Two Convicted Pedophiles Arrested and Deported

[Gaybutton]

The following appears in the PATTAYA DAILY NEWS:

 

for photos, see: http://www.pattayadailynews.com/shownews.p...NEWS=0000008617

_____

 

Interpol Request Arrest of 2 British Paedophiles in Pattaya

 

Following a request from the English division of Interpol two convicted British paedophiles have been detained by the Pattaya Immigration Police.

 

At 2.00 pm on 11th March 2009 an operation was mounted by a team of Immigration Police led by Pattaya Chief Inspector Pol.Col. Arnonnat Kamonrat, accompanied by Sriracha Chief Inspector Pol.Lt.Col.Pakapong Sai Ubol and Koh Srichang Chief Inspector Pol. Lt. Col. Panomprai Jangah.

 

The police arrested two British nationals, Mr. Charles Thomas Hadley [58] and Mr. Brian Peter Lielson [66], at the entrance of Aree apartment, Soi New Leng-Kee, Pattaya third road, Nongprue, Banglamung.

 

The two men were both former London real estate businessmen and had committed more than 10 offenses of child sex abuse in England together with similar offenses in Cambodia before visiting Thailand.

 

Pol.Lt.Col.Pakapong Sai Ubol said Mr.Hadley had previously been jailed in England for 9 years and Mr. Lielson for 7 years for under aged sex offenses.

 

On their release from jail, they came to Thailand and Pattaya on a tourist visa in 1993. They made several trips to Cambodia during which they built up a record of sex offenses with young boys.

 

Following the request from Interpol on 16th February 2009, the immigration police cancelled their visas and four days later their names were put on the blacklist . On the 5th March, the Sriracha immigration discovered that they had arrived in Thailand and traveled to Srichang Island [Koh Srichang] in the Sriracha district.

 

The suspects were later traced to the A-ree apartment in Pattaya at which point the Sriracha police requested the co-operation of their Pattaya colleagues to make the arrest.

 

The two paedophiles will be processed and sent back to England.

____________________

 

And this, from PATTAYA ONE:

_____

 

Immigration Police Arrest Two Convicted English Pedophiles and Deport Them

 

In a joint operation between Pattaya’s Immigration Office and Police from Sriracha, two English Nationals were arrested on Wednesday at the Aree apartments here in Pattaya based on information received from Interpol regarding their previous convictions. Both men, named as Mr. Charles Thomas Hadley aged 58 and Mr. Brian Peter Nielsen aged 66 are convicted sex offenders from UK and are known to have committed similar offences in other countries, including Cambodia. It is known that both men have been coming to South-East Asia since 1993.

 

Immigration Police detained the two men under new rules governing individuals who have been convicted of serious crimes in foreign countries. Immigration can now deport these individuals regardless of whether they have committed offences in Thailand or not. Pedophilia is one of a number of serious crimes the new rules cover and both men were later transported to the Immigration Detention Center in Bangkok where they await deportation back to the UK. Their passports will also be stamped as “persona non grata” meaning they will not be allowed to re-enter Thailand.

 

We also understand that one of the two men is currently wanted on sex offence charges back in UK.

[Guest lvdkeyes]

It's too bad they didn't keep them here in a Thai prison.

[Bob]

Another example of how incredibly insufficient/stupid Thailand (and probably many other countries) is about letting slimeballs into their country.

 

Their passports are swiped at immigration and their information goes into a database in a nano second. Doesn't that database contain even public information (like arrest information, conviction information) from the crime records in England? If not, why not?

 

If a country was serious about stopping convicted murderers, pedophiles, or whatever from entering their country, it would be a fairly simple matter of coordinating criminal databases throughout the world. Maybe Interpol or the FBI ought to show them how to do it.

 

 

[Guest laurence]

Another example of how incredibly insufficient/stupid Thailand (and probably many other countries) is about letting slimeballs into their country.

 

It may have nothing to do with the Thais. Only certain information is contained on a Passport and not a person's criminal record. I suppose it is possible to have a worldwide pool of everyone's record but is that really desireable? Many people share the same name as many have discovered in the US with their "terrorist" lists. Rather surprising that they were caught at all.

