Thread: John Wrenshall & background checks

Originally Posted by haltest

Tis an interesting topic KS

Indeed it is Hal, indeed it is! One of the things I find extremely interesting is the way that many, probably most members of society tend to make blanket generalizations. I was recently reminded by PM by a member of this forum that I have more reason to hate pedoes than most, what I found interesting about the PM was the underlying glee he managed to put into it when mentioning my background. Yes I do have more reasons than most to hate the filth who carry out these crimes having been a victim from the age of 9 until 14. Still that was a long long time ago and I like to think that the 20 odd years of therepy has for the most part worked although sometimes the nightmares do come back.
One part of the therepy involved trying to come to an understanding of what was going on in the abusers mind, even simplistic understanding can be very cathartic. This understanding does allow me to see both sides of the argument here, and indeed I acknowledge that some of what I say may give the impression that I in some way support these abusers. Far from it, I hate some of them and would happily pull the triggar, but I pity more and feel that they do need help in a secure environment away from any temptation.

Anyway back to your points hal:

By my understanding most legal systems define a pedo as someone who has sex with a minor (an age that is defined under law with not absolute correlation to physical or mental development) and yet medically they are defined as someone who is sexually attracted to (note attracted as part of the definition, acting on the attraction is not necessary) pubesceant and pre-pubesceant children.
now given the above, let me pose you two scenarios:
1) I have a distant relative back home, Who because of a hormonal deficiency did not start puberty. her whacky religious parents refused treatment that could easily have overcome the problem. At 16 she became legal, and yet she hardly looked 10 years old. anyone who had been sexually attracted to her would medically been deefined as a pedo, and yet those that did engage in sex with her post 16 would legally have not been pedoes.
2) The opposite end of the spectrum, the early bloomer, puberty kicks in early and finishes early, say between 9 and 12. You she her in a two piece on the beach and think "yeah I would give her one" if you did give her one then legally you would be a pedo yet medically you would be someone with a healthy libido.

Was it Tracy lords? who made a finacncial killing, by entering the porn business at 15 by lying about her age. made a string of movies until her 18th birthday. she made one last movie where she fully controlled the finances and royalties and then declared her real age. Imediately every othe movie she made became illegal child porn. How many of the members of this forum have clips from those movies (and they are still available on the net) on their harddrives and are thus in possession of child porn.

Originally Posted by haltest

The fact that they appreciate society knows it to be wrong would be grounds to believe they are sane!
Behaviour to mask or hide their acts would be deemed to be the acts of a sane person. If they hide them = they must know they are wrong (a truly legally insane person would perhaps not know they had done the acts for example)

Again we have a legal/medical devide here and what appears to be a blatant generalization. Let me pose a few questions here: how many members of this forum prefer a bald pussy? How many are attracted to Asian girls because of their small demure bodies? How many are attracted to breasts that need padding to fill an A cup? Watch the catwalk in Nana and note the girls who disappear with a client the quickest. I could argue that all these are indicators of latent pedophillic tendancies. Luckily in asia all those attributes come packaged over the legal age of consent and thus no laws are broken. Yes Thailand does attract those perverts who cross the line into full legal and medical pedophillia But I would argue that there are far more who exercise their tendencies legally.
I guess I am going to get a right royal flaming for the above paragraph. Ah well!

Originally Posted by haltest

But they do form an intention to abuse and hurt children and that fulfills the mental requirement.

All I will say here is generalization and going any further will only inflame the kneejerkers who can only see generalities.

Originally Posted by teacherfinder

Even a basic background check on a prospective teacher runs 50 U.S. Dollars.

I guess there are probably about, what, let's say 2,000 people worldwide at a very conservative estimate who are making a decent living working for NGOs that are supposed to be working to end the exploitation of children.

You'd think that they would be able to set up some way of doing background checks that don't cost this sort of money.

I'd guess that the sad truth is that they'd rather spend their time going to seminars to learn the latest acronyms, with a very nice buffet lunch thrown in.

I remember reading a couple of years ago about a guy who had been campaigning against child prostitution for twenty years and had eventually retired.

To Pattaya.

Hmm....

A simple background would not have solved the problem, as pointed out in several of the news articles. The Canadian government withheld Wrenshall's criminal history. The press revealed his criminal record after he was arrested in December. Prior to that, he was just an anonymous old man. A background check would have been clean.

AUA ignored obvious signs? Such as? A stain on his pants? It's all their fault? Give em a break. It's a business...he was doing his job. Read the captain's quote. Wrenshall's public image was squeaky clean. (Or was that the "obvious sign" that you think should have been pursued?) Has anyone cited an available, credible piece of evidence that was overlooked prior to his arrest?

Count on the captain to do something? HAAAAAA!!!!!!!! You obviously don't know the man. Mai pen rai, boys, mai pen rai.

Originally Posted by Humbert

Thais will forget it pretty quick.

I conducted my own piece of research into this after reading a fearful thread on another Foreign forum.

not 1 of the 23 Thais I spoke to had heard of Wrenshall.

Nor had I and I'm not Thai.

Calgary man accused of pimping young boys in Thailand