Grooming gangs

[Wisbech Eagle]

Wishful thinking. There is probably a UN or ECHR parameter that details what age we have to adhere to, so Parliament are just a ‘yes’ stage of the process.

18 is the UN recommended age for legal responsibility but it’s up to every country to determine for itself what’s appropriate.

 

[Teddy Eagle]

I suppose by that you mean that it was assumed that the boys were asylum seekers. Why is that an outrage? It’s deeply disappointing but so is any crime of this type. In the meantime we continue to face the need to deal with asylum claims and accommodate the applicants while they are processed. We all wish that wasn’t true but neither a workable solution nor a magic wand has yet been found. Expressing outrage might make you feel better but it does nothing at all to help anyone else.

You suppose wrongly. The outrage was in making the assumption.

 

[Teddy Eagle]

18 is the UN recommended age for legal responsibility but it’s up to every country to determine for itself what’s appropriate.

In England the age of criminal responsibility is 10.

 

[Common Sense Club]

18 is the UN recommended age for legal responsibility but it’s up to every country to determine for itself what’s appropriate.

…and the ECHR?

 

[cryrst]

My stance is simple. The law is the law. It would have been determined after a great deal of thought and debate into all aspects and all circumstances. Even for such an awful crime as this is.

How we control speculation is another question. I would restrain the media myself and not allow them to publish anything more than that released by the police until trial. Dealing with the internet, on issues like this and many more, is much more difficult but really important. We have only just started to get any kind of grip on this but much more is needed. The major platforms have got to start taking responsibility for what appears or we will have to close them down. Only this week Musk said it was impossible to moderate X due to the volume of posts. My response to that would be tough. You claim AI can do anything. So make it do it or lose the right to our market.

If AI moderates who programs it?
Most posts would be removed if they had any of thousands of certain words in them. It’s not easy for a PC to look at context. You may call that ironic !

 

[Spiderman]

It wasn’t easy to find but I did read them. There isn’t any “outrage” I can see. She scolded the boys for bringing asylum seekers into disrepute. She was scathing about their behaviour and rejected any suggestions that culture could provide mitigation. Correctly in my opinion. She lifted reporting restrictions to “prevent speculation and false information.”

That worked!

She criticised the lack of information given out initially

 

[Wisbech Eagle]

You suppose wrongly. The outrage was in making the assumption.

I am glad to know that you are outraged when people make assumptions. Always better to know the facts.

 

[Wisbech Eagle]

She criticised the lack of information given out initially

Not in the remarks I read. She seemed even handed and objective.

 

[Wisbech Eagle]

If AI moderates who programs it?
Most posts would be removed if they had any of thousands of certain words in them. It’s not easy for a PC to look at context. You may call that ironic !

If AI is capable of so much, and it clearly is, then it ought to be possible to write a sophisticated method that flagged up inappropriate content whilst not being a nanny.

I don’t know how much you use it but it’s already able to do some remarkable things for us at a personal level. How much more could Musk build into X?

It needs to be done, or we face a major problem.

 

[Wisbech Eagle]

In England the age of criminal responsibility is 10.

We were actually talking more about the age of consent than legal responsibility.

 

[Wisbech Eagle]

…and the ECHR?

Not involved.

 

[georgenorman]

I loath grooming gangs and their apologists.

 

[Spiderman]

Not in the remarks I read. She seemed even handed and objective.

A judge in a case involving two young Afghan rapists criticized the police and other authorities for how information was handled, suggesting a
"lack of information stokes public anger".

Quite easy to find actually

 

[Teddy Eagle]

I am glad to know that you are outraged when people make assumptions. Always better to know the facts.

Assumptions based on previous events which turn out to be true. Just another example of your predilection for authoritarianism. Don't think anything other than what you're told and if it turns out that you were lied to then it was for your own good.

 

[PalazioVecchio]

'Grooming Gangs and Tapioca Pudding' ............ which has got more to do with the OP than the last 24 hours worth of dirge. Dirge from deliberate Trolls. Trolls intent on diverting every sensible conversation with tripe. The worst offender being the bloke just above this posting. He is closely followed by mr distraction himself, the Mayor of a feminist commune in Cornwall - never ever on target with the subject of the OP. Roger Irrelevant.

Its only certain subjects they don't want us talking about.

Grooming gangs & Tapioca Pudding.

 

[Spindle]

A judge in a case involving two young Afghan rapists criticized the police and other authorities for how information was handled, suggesting a
"lack of information stokes public anger".

Quite easy to find actually

He's not interested in looking. Will probably ask for a video of the judge saying that, before claiming it's AI in the event that you produce it.

 

[PalazioVecchio]

History is awash with grooming gangs. The language has changed, but the story is always very similar. And if the story we hear, propagated today in the UK, is at variance with the actual history ? no comment.

 

[Common Sense Club]

Not involved.

Hmm, so the ECHR would have no involvement if somebody wished to appeal against the lowering of the age at which young perpetrators of criminal acts were named. There would be no HR lawyers challenging a government wishing to automatically naming criminals in their early teens who commit rape, murders etc? The ECHR would be used to frustrate and overturn?

 

[Wisbech Eagle]

A judge in a case involving two young Afghan rapists criticized the police and other authorities for how information was handled, suggesting a
"lack of information stokes public anger".

Quite easy to find actually

I read that. Not though the remarks in whatever report you read. Mine says:-

• In a move to ensure transparency, the judge lifted reporting restrictions to name the defendants, citing that "lack of information stokes public anger".

So the idea it was criticising the police comes from the reporter. Not the Judge. Another reporter reporting it differently. The Judge could just as easily thought the right time to release the names was after sentencing but until then it was necessary.

 

[Wisbech Eagle]

Hmm, so the ECHR would have no involvement if somebody wished to appeal against the lowering of the age at which young perpetrators of criminal acts were named. There would be no HR lawyers challenging a government wishing to automatically naming criminals in their early teens who commit rape, murders etc? The ECHR would be used to frustrate and overturn?

My understanding is that the setting of the age is the responsibility of national governments. Human rights lawyers might well get involved, but not via the ECHR.