INFORMATION AVAILABLE AS TO THE IDENTITY OF ACCUSED CHILD MOLESTERS
When does a communities' right to know supercede the rights of the accused in sex assault or pedophilia cases?
If you want further details, mail me, I will send you the names. Or call me, I will tell you. We all have a right to know what is happening here, and for the people who may have sent their kids to this babysitter, they deserve to know as well.
The names are...Bradley Riddell, 40, and Christine Riddell, 39.
The communal rights of our city should always exceed the accused rights, but the issue is the protection of several small children in our community, and their right to exist without further identification and molestation.
On the other hand I look at the situation and think to myself that there are thousands of unsuspecting children in our community, and what is wrong with warning them away from certain suspect individuals?
I am glad these people are not my neighbours, and I can say that with certainty,(i know who they are and where they lived) but what about the others in our city who do live next to these people,that do have children and what about the concern that this person was a career babysitter in our community?
Available on FACEBOOK are many clear photos of these people, where their names are clearly visible. This person needs to be routed out of our city, and into a jail somewhere, where the inmates will take care of them when the courts are afraid to.
23 comments:
gross assholes
Is the publishing of an accuseds' name not illegal?
...only if you're a newspaper.
They haven't managed to silence private citizens yet but they're working on it.
Uh, I'd consult your lawyer on that.
Court publication bans are usually for publication in ANY form, anything that could lead to the identification of the person(s) covered by the ban.
I'm not a lawyer (or covering this issue), so take what I write as you may.
hummm,
looks like ya scooped the review folks.
Despite Hugo's attempts to discourage Jim from posting this.
Uh, I advised him to check with his lawyer, that's all.
Certainly, we checked with ours multiple times Wednesday before we published what we did.
It was cautionary advice, strongly prefaced by a statement that I'm not a lawyer.
Perhaps if I were, I would have given better advice.
ha ha ha whatever Hugo
There is a group on facebook called I hate Child Molesters which also identifies these sickos, so I'm sure it won't be long before everyone knows...
I wouldn't bash Hugo.
There are restrictions that he must adhere to, and a code of ethics when reporting.
I'd like to hear more about this journalistic code of ethics. Where can I get a copy?
No please, go ahead. If I had a nickel for every time someone mocked me or criticized my work and that of my colleagues (on this blog alone) while not having the cajones to post with their real names... why, I'd have retired from journalism and bought a golf course or something.
:P
I'll thank you to keep your cajones to yourself. This is a family blog. :)
lmafo
"It was cautionary advice, strongly prefaced by a statement that I'm not a lawyer."
Yes Hugo. You covered your ass admirably.
If you had contacted Jim when you found your "cautionary advice" was ill advised no one would be questioning your motives. Since you chose not to, your motives are questionable.
OK. So let me get this straight. Someone, who doesn't have the courage to put their own name on a comment, questions my motives?
I issued a caution under the best of intentions because I didn't want to see Jim run into legal issues because of this blog. He's a good guy and a strong civic democracy needs people like him running blogs like this. Jim did what he wanted with that caution, and any other he may or may not have received.
We contacted *OUR* lawyer, who *WE* pay to provide *US* with advice. A decision was made (that I was not involved in). How is it now MY responsibility, in any way, to call Jim and tell HIM?
Jim is free as the owner of this blog to disregard my advice. I didn't force or compel him in any way to pull the post when he did, as far as I know he did so of his own volition. Just the same way he put it back up Thursday.
Grow up and stand behind what you have to say by putting your name to it. That's what we grown ups do.
Your explanation sounds completely reasonable and is probably quite true. That doesn't change the fact that had you informed Jim that your cautionary advice was unnecessary and he was free to re-post, your actions would be beyond question or reproach.
Not telling Jim that you were wrong and he was in no jeopardy was at best irresponsible and leaves your motives open to question. This is not an accusation. It is simply observation and conclusion based on what has been documented in the above comments.