 

[Bob]

I suppose it is possible to have a worldwide pool of everyone's record but is that really desireable? Many people share the same name as many have discovered in the US with their "terrorist" lists.

 

Yep, not only desirable but mandatory if you have any interest in trying to protect your country. If I ran country "x", I sure as hell want to know that some guy trying to get into my country has been convicted of underage sex, murder, bank robbery, or what have you (felonies, not misdemeanors) as I don't want the guy in my country. Convicted felons have a high repeat rate in their home country....and I'd guess that it's even worse in foreign countries where he's not known.

 

No, the info isn't on your passport. If you get stopped for speeding or even a taillight out in the US, the cop runs your driver's license number.....and what'll show up is a felony warrant issued anwhere in the country or even by Interpol. Nothing wrong with that in my book, that's how they pick up a lot of criminals. In my view, every country ought to have computer/internet connections to the lien systems of other countries as that's how you'll know a serial killer is trying to come into your country.

One can always make allowances and investigate further for some rogue countries (i.e., just because somebody has a criminal record in Burma might not mean the same to me as somebody with a criminal record in the US or europe).

 

Are mistakes made with the records? Sure....but it's not a common occurrence and the alternative is just to totally ignore the information that's available that may very well keep some of your citizens alive or unmolested.

 

P.S. As an additional tool, perhaps a country might want to consider revoking the passport of anybody convicted of a certain-level crime. If certain felons aren't allowed to own a gun or vote, maybe they shouldn't be allowed to travel as what they do overseas does reflect on the home country. Unfortunately, historically nobody often cares what somebody does as long as it's not on "my turf."

[Guest laurence]

For me, I view Big Brother as malevolent rather than a benevolent presence.

 

As far as persons who have committed crimes and paid their debt to society, I see no reason they should be further punished. They should have the right to vote, travel, live where they want and be able to work. As far as the "revolving" door (recidivism) that was a dirty, but effective tactic, to doom the presidential chances of Gov. Dukakis. It is natural that we all want to think of convicted felons as horrible people that must be controlled at all costs. In reality many were just normal people who, for various reasons, ended up in prisons. That is, they got caught while most offenders and law breakers do not.

[Guest luvthai]

I have to agree with laurence on his one. Once they paid their debt they should be free men. Unless they are arrested for a specific crime either in Cambodia or Thailand then it is wrong to deport or blacklist them.

Using this kind of logic then anyone can say anything about someone and have them deported. If the UK doesn't want them to travel then they should not issue them a passport. Instead of tracking who they consider criminals they should just revoke the passports and prevent them from traveling.

[Guest lvdkeyes]

In the US sex offenders must register regarding their whereabouts. This is because it is a well known fact that sex offenders don't stop. They go on to commit the same crimes over and over again. I am not sure how they should be handled internationally, but, perhaps when they apply for a passport, the country where the were convicted the first time should notify the countries where pedophile tend to travel i.e, Thailand, Philippines. Laos, Cambodia, India and Mexico to name a few.

[Bob]

In reality many were just normal people who, for various reasons, ended up in prisons. That is, they got caught while most offenders and law breakers do not.

 

 

While that does happen on occasion, it's rather rare. What is typical (certainly 95% or more of the time) is that the offender has a long list of offenses prior to entering a prison for the first time. It's not a high percentage of people that commit serious crimes, it's the rather small percentage of people that commit lots of serious crimes. And I disagree with the expressed notion that most offenders don't get caught - eventually most of them are caught.

 

Recidivism for serious felonies is a substantial problem and the notion that "ok, you served your time, we'll now treat you like everybody else" simply places people at peril. Presuming or thinking they will likely just be peaceful citizens once they've "done their time" is naive and contrary to known data. I can understand the philosophical good notion of "forgive and forget" but, presuming it was my job to protect society, I'd feel obligated to follow the known data.

 

Getting back to the original point, every country has the right to say who can or cannot enter its territory and I, for one, would not allow a convicted felon into any country I controlled absent some special circumstances (where, for example, it's obvious that it was a political prosecution, that there was no semblance of a fair trial, etc.). Thailand should (in my view) never allow a foreigner into the country if he/she has been convicted of a sex-related offense (again, absent special circumstances) as it is more than likely that the same foreigner is going to commit the offense again here. And, if they were serious about trying to protect their children from serial pedophiles, they'd make sure that information is available via computer as their passports are swiped.

