Philip Pickett sentenced to 11 years imprisonment

[Richard Barrett]

ferneyhoughgeliebte and Richard B

Do you not think that if this conductor had been a mere music teacher, employed or otherwise, the outcome would have been very different? Or a musician with much less status, like Philip Pickett, the original subject of this thread? The question we need to be asking here is about ourselves and not about the regulations (that is another matter).

I'm not sure what you mean by this question...?

[Serial_Apologist]

Yes it is. Catching up with this thread I see that Orphical's early contribution hasn't really been followed up on - namely, since obviously it's better for these things not to happen in the first place than it is for their perpetrators to be punished, in many cases after being able to carry on their activities for a considerable period of years, how should we as a society talk about paedophilia and people who are drawn to it? Perhaps the stories that have come out as to how it has ruined lives, and the way victims are much more likely than in former times to speak out rather than suffering in silence, might activate the consciences of some of those people and make them think twice about putting their tendencies into practice. (I don't believe for one moment in the supposedly deterrent effect of jail sentences.) But what would one do if one began to realise that one harboured such tendencies oneself? Is there a case for regarding them as requiring some kind (what kind?) of medical treatment? I would have no idea how to start finding answers to questions like this.

Education in the "classical music" world is, unfortunately, set up so as to have made it very easy for paedophiles to do what they do - instrumental teaching in particular involves years of individual and necessarily rather close contact between teacher and pupil, establishing an intimacy and a kind of power relationship it's very easy to abuse if one is tempted in that direction. Composition teaching isn't exempt from this either, although in general it involves older students. I think this kind of relationship is somewhat different in nature from those occurring in other artistic disciplines, but I may be wrong about that.

The seemngly most obvious answer would be that, were one to detect such tendencies in oneself, one would suppress or repress them towards the other person or persons concerned, in the same way that a non-paedophile would and should be required to. However, there does seem to be something specific to paedophilia which is more akin to psychopathy in its total insensitivity and lack of awareness towards the other, bypasses empathetic inner constraints, and compels them physically to act out their sexual fantasies and impulses on others. Hence the admission in public by some that they cannot be cured, and that therefore some final irreversible treatment should be given to them.

[french frank]

there does seem to be something specific to paedophilia which is more akin to psychopathy in its total insensitivity and lack of awareness towards the other

As in: Denial, no remorse, "I have accepted my sentence and paid my debt to society."

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

Do you not think that if this conductor had been a mere music teacher, employed or otherwise, the outcome would have been very different? Or a musician with much less status, like Philip Pickett, the original subject of this thread? The question we need to be asking here is about ourselves and not about the regulations (that is another matter).

I don't know - without statutory sentencing rules, these things are left to individual Judges, and I would hope that their record collections don't unduly influence their verdicts.

Any abuse of a position of trust and prestige in order to target vulnerable victims deserves severe and just retribution, and I think eleven years is exactly that. Whether or not it would have been a shorter or longer prison term had the offender been less well-known, I cannot say - but I think that there is a case for saying that where an offender has used their fame to net a wider "pool" of potential victims, then a more punitive sentence, because of the wider publicity it would receive, is meritted, if as a deterrent (perhaps only temporarily) for others tempted to chance their luck.

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

However, there does seem to be something specific to paedophilia which is more akin to psychopathy in its total insensitivity and lack of awareness towards the other, bypasses empathetic inner constraints, and compels them physically to act out their sexual fantasies and impulses on others.

That's good - but not perhaps so "specific" to paedophilia? Aren't all sexual predators similarly near-psychopathic? (And with similar results on the victims of such people?)

[teamsaint]

I don't know - without statutory sentencing rules, these things are left to individual Judges, and I would hope that their record collections don't unduly influence their verdicts.

One of the aspects of RKs conviction was that , although the sentence seemed broadly in line with others who had committed similar offences ( as far as one could tell) the judge made the extraordinary decision to allow him to work with children on release.

Given levels of safeguarding elsewhere, its very, very hard to figure out. Although as I have previously been told on this forum, the judge knows more about it than I do...........


( To put into context, a teacher can be asked to disclose details of a range of convictions for people living in the same house as them, including things such as cautions for ABH, and could potentially be stopped from working simply because a person with such a conviction is living in the same house.)

