Victim not allowed to know where paroled attacker lives to protect his privacy :(

[twinkles**stars]

http://www.news.com.au/national-news/victoria/victim-not-allowed-to-know-where-paroled-attacker-live...

inShare

Domestic vioence victim Jeannie Blackburn is lobbying the government to release information regarding the whereabouts of violent criminals who have been released on parole.

A VICTIM of terrifying domestic violence has been told she is not allowed to know the area where her paroled attacker is living because of HIS right to privacy.

Jeannie Blackburn suffered 18-months of unprovoked violent abuse at the hands of Paul Francis McCuskey, culminating in her losing sight in one eye after he dragged her from her bed and stomped on her head.

Medical experts said her injuries were similar to that of a high impact car crash.

McCuskey was released from prison in April - with two and a half years to serve on parole - but pleas to the Adult Parole Board and Victims of Crime Register to know the area where he is living have been denied.

In a bizarre twist, McCuskey has been informed of where Ms Blackburn lives, as he is not allowed to go near her address.

"I don't want to know what street or even what suburb he is in, but just a general area to avoid for my own protection." Ms Blackburn said.

"I am being made to feel like a prisoner in my own home while he is free to walk the streets as he pleases.

"Why does he have more rights than I do, when I have done nothing wrong?"

Paul Francis McCuskey who is on parole for domestic violence against his ex-partner Jeannine Blackburn, who is fighting to know where her attacker is now living.

The woman beater also caused Ms Blackburn to miscarry after kicking her in the stomach in another sickening attack.

McCuskey, who received a bravery award for being one of several CFA volunteers who rescued an elderly woman at Cambarville during the 2009 Black Saturday bush fires, later had the honour stripped after intervention from the Governor General of Australia, Quentin Bryce.

He was sentenced to five years and six months in prison, with a minimum of three years, in April 2010.

Ms Blackburn said she contacted the Adult Parole Board to find out the general area of where he was living after his release on April 27 this year.

She claims she was told they could not tell her due to his right to privacy. The allegation is denied by the Adult Parole Board.

Ms Blackburn said she then contacted the Victims of Crime Register and wrote a letter requesting the information early last month without reply.

Domestic vioence victim Jeannie Blackburn is lobbying the government to release information regarding the whereabouts of violent criminals who have been released on parole.

Its website states: "Inclusion on the Register does not entitle you to information about… Where the prisoner / offender lives or intends

to live upon release from prison."

Ms Blackburn now intends to lobby the State Government to change the law.

"He lost his privacy rights when he pleaded guilty to intentionally, recklessly and seriously injuring me, at least while on parole" she said.

"Laws should be in place to protect the innocent, not the guilty."

A spokesman for the Adult Parole Board said McCuskey is subject to a "strict supervision regime."

"If Mr McCuskey fails to comply with any condition of his order, he will be immediately reported to the Board," he said.

jon.kaila@news.com.au

Read more: http://www.heraldsun.com.au/national-news/victoria/victim-not-allowed-to-know-where-paroled-attacker...

[lionrose.7]

A VICTIM of terrifying domestic violence has been told she is not allowed to know the area where her paroled attacker is living because of HIS right to privacy.

Jeannie Blackburn suffered 18-months of unprovoked violent abuse at the hands of Paul Francis McCuskey, culminating in her losing sight in one eye after he dragged her from her bed and stomped on her head.

This women would be petrified now this animal is out of jail, she will relive what happened to her for the rest of her life.

Even if she sees someone in the street that looks like him she will panic.

She needs to know where he is for her own protection.

Just my opinion.

What happened to Victims rights.

[catsnknots]

http://au.news.yahoo.com/sunday-night/features/article/-/18781847/predators-under-protection/

CM.... Watch part one and part two... 

In America some states put signs in front of paedophiles homes so that everyone knows where they are...

There is zero vigilante behaviour. 

When people know where these people are they actually feel safer. They are able to monitor these men and help keep them in check. 

So if you want to sprout off about vigilantes then please do some research. 

Victims need their power back.... they need to feel that they have some control of the situation as that was stolen from them when they became victims of these offenders. 

That man lost his right to be a regular member of the community the day that he was found guilty. I am all for letting a person do their time and then move on but some people will always be a risk. 

How would you like it if your daughter grew up and ended up in a relationship with a man like the one in the OP, who had had a conviction and did time and was allowed to then go on with his life like nothing has happened???? I bet you would not feel safe with her bedding down with a man like that. 

[catsnknots]

---

@crikey*mate wrote:

---

You're shooting the messenger here - I don't make the laws!

Should the offender or the victim break the law, then they will be punished *cough*accordingly*cough*

I study the law because I wanted to know why it works the way that it does. It doesn't mean that I agree with it.

