Reply to post: Blerrgh re-write

Sex ban IT man loses appeal – but judge labels order 'unpoliceable'

Anonymous Coward
Anonymous Coward

Blerrgh re-write

In the new world order, coppers and co don't make judgement calls or use their initiative. It is all about taking a risk management approach to civil society.

The psych-nurse felt obliged to report (would get in trouble, otherwise). An SRO was issued and now the cops still have to apply it even though it is "unpoliceable". The judge put in his opinionated two cent's worth.

The individual in question (manipulative or not) now has their life pretty well buggered without actually being convicted of any crime. How can that be a good precedent for anything? To me, it looks like full-on shirking of individual responsibility, by handing over this bag of shite to the next recipient and hoping the problem doesn't come back to you. If there was a need to monitor the individual, there are ankle-bracelets and state ordered therapy available. How is policing an individual's sex urges supposed to work? You can't be punished for something you might do and you are either guilty of an act or not guilty. Letting civil servants run roughshod over our civil rights without due process is not going to be a popular societal control mechanism, but I suppose it is worth a go.

Move along citizen, there is nothing to see here... and put your damned electro-shock collar back on again before we lose patience and give you the perma-weld model

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019