Aspies For Freedom

A former security guard who sexually abused a vulnerable teenage boy was yesterday jailed for three years and placed on the sex offender register for life.

Tony Hallam, 53, was also banned from ever working with children and will be placed on an extended three- year licence on his release from prison.

Hallam, who had previous convictions for sex assaults on young boys in 1969 and 1971, went on to obtain a job as a security officer working at the Norwich headquarters of Archant, publisher of the EDP.

It was there Hallam carried out one of the indecent assaults on the boy who has Asperger's syndrome after taking him to a security room in the building.

Hallam, now of Julian Road, Caister, near Yarmouth, was convicted at Norwich Crown Court of two counts of indecent assault on the boy, who cannot be named for legal reasons, and one of inciting him to commit an act of gross indecency.

He was cleared of one indecent assault and one of gross indecency with the boy. He had denied all charges.

Sentencing him, Judge Daniel Worsley told him he had befriended the boy and said: "I have no doubt that you were motivated by a desire to abuse him if you had the chance. He and his parents trusted you."

He said Hallam had abused the boy in a security room in the building and then had further sexually assaulted him after they returned to his home, having plied him with cannabis and lager.

Judge Worsley said he had read an impact statement from the victim and said: "Who knows what long-term emotional damage you have done, and it is all the worse because the boy already had problems."

He said Hallam had shown no remorse and the victim had to go through the "pain and shame" of giving evidence in public during the trial.

"You have done this sort of thing before to children albeit you were very young. This is a bad case of its kind."

Jonathan Goodman, mitigating, said: "Hallam is not a sexual predator. He was not out hunting young men."

He said his previous con-victions were 30 years ago and added; "From then to now he has not troubled the courts."

Oh geez. Give me a break!  How much do you want to bet he "hasn't troubled the courts" only because he didn't get caught during those 30 intervening years???

They must have their head buried in the sand if they think he hasnt commited any offences just because he never got caught. Also its very hard to get that type of case into court in the first place.

Three Years????

For what he did, this scum got only three years, when the boy will have to cope with this for the rest of his life?  :evil:  :evil:  :evil:

I am glad he got caught, but the leniency of these sentences makes me want to SCREAM!  :cry:

He was probably a mason  :roll:

That is just sick, I'm sure that this sicko will have more victims come out even if the cases are so old they can't be prosecuted, to provide evidence that such a thing has been going on. One tactic of pedophiles is to convince the child that they won't be believed, or that it's their fault because they gave in. This is NOT true.

Also, I don't think this sicko was a Mason, they would likely have kicked him out if he was. I have some good friends who are Masons, and they would never consider harming anyone, especially an innocent child.

Does anyone know what the EDP is?

It doesn't surprise me that this is a paedophile who has reoffended after an apparent long period of non-offending. I believe the way the courts and judges think of paedophilia is seriously mistaken. They categorise paedophilia as a kind of crime, a lapse of good behaviour, a moral flaw, while many paedophiles thenselves argue that paedophilia is a legitimate kind of sexual orientation. While I would never argue that there is anything legitimate about paedophilia, I do believe it is obvious that paedophilia is indeed more like a sexual orientation than a temporary lapse of morals. If a person isn't basically a paedophile I don't believe they would never commit the crime under any circumstances or while in any kind of mood or situation. In contrast, just about anyone could commit violence in certain situations. Judges should be assuming that if a person has comitted paedophilia once that they will most likely reoffend. I think treatment of offenders of this kind of offence is the only justifiable use of compulsory severe aversion "therapy" or brain-disabling psychiatric drugs.

" I think treatment of offenders of this kind of offence is the only justifiable use of compulsory severe aversion "therapy" or brain-disabling psychiatric drugs."   Would this kind of therapy work or would the offender have to want it to work?

I think people who do thinks like this should be castrated without anesthetic.

I have heard that some countries use chemical castration, that is drugs that reduce the sex drive.  

I find people who want to give presents or favours to others suspicious.  Usually they are paying lots of attention to the victim first and giving presents.  Sometimes they try to get the victim to tell them secrets in confidence.   They will often threaten to reveal secrets or spread false rumours about someone if they do not get what they want.  Or often the victim just likes the attention and presents and will put up with the abuse.   The abuser is controlling and often wants to control other parts of the victim's life such as what they wear, where they go, who their friends are.  

For older children and teens or even adults,  you usually know you are being abused.  I know I put up with alot of bad boyfriends just because I felt I needed them.  

If the sex part of the relationship is not really wanted, makes you feel guilty or hurts physically -  you are being abused.  You might even enjoy it abit but still feel really guilty and not that it is your choice.  It is not right no matter what benefits you are getting from it.  You might feel that you are benefitting from having somewhere to live/food/money, getting attention/affection/gifts,  someone to feel like your friend or security of feeling  you have a boyfriend/girlfriend.  So you put up with the sex part because if you refuse, you will be kicked out of the relationship.  It is better to leave a bad relationship than stay for rewards.  It is not worth it in the long run.   It will damage you bit by bit.