Bit of a record, isn’t it?

Pleasted, who had a long history of offending against children, lived opposite the family on an estate in Silvertown, east London.

He had 24 previous convictions for sexual offences dating between 1970 and 1991 and at the time was awaiting trial for attacks on children under the age of 13.

8 thoughts on “Bit of a record, isn’t it?”

  1. As with any repeat offender, there’s an iceberg pattern: a small number of offences that are prosecuted, and vastly more that aren’t.

  2. The fact he had benefitted from the justice system’s leniency under one name rather proves the futility of banning a change of name, doesn’t it?

    Of course, if this law comes in, what’s to prevent a criminal simply changing gender instead?

  3. He had 24 previous convictions for sexual offences dating between 1970 and 1991

    Meaning he should have been strung up before Mrs Sands’ boys were even born.

  4. Since the judge after about the third one should have spotted the pattern, why was he not banged up for life at that point? As present cases show, the supposed controls on these people out in society just don’t work. The people charged with the monitoring have too much to do anyway.

  5. He had 24 previous convictions for sexual offences dating between 1970 and 1991 . . .

    I can’t find a story (including contemporary ones) mentioning any time served, which makes me suspect there wasn’t any – because why wouldn’t you mention it?

    It’s noteworthy in the contemporary reports that the police say the mother being cleared of murder was the right verdict, plus emphasising that it was the courts, not them, that let the pedo out on bail into the community of his victims. The mother’s sentence after trial was three and a half years, but the Court of Appeal increased it to seven and a half years, ensuring her children (sex abuse victims) were without a parent during their adolescence.

    If I was Bruce Wayne, it’s these court bunts who would feel the vengeance of the bat cat.

  6. Sounds like she should have been knighted instead of spending four years in prison, as contributing far more to society than 99% of that year’s crop of knighthoods.

    What’s wrong with you people?

  7. I know the complaint about the three-strikes rule meaning trivial offences can lead to larger sentences, but at some point it has to make sense for habitual offenders to have some sort of escalation/multiplier applied

    Repeat/multiple offences being something the justice campaigners conveniently don’t mention when saying look how unfair it is getting 10 years for something minor

  8. I hope moults last few moments on earth were terrifying agony. Then I hope and pray that he meets God and faces eternal damnation.
    No one trusts the Police and courts to protect the public anymore so well done Ms Sands.

Leave a Reply

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