Non-motoring > The John O'Neill Case Legal Questions
Thread Author: zippy Replies: 4
View Threaded 

New Fri 19 Aug 16 23:42 
 The John O'Neill Case - zippy
This has been all over the papers recently.

The guy was found not guilty of rape but nevertheless the police sought and secured a "Sexual Risk Order" where he has to report to the police if he wishes to even "chat up a female" 24 hours before he does. He also has to submit phones and computers to police on their demand.

He can't get a job because no one will employ him (and risk their phones and computers being interrogated by the police) and he can't claim benefits and because he can't claim benefits he can't get legal aid.

His sexual preferences are recorded as being extreme to some people.

My concern is that is the thin edge of the wedge; we have ASBOs, SROs, confiscation orders, penalties for not submitting passwords or encryption keys etc. It seems that if the police don't get their way in court, they will come after you in other ways.

I am surprised that they haven't tried to give Cliff Richard an ASBO to prevent him from singing to the crowd at Wimbledon!

Thoughts for discussion.....?
Last edited by: zippy on Fri 19 Aug 16 at 23:42
Reply to this message | Report message
       
New Sat 20 Aug 16 00:48 
 The John O'Neill Case - rtj70
From what little I've seen... he sounds dangerous and he's not 100% certain he's not raped anyone. To respond to:

His sexual preferences are recorded as being extreme to some people.

As in sexual violence? Is that what he wants and that's okay? He's probably close to have needed convicting before now. The fact his appeal didn't work backs that up.

No thin edge of any wedge.

As for can't get a job.... this appeal did him no favours.
Last edited by: rtj70 on Sat 20 Aug 16 at 00:49
Reply to this message | Report message
       
New Sat 20 Aug 16 07:46 
 The John O'Neill Case - Ian (Cape Town)

>> His sexual preferences are recorded as being extreme to some people.
>>
>> As in sexual violence? Is that what he wants and that's okay? He's probably close
>> to have needed convicting before now. The fact his appeal didn't work backs that up.
>>
>> No thin edge of any wedge.

He admitted that he cut, burned and bit his partners, and that is how he got his jollies.
He also admitted that maybe it wasn't always consensual.
How long before he escalated his violent proclivities to a scale of GBH or killing?
He sounds like a very dangerous man to me. A ticking timebomb, if you will...
Reply to this message | Report message
       
New Sat 20 Aug 16 07:23 
 The John O'Neill Case - Ian (Cape Town)
>> I am surprised that they haven't tried to give Cliff Richard an ASBO to prevent
>> him from singing to the crowd at Wimbledon!

would have been cheaper than putting that roof up.
But the same effect.

But on the O'Neill case:

".. the court heard details of confessions to health professionals, which included choking a woman unconscious and thinking "a lot" about killing her."
That seems pretty damning to me.
Last edited by: Ian (Cape Town) on Sat 20 Aug 16 at 07:26
Reply to this message | Report message
       
New Sat 20 Aug 16 10:52 
 The John O'Neill Case - zippy
i have no doubt this person was chosen for one of the first "SROs" for a reason.

My concern is when do they start applying it to all people accused but not committed of a sexual crime?

For example, in 10 years time would:

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/07/26/geography-teacher-cleared-of-raping-private-school-pupil-whose-f/

expect a draconian "SRO" as well?
Reply to this message | Report message
       
Latest Forum Posts