What should be obvious to you and probably is obvious to others reading this blog is You Owe Jim An Apology. You gave him bad advice. When you found out it was bad advice you did nothing to correct your error. Now you are refusing to accept responsibility and claiming that Jim "did so of his own volition" when he obviously did so as a direct result of your advice.
Be a man. (subtle cojone reference) Apologize.
ok, this isn't funny anymore, I'm sure no apologies are neccessary
Neither myself or the S-R owe Jim anything when it comes to this-- and I'm done commenting on this thread.
Stubbornness is one thing, but such zeal from someone who is too chicken to use their own name deserves no further reply or response.
Nice to see the readers of this blog are so interested in the welfare of children in this community and the long term effects on the toddlers involved.
Let's hope that the publishing of the names does not create more trauma for the toddlers and their families as they try to recover and heal from the horrible events they have experienced.
Hey guys.
I've just read all of this. Unfortunately I've not paid attention since putting this up and I think that everyone is kind of getting off topic.(I'm still boiling sap outside...)
Everyone should be concerned about this.
I feel sad for the people involved, the parents and their respective families even more so since hearing it was members of a friends' family who were victimized.
The real tragedy in all of this is the long term impact that two nasty people have left in all of our collective thoughts.
This morning my autistic son was "lost" for a short while when he was being "cared" for by his caregiver. While we raced from our home to the "scene", we frantically looked through yards, sidestreets and on sidewalks hoping to see him.
ALl that we could think of were the recent events in our community, and feared for his safety even more. Without any permanent identification method, no tracking device of sorts(damn, GPS would be the ticket here)or any way to pinpoint him, we worried even more. On our way through the Peel and Wellington intersection, we spotted 2 cruisers in the church parking lot, and we asked a lady standing on the sidewalk if she had seen a little boy. She said they had one in the building.
So luckily he wound up being found at the church shoeless,coatless, non-verbal, and unaware of his surroundings.
We felt completely helpless during that frantic search, and I was not a very happy camper with my support worker who had not been paying attention to him as he should have been. I admonished him publicly, and I suppose that wasn't the correct thing to do, but I'll tell you, it sure sucks to have to place your trust in these people,and to feel let down in the most frightening of ways.
Here's top hoping we all learned a lesson today.
My lesson, for not paying attention and stopping this thread earlier, and my support workers lack of attention in the matter of losing my son.
So to that...this is now closed.
Thanks Guys!(and thanks to ocps for a fast and super response)
I have to disagree that the real tragedy is the long term impact this has on our collective thoughts.
IMHO, the real tragedy is that several children have lost their innocence, have had to go through invasive examinations and now, along with their parents, face the court system for years and must relive the details. Let's hope the adults responsibe plead guilty and spare them some of the pain they face.
I'm glad your son was found safe.
Being a victim of sexual assault as a child I can tell you children will NOT be the problem but the adults will be.
Kids have the ability of being strong of character but it will be the adults who will NOT be able to let this go.
Experts will say to talk about it but they will also not tell you that people will get sick of hearing about it.
I wrote a EXPERT opinion on this on ourecho.com called'Doing Life No Chance For Parole'as well as a poem called'Another Child Is Missing'they can be found under my name Charlene Smith/Woodstock,Ontario
My stories are about the hard subjects no one wants to talk about and since I am a survivor of alot of things,I write about them.
As to Hugo's advice,it was correct as these people are PRESUMED INNOCENT until they are found guilty and under a court ordered ban it is to make sure they get a fair trial and that any potential jury pool isn't tainted.
Before anyone attacks me,I have an on going investigation into sexual assault going back to the 1970s as well as a case filed with the Ontario Omsbudman.
In this case the predador was caught 20 years and many kids later and when he told of all the kids he had assaulted,he forgot me.
By forgetting me,IF they decide to pursue it,he could go back to jail for good and they could attempt to correct the mistake they made back in the 1970s by NOT using me to convict and stop him back then.
Onlt time will tell but I do hope people will read my stories to see what can happen when people don't listen or do anything.
Charlene Smith/Woodstock,Ontario
Post a Comment