WOULD THE ENTITY PLEASE GET OFF MY NEIGHBOURS
“Yes, I understand what you are saying and of course it makes sense to be able to predict and recognise the signs of criminal behaviours. As you say with hindsight JS grooming behaviour is recognisable to those who know, other criminal behaviour such as recent events in Wales seem less obvious to me”
I can see where you want to go with this but can’t see how such knowledge could be used. There are legal issues here that would block anybody from acting on what they fear “might” be a persons deeper personality. Because until a “bad person” acts there is nothing anybody could do. We look back at somebody like Saville and say we should have known, but without good reason nothing could have been done anyway. We have all come across those people who arrive with a “Hi everybody, hope you are all well” type thing and we feel it is false, yes they are kind to animals, children and old people, but there is still something that comes over as not right about them. Is that enough to do something about them, is it in fact enough to even justify suspicion?
Yes in respect to Saville we could say that there was enough doubt, people had been talking for a long time, and it was known that when challenged about anything he could turn from Mr. Nice very quickly into a very aggressive person. Clues to something not right yes, but what? That would be too dangerous to say.
It would be wonderful to be able to understand and identify the damaged people around us before they got the chance to harm others, but maybe all we really can do is protect where we see a need. And maybe the “why” will only ever be something we can understand retrospectively. In fact the “why” might be as different as each person and as such impossible to protect against.
It would be wonderful to be able to understand and identify the damaged people around us before they got the chance to harm others, but maybe all we really can do is protect where we see a need. And maybe the “why” will only ever be something we can understand retrospectively. In fact the “why” might be as different as each person and as such impossible to protect against.