[Guest laurence]

This is because it is a well known fact that sex offenders don't stop.

Well known maybe, but not a fact. Many factors are involved depending on age, length of sentence, type of offense, and on and on. Sex offender covers a lot of territory and not just the dirty old man stereotype.

[Guest Astrrro]

P.S. As an additional tool, perhaps a country might want to consider revoking the passport of anybody convicted of a certain-level crime.

 

I'd like to see the opposite. The US should pay countries to take our prisoners. Set up a deal with Pakistan or Zimbabwe such that for every prisoner they take they get a few thousand bucks.

 

The prisoners would be allowed to live as free men in their new country. Up to the prisoner if he wants this deal, but many with years to serve might go for it.

 

One condition is that they can never return to the USA.

 

Big cost savings for America and we're permanently rid of scum.

 

[Guest lvdkeyes]

Sex offender covers a lot of territory and not just the dirty old man stereotype.

I did say "sex offenders" not dirty old men stereotypes. I am more inclined to agree with Bob's post.

[Bob]

Well known maybe, but not a fact. Many factors are involved depending on age, length of sentence, type of offense, and on and on. Sex offender covers a lot of territory and not just the dirty old man stereotype.

 

Sorry, but the high recidivism rate of sex offenders is absolutely a fact. And that's based on what we know (some organizations assert that a significant percentage of sex offenses against kids are never reported).

 

What's additionally sad is that many sex offenders essentially create new offenders. I've never met an adult who molested kids who wasn't molested himself/herself when he/she was young. The older creep does something nasty to a kid and a much higher percentage of those victims than the normal population will go on to molest other kids. I've asked every offender I've personally met in my 33+ year career and I've asked lawyers, prosecutors, and judges in every other case I heard about - and always the same answer (yes) about whether the offender was molested as a kid. A rather sad and vicious cycle*.

 

Some people see the sex registry laws - the ones that require notification to police agencies of your address, prohibiting residing near a school, etc. - as somehow unfair additional punishment to the poor convicted soul. I don't see that at all. We know they're likely to re-offend and doing nothing seems to me to be aiding and abetting further sex offenses against children.

 

[*This doesn't seem to occur to any significant degree to older victims of sexual abuse. I have no clue why but perhaps it has to do with the emotional state or developmental stage of the child and the damage/disruption sexual activity causes to that. ]

[Gaybutton]

I've never met an adult who molested kids who wasn't molested himself/herself when he/she was young.

How many have you met . . . . . ?

[Bob]

How many have you met . . . . . ?

 

Never counted but probably 100-150. And, when I say "met", my meaning is that I talked to them on one or numerous occasions and the topics, amongst others, were their personal histories. These were not social contacts. As to peripheral contacts with others (through the other people mentioned), in the many hundreds, for sure.

 

I'd guess that there has to be somebody out there who molested a kid and wasn't molested himself/herself as a child; however, I never found one.

 

I'd note that I don't count an 17-year-old having consensual sex with a 14-year-old as a sex offender (or at least not in my eyes). It's technically illegal but I don't view consensual high school sex as an offense.

[Gaybutton]

Never counted but probably 100-150.

Was this part of your line of work? It must have been interesting, and also sickening.

[Bob]

Yep, part of work. Sickening? Not all that often, guess you develop a thick skin. Plus, in most cases, you actually get to like some aspects of the individual.

 

I do recall one case where a woman was writing to her boyfriend in prison (the guy being there for child rape) and was actually asking the guy to be her daughter's (who was 3 at the time) "first." The guy got out, the woman held her daughter down, and the guy used a child's toy as an implement. Took six hours of surgery to put the little girl back together. Then - and this is the part where I was royally pissed and frustrated - they made a deal with the mother to ensure a conviction of the guy. She got 4 years and he got life without the possibility of parole. What pissed me off is the deal the mother got - a person who was just as guilty as the guy but who should have had the instinct to protect her young daughter. Needless to say, her parental rights were permanently terminated but it's also too bad they couldn't have sterilized her to avoid almost certain abuse/neglect of any child she might bear in the future.

