic-stricken and enthralled, how obsessed, we have become with child sexual abuse, how willing we are to believe in its occurrence in every “town, village and hamlet”, to quote the Deputy Children’s Commissioner’s lunatic remarks, that these sane and courageous words should seem faintly scandalous in the supposedly more enlightened twenty-first century.

    I hope he won’t object to the comparison, but it seems to me that, almost alone amongst commentators and journalists, Raymond Peytors is the Thomas Maule of today.

  7. Ramon1940
    January 11, 2013 at 7:53 pm

    Try mentioning the “innocents in prison” to any newspaper and they turn their backs. Barristers are the same, any man falsely accused of child sex offences is encouraged to plead guilty from the start.Makes it so much easier for the Barrister to collect his fees.
    Contact your MP over allegations, they do not want to know, and will not even offer any advice.
    Judges do not even refer to the defendents witness statements/court questioning refuting the accusers claims, I should know, as my Son is serving 7 years for such a crime, which we all KNOW he did not commit, and I have the Judges summing up where the witness’s were not believed by the Judge.
    The families of these men suffer, the taxpayer picks up the bill for supporting wives and children, marriages are wrecked, homes and possessions lost, children taken into care if the partner stands by the convicted man.
    Furthermore many falsely accused men have taken their own lives because they know they cannot win against a BIASED justice system.
    This is the position in Britain today for these FA’s easy money for telling lies.

  8. Jenny
    January 11, 2013 at 5:08 pm

    A wonderfully objective article.

    About the only one I have seen during this feeding frenzy.

    Thank you.

  9. suetiggers
    January 11, 2013 at 5:00 pm

    My goodness, and I thought this insanity was only happening in America!
    Since George Bush started the ball rolling and with only a few truly heinous public cases of child abduction, the sunami of public opinion hucksters and fear industry has joined with the criminal justice system in the U.S. to have a good old witch hunt with all kinds of people (men mostly) who are not dangerous, and esp. not to children…
    But, the beat goes on. Thanks for this good article. suetiggers in USA

  10. redrum
    January 11, 2013 at 4:52 pm

    Well said!

    It’s about time we heard from someone who is not climbing on the bandwagon and who has the courage to speak out.

    Pity a few more do not follow your example and put an end to this madness.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

SPAM protection: Please fill in the missing number... Time limit is exhausted. Please reload CAPTCHA.