5 ms·

The article seems to indicate that this person was not involved, and had no knowledge. They were also never charged. I mean, the situation itself is quite hor

The article seems to indicate that this person was not involved, and had no knowledge. They were also never charged. I mean, the situation itself is quite horrifying, but I'm unclear as to why this should cause such an uproar. Guilt-by-association is already tough, but now guilt-by-relation? That's going to be tough the world around.

colpabar 6y ago
>She added: “Yes, he was my election agent. This was one of a number of ways I was seeking to reconcile my relationship with my father after coming out of care. On reflection, I can understand that it was unacceptable for me to appoint my dad as my election agent when he had been arrested.” Do you really think that someone hiring a convicted pedophile as their election agent isn't a big deal? Doesn't it make you wonder why reddit hired this person, and then made a top-down effort to suppress their name?
- caspper69 6y ago
  Well, minor nit here, the father was not convicted when they were hired. They received 22 years when they were convicted, so unlikely to be working anywhere. But who knows what the father told his child. I mean most reasonable people would not believe their parent capable of such horrors, even if they were charged.
  - hervature 6y ago
    > I mean most reasonable people would not believe their parent capable of such horrors, even if they were charged. Blind faith in friends/family is absolutely NOT reasonable. If I'm supposed to believe a system convicts strangers accurately, then it follows people you know are accurately convicted.
    - caspper69 6y ago
      You seem to have a problem with the arrest / conviction timeline. The father was arrested, hired, then convicted and sent to jail. It is entirely possible to believe one's friends & family after their arrest, but completely change your mind once they are convicted. What am I missing here? Edit: maybe you are unfamiliar with Western justice systems where people are able to post a bond and remain free until the verdict and/or sentencing phase?
      - hervature 6y ago
        I actually got blinded by the first two mentions of conviction that it didn't even register that you said charged even though I quoted it. But still, blind faith is still unreasonable. Would you hire a stranger charged with rape if they gave you a serious alibi? A verifiable "I wasn't even in the country, here are receipts and photos" type alibi. Most people would say "we'll wait until the charges are dropped to make it official but you got the job".
      - slibhb 6y ago
        The father was hired after his arrest. To me, that's troubling. It suggests bad judgement...and the Greens and Lib. Dems both agree with me. Further, I don't believe in the existence of a 50 year old man who one day decides to rape and torture a 10 year old child. I believe he's guilty of more than that though I have nothing to support that assertion except my priors about how pedophilia works. Nevertheless, I'm fairly confident of those priors and so is our justice system: there's a reason sex offenders are forced to register. Progressives seem unable to ferret out deeply troubling behavior as long as it is associated with certain minority groups. I do fear for backlash against innocent people by those with the opposite bias but that's no excuse to downplay what's going on here.
        caspper69 6y ago
        I absolutely 100% agree with you. But I am trying to decide if the internet brigade is upset because they think this person is guilty of more than they are letting on, or if they are guilty of extremely poor judgment, and the internet is never going to let them forget it. I further wonder how long people can be punished for exercising extremely poor judgment, or at least making the wrong call when the optics are already extremely poor.
    - freeflight 6y ago
      One can believe in the system but still doubt it when personally affected by one of it's decision, as hypocrite as it might appear on a surface level, that's actually an entirely human reaction. Pretty much everybody would ere on the side of the accused when they happen to be somebody they are very close with, like a parent, sibling or child, due to the emotional attachment we tend to have to people like that vs strangers.
  - shaftway 6y ago
    If we're going to minor nit, they lied about the father's name to try to get that hire in under the radar and it led to their expulsion from the party.
dvhh 6y ago
This might be hearsay, but I read that the father was hired under a false name while he was being on bail. Of course, we must apply some innocent until proven guilty principle before reaching to somr conclusion, but reddit (nor any modern social network) have never been known to apply the same standard
- centimeter 6y ago
  > but I read that the father was hired under a false name Yes, he hired his father under the name "Balloo" and later said "oh it's a nickname".
  - YawningAngel 6y ago
    There's really no need to make this conversation uncivil by refusing to use a trans person's pronouns.
    - centimeter 6y ago
      I speak standard colloquial international English, not the narrowly-used Anglo-American sub-dialect that makes pronouns arbitrary.
rblatz 6y ago
She lived in the house during the time that the child was chained up, tortured, and raped over the course of numerous days. I find it hard to believe she wasn't aware of at least some of it. I also don't find it hard to believe that there isn't enough evidence to prove she was aware in a court of law.
- caspper69 6y ago
  This is a very serious allegation. She says she was in the house off and on, and it appears she had a complicated relationship with her father (this is not at all surprising given the context). I am not saying it is not true, but it is pure speculation on your part, unless you were somehow part of the investigative team, and a very dangerous idea to just throw out there with nothing more than conjecture and circumstantial reasoning.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]

colpabar 6y ago

>She added: “Yes, he was my election agent. This was one of a number of ways I was seeking to reconcile my relationship with my father after coming out of care. On reflection, I can understand that it was unacceptable for me to appoint my dad as my election agent when he had been arrested.” Do you really think that someone hiring a convicted pedophile as their election agent isn't a big deal? Doesn't it make you wonder why reddit hired this person, and then made a top-down effort to suppress their name?