---

This thread is discussing the downside of the law... not what the law is.... 

We all know what the law is and we are arguing that it is a bad law... we want change... 

[catsnknots]

http://www.humanheadline.com.au/hinch-says/megan-s-law

And today, I am launching an international petition to try to get 25,000 signatures which I plan to take to Canberra to present to the new Prime Minister Tony Abbott.

There is a link to the petition in the link that I have posted... 

We can make an effort to change one unjust law... and when they make a change to one there is an opening to change the law for other areas. 

[polksaladallie]

---

@the_hawk* wrote:

---

I think you have summed up the whole legal system well, little feeling or conscience.

Going by a number of comments many clearly dont understand what its like being a victim and clearly thats why the law protects the perpetrator and affords them more rights than the victim.

---

Imagine what it is like when the DV perpetrator is a police officer.

They do not go to jail, they are protected by the other people in "the job". 

They have ready access to the whereabouts of their victim. 

They cannot be complained about when they contravene DVOs, the complaints disappear into thin air.

[the_great_she_elephant]

Lets say a victim of crime or one of their associates is so distraught that they decide to administer their own justice. Then what happens? What happens when they kill or maim the offender? What happens when they inturn break the law themselves? Then , where does that stop? How many chain reaction crimes does it take before everyone receives the justice to which they believe they are entitled?

Lets say a paroled perpetrator of crime or one of his associates, is so angry (with his victim, whom he perceives to have caused his incarceration) that he decides to administer his own revenge, Then what hapens? What happens when he kills or maims his victim?

The law cannot punish for crimes that have not yet been committed, but it should try to prevent them for the protection of everyone.

[*crikey*mate*]

---

@the_great_she_elephant wrote:

Lets say a victim of crime or one of their associates is so distraught that they decide to administer their own justice. Then what happens? What happens when they kill or maim the offender? What happens when they inturn break the law themselves? Then , where does that stop? How many chain reaction crimes does it take before everyone receives the justice to which they believe they are entitled?

Lets say a paroled perpetrator of crime or one of his associates, is so angry (with his victim, whom he perceives to have caused his incarceration) that he decides to administer his own revenge, Then what hapens? What happens when he kills or maims his victim?

As I said, when revenge is administered, if it breaks the law and the offender is caught, then they will be punished according to the law.

The law cannot punish for crimes that have not yet been committed, but it should try to prevent them for the protection of everyone.

And it does. It has put inplace deterrants and more specifically for this case it appears that it has put in place measures designed to prevent the original offender from contacting or approaching their victim. 

---

She ele, I don't agree with a lot of it, but I am learning to understand why it is as it is.

...............................................

Catmad;

32 American States (and the Military and Federal Gov) have the Death Penalty for aggravated murder committed by mentally competent adults, treason and the sale of illegal narcotics. (I now refer to American Law as CatMad has done so earlier)

Why only those three areas of crime? Why not pedophiles? According to CatMad, they cannot be rehabilitated, whereas murders can be. Why not abusers? Why not rapists?

I reckon a whole lot of victims as well as society in general, would feel a whole lot safer and be a whole lot safer if the offender were dead, or at the very least incarcerated for the rest of their lives. So, why is it, in your opinion (either emotional or informed)  that Australia does not have the Death Penalty? Why is it that "never to be released" is not a sentence handed down more indiscriminately?

[bella_again]

I tend to agree with Crikey's last post on this one.  I think its more complex than any of us imagine.  The reality is we don't know the facts.  Protective measures have been put in place via proale conditions that are supposed to protect the victim and the offender.

The problem is if someone has served their time in prison and have been deemed suitable for parole then we should leave them alone.  You can't punish someone for the same crime over and over again that is equally as wrong.  The victim does need protection absolutley but she also needs supports in place that help her to move on with her life.  What happened to her is autrouis.  But knowing where he is isn't going to make her life any easier if anything it will add to her anxiety and feed her fear.

I do think she should be helped to be relocated if that is what she wants and that she should be able to change her name without him ever knowing.  There should be measures in place in those areas that fully protect the victim.  We have to remember that we do need to give offenders an opportunity for rehabilitaion if its not possible he should not be out in society.

[bella_again]

Gosh apologies to the spelling police lol Forgot to check it!!

[the_great_she_elephant]

I do think she should be helped to be relocated if that is what she wants and that she should be able to change her name without him ever knowing.

I'm sure she would be quite happy with that - but apparently,  because he has an order against him banning him from being  within so many metres of her house he needs to know where that house is so he can comply.

 We all know that if someone is bent on revenge, and has the address of their target, a  banning order isn't stop them.The best solution would have been  an order banning him from being within the same city (or even state) as her. .