When the Sex Offenders Register was established, it made sense to me that society should have the ability to identify the whereabouts and movements of certain types of criminal – predatory paedophiles, rapists, those who commit violent crimes with a sexual content, and particularly serial sex offenders.
I now find myself disturbed by two reports (3 October). One detailed how two people made love on the canal towpath, were prosecuted and placed on the Sexual Offenders Register. The other reports the Scottish Parliament's determination to retain the
powers, in law governing the age of sexual consent, which encourage the prosecution of persons under the age of 16 for having consensual sexual intercourse.
What was the point of placing two young adults on the SOR, maybe impairing their career prospects and potential usefulness to society for ever for what was at worst a public nuisance.
Similarly retaining the powers to prosecute boys and girls of 14 and 15 for a consensual act of sexual intercourse with their peers – leading to their potential imprisonment and inclusion on the SOR – is both mad and hypocritical.
Scotland would be better served if we spent less money prosecuting the essentially innocent, and more, for instance, on researching how to increase the efficiency of rape prosecutions. Stop going for the easy targets, and tackle the important ones.
DAVID FIDDIMORE
Calton Road
EdinburghIt seems incredible that a drugs dealer who had been sentenced to 18 months' imprisonment should be released from prison after only three months and be free to ply his wares again (your report, 4 October).
So much for the deterrent effect. There is a growing public perception that the justice secretary, Kenny MacAskill, is soft on crime, and such events can only add to this view. The government has a duty to safeguard the public and not put them unnecessarily at risk.
BOB MacDOUGALL
Oxhill
Kippen, Stirlingshire David McPhillips (Letters, 3 October) is right that Scottish democratically elected politicians defy public opinion on the death penalty. Even in liberal enlightened Scandinavia, popular opinion supports the death penalty, but political elites overrule.
If citizens forgo the right to personal revenge and delegate the responsibility to administer justice to the state (as in any civilised society), the state needs to satisfy the public that it is indeed inflicting sufficient retribution. The perceived inadequacy of sentences weakens any sense of citizenship.
RICHARD LUCAS
Cowan Road
EdinburghThere can be only one reaction to David McPhillips's letter on "Crime and Punishment" (3 October).
Unfortunately, I am too civilised to give it.
JOHN THORPE
Darniemow
New Luce, WigtownshireThe full article contains 432 words and appears in The Scotsman newspaper.