caspper69 6y ago
Well, minor nit here, the father was not convicted when they were hired. They received 22 years when they were convicted, so unlikely to be working anywhere. But who knows what the father told his child. I mean most reasonable people would not believe their parent capable of such horrors, even if they were charged.
- hervature 6y ago
  > I mean most reasonable people would not believe their parent capable of such horrors, even if they were charged. Blind faith in friends/family is absolutely NOT reasonable. If I'm supposed to believe a system convicts strangers accurately, then it follows people you know are accurately convicted.
  - caspper69 6y ago
    You seem to have a problem with the arrest / conviction timeline. The father was arrested, hired, then convicted and sent to jail. It is entirely possible to believe one's friends & family after their arrest, but completely change your mind once they are convicted. What am I missing here? Edit: maybe you are unfamiliar with Western justice systems where people are able to post a bond and remain free until the verdict and/or sentencing phase?
    - hervature 6y ago
      I actually got blinded by the first two mentions of conviction that it didn't even register that you said charged even though I quoted it. But still, blind faith is still unreasonable. Would you hire a stranger charged with rape if they gave you a serious alibi? A verifiable "I wasn't even in the country, here are receipts and photos" type alibi. Most people would say "we'll wait until the charges are dropped to make it official but you got the job".
    - slibhb 6y ago
      The father was hired after his arrest. To me, that's troubling. It suggests bad judgement...and the Greens and Lib. Dems both agree with me. Further, I don't believe in the existence of a 50 year old man who one day decides to rape and torture a 10 year old child. I believe he's guilty of more than that though I have nothing to support that assertion except my priors about how pedophilia works. Nevertheless, I'm fairly confident of those priors and so is our justice system: there's a reason sex offenders are forced to register. Progressives seem unable to ferret out deeply troubling behavior as long as it is associated with certain minority groups. I do fear for backlash against innocent people by those with the opposite bias but that's no excuse to downplay what's going on here.
      - caspper69 6y ago
        I absolutely 100% agree with you. But I am trying to decide if the internet brigade is upset because they think this person is guilty of more than they are letting on, or if they are guilty of extremely poor judgment, and the internet is never going to let them forget it. I further wonder how long people can be punished for exercising extremely poor judgment, or at least making the wrong call when the optics are already extremely poor.
  - freeflight 6y ago
    One can believe in the system but still doubt it when personally affected by one of it's decision, as hypocrite as it might appear on a surface level, that's actually an entirely human reaction. Pretty much everybody would ere on the side of the accused when they happen to be somebody they are very close with, like a parent, sibling or child, due to the emotional attachment we tend to have to people like that vs strangers.
- shaftway 6y ago
  If we're going to minor nit, they lied about the father's name to try to get that hire in under the radar and it led to their expulsion from the party.

dvhh 6y ago

This might be hearsay, but I read that the father was hired under a false name while he was being on bail. Of course, we must apply some innocent until proven guilty principle before reaching to somr conclusion, but reddit (nor any modern social network) have never been known to apply the same standard

centimeter 6y ago
> but I read that the father was hired under a false name Yes, he hired his father under the name "Balloo" and later said "oh it's a nickname".
- YawningAngel 6y ago
  There's really no need to make this conversation uncivil by refusing to use a trans person's pronouns.
  - centimeter 6y ago
    I speak standard colloquial international English, not the narrowly-used Anglo-American sub-dialect that makes pronouns arbitrary.

rblatz 6y ago

She lived in the house during the time that the child was chained up, tortured, and raped over the course of numerous days. I find it hard to believe she wasn't aware of at least some of it. I also don't find it hard to believe that there isn't enough evidence to prove she was aware in a court of law.

caspper69 6y ago
This is a very serious allegation. She says she was in the house off and on, and it appears she had a complicated relationship with her father (this is not at all surprising given the context). I am not saying it is not true, but it is pure speculation on your part, unless you were somehow part of the investigative team, and a very dangerous idea to just throw out there with nothing more than conjecture and circumstantial reasoning.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]