I make no secret as to my intense disdain for sex offenders. They are for me the last category of humans to whom, once found guilty, no quarter should be given. But that is the special preserve of the law. There is already a very high incidence of child abuse in this country, with the sexual and indecent type at almost epidemic levels. There is hardly a day’s edition that does not report an act of deviancy committed on a child. But because of a judiciary that is burdened with a seemingly hopeless case trial deficit the wheel of justice is not turning quickly enough. The ideal should be a trial taking place at least some six months after the committal proceedings. This process is thought to serve the purpose of reminding the public, especially would –be offenders, of the court’s ability to dispense justice condignly. The STAMP IT OUT consultation was indeed a brilliant plan conceived so as to have a national input for a problem that is indeed a national one. It is everyone’s concern, so to speak. Given the finished proposals now under consideration for legislation, and if successful, and supported by a reformed judicial system, speedy justice can happen. An examination of the proposals reveals a wide ranging and thoroughly thought out plateau that covers every aspect of this dastardly act. Of great interest are the proposals that deal with the court and evidence procedures. These from my layman’s understanding seek to not only remove traditional hindrances in any such trial, but also make it very, very difficult for the accused to escape sanction because of procedure, especially with regard the corroboration of evidence aspect.
Other aspects of the proposals  that augur well for successful implementation once these become a legislative reality are those for the training of judges and prosecutors; the introduction of the paper committal system; and the key feature of a forensic laboratory.  I do believe that the proposed training of judges in this particular aspect is a key element in their being able to have an objective view of the particular case, and in guiding the jury. It is argued by many sexual violence experts that some judges tend to be biased against the victims in such trials; though it is not expected that such a line will be adopted in the cases of victims.
I do hope that the long overdue crime forensic laboratory becomes a reality, since this scientific capability will greatly aid in placing the alleged suspect at the scene of the crime. This is not about the adoption of an expensive foreign feature, as I was told by a friend of mine who argued that there is no replacement for good, old crime- fighting. That may be true, but there are limitations, especially where there are no witnesses to a crime, for example, murder. With sexual assault cases once non-co sensuality can be proven, forensics can give credence to the victim’s allegations.