Welcome to another week.
A male paedophile pretending to be a single mother in an online chat forum has been jailed for five and a half years after being caught trying to encourage parents to abuse their children.
Samraj Kundi told forum members he was a single mother from Liverpool who was “into action, not fantasy”, The Independent reported on Sunday.
Kundi pleaded guilty to 12 charges of intentionally arranging or facilitating the commission of child sex offences and two counts of breach of a Sexual Harm Prevention Order.
This was not his first series of offences. Mr Kundi had served a two-year prison sentence for distributing indecent images. Once freed, he began committing new offences within three months.
Mr Kundi’s barrister tried to mitigate his sentence by explaining that he had committed the crimes at a time when he was suffering with “low mood and anxiety”. It is not clear from initial reports whether the judge took these factors into account when deciding Mr Kundi’s sentence.
Kundi will spend at minimum of three years and eight months in prison with the possibility that he might serve out the whole of his sentence. Once released, he will then be on an extended six-year licence period.
Our question this week then, is just this: do you agree with the sentence Mr Kundi was given?
Researching Reform 
Were any actual children harmed by the 12 actions he took that were each charged as “intentionally arranging or facilitating the commission of child sex offences”, which appear to have amounted merely to writing about disordered sexual fantasies online that would have been real criminal offences if enacted in real life? Largely in conversation with an undercover police officer, who’d have had an entrapment agenda.
Arguably these online writings could have been charged as offences of “counselling” child sex offences, but the report doesn’t suggest that he actually arranged or facilitated anything, except offensive dirty talk amongst adults, not least the undercover police officer who nicked him.
He pleaded guilty, despite what looks to me as though he had no case to answer other than on the breaches of his Sexual Harm Prevention Order. Presumably he’d been advised to expect a prison sentence if he didn’t fight the charges, and what prison sentence to expect with and without discount for early guilty pleas. To me, that speaks of a man who wanted to go back to prison, perhaps because he was disappointed with himself at having relapsed.
I expect the judge’s sentencing remarks clarify how the sentencing decision was calculated. The sentence gives the public some protection from this risky individual for another eleven and a half years, rather than for the rest of his life. Perhaps he’ll have burnt out as this type of antisocial offender by then. Let’s hope and pray so.
LikeLike
My knee jerk reaction would elicit a no in me but on reflection……Whilst in prison will he get therapy? Can he be rehabilitated? If not, it’s all a waste of time & tax payers money as he will continue the same kind of behaviour on release.
LikeLike
Yes, that was the issue I was hoping to address here with the RR community. Is this an appropriate solution? Will it halt re-offending, which this offender is clearly engaged in and seems to have a predisposition towards in this context.
LikeLiked by 1 person