Dear Editor, I write in response to a previous letter headlined ‘Plea for help and support for sex offender’ and published on Thamenews.net.
The letter, submitted by friends of the family of the convicted paedophile Nick Graves claims that the statement made by the relatives of the victim
was a ‘vindictive attack’. On reading the letter, it becomes clear that this is because the authors are concerned that information about a paedophile living in the ‘close knit community’ of Towersey would be
embarrassing.
Demonstrating much more imagination than Judge Julian Hall, who decided that it was appropriate to release Graves on the basis that he had been punished
enough already by losing his well paid job and a few -(although clearly not all) friends, they manage to interpret the statement as an attack on Graves’ family. This is patently not the case.
The statement does not single out the Graves family but urges all parents, carers and families to
be vigilant, to listen to children and to report suspected abuse. This is sensible and balanced advice.
There are two foolish and particularly ignorant statements that should not go without comment. In both the friends of Graves seem to claim expert
knowledge in child psychology. Firstly, the damage done to the victim will apparently ‘probably be minimal’. How do they know this? Even Judge Hall
says ‘one can never tell long term’. Furthermore, surely seeing someone who has been found guilty of sexually abusing you walk free with glowing
references adds insult to the initial injury and must have an effect?
Secondly and perhaps even more alarmingly, they question the testimony of ‘mischievous’ children who claim abuse and that maybe we shouldn’t bother
listening to their accusations because they might be making it up. This is precisely the attitude that has protected paedophiles in the past and provides the kinds of environments in which they can operate freely.
It is admirable that they propose forgiveness. Forgiveness is however best accompanied by atonement. Graves has avoided the opportunity to atone by
rallying health professionals to produce mitigating evidence, friends to provide ‘glowing’ references, and admitting guilt only after being unanimously found guilty by a jury. These are not acts of atonement but calculated acts to avoid a custodial sentence. Ironically, it is only through a custodial sentence that he could receive the appropriate
treatment for his disease.
Yours sincerely,
Simon Rycroft
(Former resident of Towersey) (SEE BELOW)
NOTE FROM EDITOR: Although it may not have been clear from my report, it was my understanding that Mr Graves WAS ordered to attend a Sexual Offenders’ Course, as part of the Sexual Offences Prevention order.