Are criminals treated better than the victims of their crimes?

Having just read a shocking news story about a man who was caught with over 6000 images of child abuse, and how he has overturned a ruling saying he is not allowed to be unsupervised with minors because it breaches his human rights, it makes me wonder if criminals now are being treated better than the victims of their crimes.

Every day, stories emerge about how criminals are often given a punishment that very rarely fits the severity of the crimes they commit. More often than not, the victims of these crimes are left feeling that justice hasn't been served.
Another article I read recently has disclosed that more than 4400 criminals who were guilty of at least 15 offenses were let off with a caution in 2010.

It appears the justice system is becoming too soft on criminals, meaning offenders are given the wrong message when they are not being given a proper punishment that suits their crimes.

This not only leaving the victims angry that justice hasn't been served, but encourages criminals to re-offend because they know there isn't any real consequences for their actions.
If this continues to happen, victims will get to a point they feel they should take action themselves because the courts and the justice system will let them down...

Crimes against children are (in my opinion) the worst type of crime. Thankfully, serious child abuse cases rarely hit headlines, but when they do they really tend to shock everybody. 

In my opinion, they shouldn't hit the headlines at all. Not because they shouldn't be reported - because they shouldn't happen!

Baby P. Image courtesy The Telegraph.

You may remember a recent story of horrific child abuse case against Baby P.? 17-month Peter was abused over a period of months until he was discovered dead in his cot.
(The list of abuse he suffered is sick, which is why I am not going to write about it here.)


His mother Tracey Connelly, her boyfriend Steven Barker and his brother Jason Owen were all arrested and charged for the torture and death of Baby P.

Considering how horrific and evilly cruel this crime was towards an innocent baby, Jason Owen has been released only THREE YEARS after being charged.

To put things into perspective, young offenders involved in the recent riots have been given similar sentences for stealing a bin and breaking a window...

It seems to me that when it comes to justice, Britain is clearly backwards.

Baby P. isn't the only case. I could also mention Jamie Bulger... His killers Robert Thompson and Jon Venables were ten when they abducted and killed Jamie , then 2.
Having been convicted and sentenced, Jon Venables have since been released and given a new identity, at the cost of £250,000.

The main question is why should people who have decided to commit such atrocities be given the chance to have anonymity and have their identities be kept secret from the public?

The british government give more rights to criminals than the victims of the crimes they commit. Criminals aren't punished, they are often treated better in prisons than they would be outside of prison.

Children can be targeted by every paedophile, sex offender and pervert that wants them because they are too young to know how to ask for someone to uphold their rights!

If they commit a crime, British tax payers' money is often use to give these offenders a new life, a new identity so they don't have to worry about being attacked by vigilantes.

- TheLittlerich