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

Although as I have previously been told on this forum, the judge knows more about it than I do...........

Well, one hopes that this is so. But it is surely necessary to the public interest to make known the reasons why he (I presume) thought it safe/appropriate to allow RK further access to children in his work. (No suggestion that the judge enjoyed listening to RK's recordings of Purcell being an influencing factor is meant to be implied here.)

[Conchis]

The sad message that this gives is that if you are wealthy, successful and in the "right" kind of culture then you can get treated as "special" and carry on with your life if you get found out

I wonder if all those who still enthusiastically buy CD's and go to concerts are still playing their Gary Glitter discs when their friends come round for a bop at the end of the week?

Gary Glitter's music was considered (both at the time of his popularity and now) pretty terrible. Its disappearance from the airwaves is no great loss to anyone, apart from Mr. Gadd himself. Ditto, Jonathan King (though I'll confess to a fondness for Everyone's Gone To The Moon).

What makes the likes of Townshend ('child sex offender'), Page ('under-age groupie shagger') and John Martyn ('appalling drunk, junkie and wife-beater') problematic is that a lot, if not most, of their music is very good indeed.

[teamsaint]

Gary Glitter's music was considered (both at the time of his popularity and now) pretty terrible. Its disappearance from the airwaves is no great loss to anyone, apart from Mr. Gadd himself. Ditto, Jonathan King (though I'll confess to a fondness for Everyone's Gone To The Moon).

What makes the likes of Townshend ('child sex offender'), Page ('under-age groupie shagger') and John Martyn ('appalling drunk, junkie and wife-beater') problematic is that a lot, if not most, of their music is very good indeed.

Ah, so it's ok as long as it is art, then ?

[Richard Barrett]

However, there does seem to be something specific to paedophilia which is more akin to psychopathy in its total insensitivity and lack of awareness towards the other, bypasses empathetic inner constraints, and compels them physically to act out their sexual fantasies and impulses on others. Hence the admission in public by some that they cannot be cured, and that therefore some final irreversible treatment should be given to them.

Yes. But I really couldn't claim to know very much about all this. What I was feeling towards in my post was that I suspect that the incidence of such behaviour might well be reduced if not eliminated altogether by changes in the way society is organised (as in "under socialism we wouldn't have this kind of thing" ) but that remains a suspicion rather than a worked-out opinion.

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

What makes the likes of Townshend ('child sex offender'), Page ('under-age groupie shagger') and John Martyn ('appalling drunk, junkie and wife-beater') problematic is that a lot, if not most, of their music is very good indeed.

It should be pointed out - particularly to any interested solicitors - that the "Townshend" mentioned to here does NOT refer to anyone who has never been found guilty in a court of law of any offenses of "child sex" in any Court of Law. And, if it did so refer, that the Posts on the Forum are the views of the Posters involved, and not the Hosts of the Forum, who disassociate themselves from any libellous comments and would gladly remove any such upon request.

[MrGongGong]

Gary Glitter's music was considered (both at the time of his popularity and now) pretty terrible.

I bet there are plenty of fans of this

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L5fDOCwa9L0

[Conchis]

Ah, so it's ok as long as it is art, then ?

No, it's not OK. That's why I said it was 'problematic'.

[Conchis]

I bet there are plenty of fans of this

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L5fDOCwa9L0

That's always made me laugh. He'll be lifted a couple of rungs in hell because of it.

[MrGongGong]

THIS
is where the problem lies

One of the aspects of RKs conviction was that , although the sentence seemed broadly in line with others who had committed similar offences ( as far as one could tell) the judge made the extraordinary decision to allow him to work with children on release.

Given levels of safeguarding elsewhere, its very, very hard to figure out. Although as I have previously been told on this forum, the judge knows more about it than I do...........


( To put into context, a teacher can be asked to disclose details of a range of convictions for people living in the same house as them, including things such as cautions for ABH, and could potentially be stopped from working simply because a person with such a conviction is living in the same house.)

I wasn't in court
BUT given the message it sends and the considerable damage he has done then it would seem that maybe this is a mistake ?

Like many people in the world of music I have worked with people who later have been prosecuted for these kinds of things. There is NO excuse EVER and RKs treatment sends the wrong message completely.