 

There was only one time I was scared shitless by somebody, a guy charged with killing two guys during a poker game. The guy was in leg chains and handcuffs attached to belly chains and the look he gave me made me feel that my life was about to end. Thankfully, he's serving life without the possibility of parole. Speaking of recidivism, this guy was 42 at the time of his murder conviction and he did the deed within two weeks of the first time he would have been off of either probation or parole since he ws 17 years old!

[Guest lvdkeyes]

It's heartening to hear from people who have actual experience with these types and not just someone who is talking from what they think/feel.

[Guest GaySacGuy]

I think that the immigration bureaus of the various countries should have direct access to "Wants & Warrents"!! This will stop those that have an active want or warrant out for their arrest or a want to see by any police agency! I believe that those that have been convicted and paid their dues should be able to travel freely about the world. Otherwise, they are deciding on a stiffer sentence than the court of law.

 

The people this thread is about had active BOL or warrants, so they would have been caught at immigration.

[Guest laurence]

It's heartening to hear from people who have actual experience with these types and not just someone who is talking from what they think/feel.

 

For those interested you can google "sex offense recidivism OHIO" for a report prepared by that State. It is long but reasonable easy to read. Lot of statistics on recidivism. One interesting statics was that recidivism for sex involving male, child (under 18 yo) was less then 10%.

 

Personally I know of people who have been incarcerated for sex offenses involving males so I do speak with some knowledge of the subject. They were lucky that they did not end up on some sort of black list and were able to go on with their lives. Including traveling outside of the US. I also know persons convicted of other crimes including drugs, drunk driving, arson, theft, armed robbery and even murder. They were not the kind of horrible people that the public wants to think. All were able to have a life after prison although at some cost to themselves.

 

[Bob]

They were not the kind of horrible people that the public wants to think.

 

Most of them aren't but, unless you've had to work with the convict - or unless he or she is a friend or a family member - one tends to naturally lump all the criminals you read about in one category. For whatever reason, it's always seemed to me that most serious criminals appear to be fairly normal people that simply can't seem to control behavior on occasion in one or more categories.

 

They often simply think differently. Outside of the Bernie Madoffs and Michael Milkens, most criminals never make crime pay. They hit a brinks truck for a million and, when caught a year later, all they have left is a boombox, a beat-up old car, and $5,000.00 in the bank. We're puzzled or perplexed as we think that, if we all of a sudden grabbed a million dollars, we'd have a ton of it left as we would have known enough not to splurge (show sudden wealth to others) and how to intelligently invest and save it for a rainy day. That difference in thinking often underlies why we didn't commit the crime in the first place.

 

I've always argued that 90% of future criminals can be identified by the fifth grade teachers (I truly believe the vast bulk of them can be so identified). And I've always argued that intervention then (some counseling and family assistance) is a hell of a lot cheaper to society than what it costs in the future damage they do, the cost to prosecute them, and the cost to house them in jail/prison.

[Guest laurence]

Most of them aren't but, unless you've had to work with the convict - or unless he or she is a friend or a family member - one tends to naturally lump all the criminals you read about in one category.

 

Good post Bob. At one time I was "lock'em up, throw away the key", but think much differently now. Oddly, even a friend who has been imprisoned for over 20 years would likely agree with you in many respects.

[Bob]

Good post Bob. At one time I was "lock'em up, throw away the key", but think much differently now. Oddly, even a friend who has been imprisoned for over 20 years would likely agree with you in many respects.

 

Thanks, just trying to express an opinion. On the other hand, the only way society can deal with certain repeat offenders (especially if it involves injury to other people) is to "lock'em up and throw away the key." I can almost agree to do that on the first conviction of a child rapist.....but I definitely agree with that concept for the second offense (and I'd feel rather sorry that society didn't stop the second offense by doing the "lock and toss" the first time!).

 

While it may or may not be society's fault, prision almost never rehabilitates anybody. More often (at least in my view) it aids and abets the convict become a repeat offender; yet, if the guy's remains a reasonable danger to other people, he shouldn't be let out. I have some compassion for the convict but that's miniscule to the compassion I have towards his victims.