The whole flare-up of this topic has come from the step-daughter. One can understnad why she is still upset; she was abused. However, she has an agenda and her comments fit.

My agenda as a music teacher is to teach music. Whilst aware of Brian Davey's past, I cannot condemn the books. I am sorry about what happened, but will continue to use the books as they are excellent.

And yet another link to the thread! But there is no direct quoting, so I guess there is no infringement by directing viewers to the right webpage?

~Wobby~

Not going to go off on one about lazy journalism but, the 'laziness' isn't in the fact that the complaint comes from the stepdaughter. The laziness is that quotes around the story are taken from a old thread on a public forum.

I'm also interested in the copyright aspect here - if I were to write something up on my own webpage, I would be entitled to have that it was my writing if it were reproduced somewhere else. If what I write on this forum is no longer mine - if it becomes the AB's - then were they asked if it could be used? Because while an 'internet forum' was mentioned, there was no credit to the author or the owner of the boards.

The laziness you see everyday on the BBC is that their 'stories' (esp on local news) are there because somebody told them about it. They get their photos from people's mobile phones and in submitting it the photographer gives the BBC the right to use the photo as they want. The flagship investigative journalism programme repeatedly has its 'stories' completely wrong and it doesn't take much to reveal the fact.

I get this strange feeling that some people in this forum are not too pleased with the step daughter. There are remarks that she's disingenuous, that she has some agenda, etc etc. I think she's brave to come out in the open. I think she's been badly hurt by a monster and a bit more sympathy for her would be in order.

I sometimes wonder if your nearest and dearest are victims of this monster, you would still talk about Wagner and compare that great composer (though he may have held terrible views common among most people in his time) to this criminal. It must be unthinkable for a four-year-old to be abused by this ugly beast - just look at his photo!!!

I don't think anybody has really said anything denigrating about the step-daughter. I think it is just people don't agree that they should have to internalise her views into their own - sympathy does go out to her on the basis of what she has gone through, and in the circumstances her actions are understandable, but surely one should still have the right to buy a product on one's own accord on the merit of its quality rather than its history and should not be denied this right either, just because of the experience she went through: after all, she has the choice herself not to buy or use the book. In terms of for teachers, I see no reason why they cannot utilise them providing they get the parents' consent if the student is young of age, in case they do not approve. I equally see no reason to question the revenue from the sales of the books, unless, of course, they are used to fund further criminal activities. The other point people made was more about the fact the newspaper had taken her word as fact rather than showing a balanced or reasoned arguement.

As for the remark about his photograph, you really shouldn't base the severity of his crimes or personality on his appearance, as that would be prejudiced. I find it unusual how people 'rate' the gravity of certain crimes and the retribution they deserve depending on the emotional sensitivity surrounding the issue, however.

~Wobby~

I do agree to a point. It's easy to understand and feel sympathy for the horror that the victims have been through, and even as an adult, clearly she is still affected. I think, if she truly believes it's right, then she is brave for standing out and saying this, and she's certainly brave for attempting to help abused children be open about their abuse.

That said I still think she's wrong. Victims have far too much say in crime and punishment nowadays and the media encourages this. Criminals have a right to a fair trial and judgement - yet this man is not being punished by an objective observer. The stepdaughter is as subjective as it is possible to be.

In the same way that families of murder victims should not be allowed to decide the murderer's punishment, the victims of child abuse should not be allowed to decide their abuser's punishment. Justice is deserved but not vengeance to put it dramatically.

The victim's opinion should not be newsworthy, if the judge did not see fit to prevent book sales then book sales should not be prevented.

Sorry If I've just regurgitated other people's opinions.

(Also, the man's ugliness is not the issue - his crimes are, I doubt it would have made any difference to his victims if he was gorgeous.)

I agree that it's prejudiced. But it's natural. I read somewhere a study on the sentencing of criminals and it seems the younger and more good-looking the criminal, the shorter the jail term. People are more harsh to older and not so good-looking people. Older, I can understand - an older man should be wiser and should not act on impulse but good looks shouldn't have an impact on sentencing but they do.

Purely on the harm inflicted on the victims, the uglier the criminal, the more traumatic it is to the victims. So maybe there's a correlation.

I don't think that last statement is true. Do you have any proof to back that up?

Perhaps it is so, and in fact, it probably is (in regards to criminals with less visually appealing faces tend to get longer sentences, and not that the quality of their visual appearance affects the trauma towards the victim). Equally, there was an experiment with two CVs upon which different pictures were added - one with a picture digitally changed to make it unappealing, and the other deemed as attractive - and it did make a difference: this, in the same way, is equally questionable to distribution of longer sentences to criminals with less appealing faces. But just because the prejudice occurs doesn't mean it is right. His sentence should be based on the crimes he commit solely, and one would hope that is true. Emotions really should have nothing to do with justice. Intentions obviously do though.

~Wobby~

Yes, I do have some proof. Recently, there was a lot of publicity in my country about a teacher who molested students. It was a male teacher molesting boys, mind you! The teacher was a small-sized boyish looking man. I think if he were a burly thick-necked tall man, it would be more frightening for his victims. Most boys at school think so too. By the way, the incident happened in another school. Not my school.

When she asked whether you had any proof to back it up, I believe she was referring to case studies (not experiments, due to high unethicality) in which high detail analysis was undergone to establish whether there was a correlation between the visual appearance of the attacker's face and the trauma caused to the victim, rather than a single case from which one could really not determine anything. To say that you personally think the experience would be worse if you saw him as ugly is not really objective.

~Wobby~

Look I really am not trying to be mean BeamishBoy but "I think" and "most boys at school think" is not proof. Perhaps a more physically threatening man may be more terrifying (I say perhaps as I can't know for sure) however big men can be handsome. Small men can be ugly. The thing about this kind of abuse is that it's a huge problem when people think of it in terms of a normal relationship. Yes a relationship may be more pleasant to you if your partner is good looking, but rape and abuse is never going to be pleasant and implying that the appearance of an attacker would make a difference is equating abuse to something less sinister.

I tried to avoid the censors there, I hope I didn't say anything offensive.

I'd rather get punched by a small petite girl than a large man with huge biceps. hehe.

We're talking more than just a punch here

Do you think all strong men are ugly? Do you think all weak men are beautiful? Do you think physical strength matters if the power an abuser has over his victim is psychological? (ie Brian Davey telling one victim that if she told anyone about the abuse, her ill mother would die.)

'Sticks and Stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me'
I don't think so - bruises will heal. It is the physcological aspect that has much more impact than anything. I feel that the most horrible thing in this crime is the abuse of trust - once bitten, twice shy.

Sadly many people of Davey's character will appear perfectly normal, turned out, even charming individuals. It's part of gaining trust to be left in charge of children. I'm sure we did all this a year ago. The simple fact is you can't judge on appearances or even behaviour how someone will act when in control. Very unfair on the 99% plus men and women who appear normal and are responsible, but that other 1% will act when you least expect. Take the Soham murderer. On the face of things he looked a perfectly normal young man. That's an extreme example, but physical appearance or personality has no impact on who they really are.