Mark Sutherland Wiki – Mark Sutherland Biography
Mark Sutherland was battered after communicating with a member of an activist group he believed to be a 13-year-old boy. In August 2018, he was caught by the group at the Partick train station.
The Supreme Court, which claimed that the right to a private life in Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights was violated, brought up a challenge.
Loses Human Rights Court Challenge
Lord Sales believed that Sutherland believed that he was communicating with a teenager and that there was no “reasonable expectation of privacy” as a child could tell an adult.
He added that the authorities “have a special responsibility to protect children against the sexual exploitation of adults” and override the right to privacy for such “understandable” communications.
“The interests of the children take precedence over any interests that a pedophile can have in allowing criminal behavior,” he said.
At a hearing in June, a panel of five justice, including Lord Reed, the head of the court, heard evidence from Sutherland’s legal team that police and prosecutors “implicitly encouraged” them using the information they often gather.
Gordon Jackson QC, representing Sutherland, told the court: “The police are aware that there are a number of hunting organizations in Scotland and the UK, and the evidence provided by them has led to a series of criminal investigations and convictions.”
Children Have Priority
Britain’s highest court ruled on Wednesday that children’s interests take precedence over any interests that could allow a pedophile to engage in criminal behavior.By presenting the judiciary through a video link, Lord Sales found that there was no interference with the rights of the five justice panels under the scope of Article 8.He said this was for two reasons – firstly, “the activity in question must be respectful” and children also have rights.
Lord Sales said the state “has a special responsibility to protect children against the sexual exploitation of adults”.”This shows that there is no protection under Article 8 for the communication of the defendants in this case.” said.
“The interests of the children take precedence over any interests a pedophile can have in allowing this criminal act to act here.”
The state should “discourage crimes against children” and prosecutors had the right to use the evidence gathered by the Groom Resistors in Scotland to convince them.Second, he said that Sutherland has no “reasonable expectation of privacy” in the circumstances.
“There was no previous relationship between the suspect [Sutherland] and the trap [Groom Resisters from Scotland], who were said to have expected privacy.
“In addition, the defendants believed that he was communicating with a 13-year-old boy, and it was predictable that a boy of that age could share an alarming communication with an adult,” said Lord Sales. He added that there are no “additional positive obligations” to prevent prosecutors from using the evidence to prosecute crimes to protect Sutherland’s interests.
What was Mark Sutherland convicted of?
Mark Sutherland brought the case after being caught by a group of “pedophile hunters” named Groom Resisters Scotland. In 2018, 37-year-old Sutherland matched with someone who claimed to be a 13-year-old boy when he communicated with Grindr.
Sutherland sent clear pictures and made arrangements to meet the “boy.” It was actually 48-year-old Paul Devine. When Sutherland arrived at the Partick Bus Terminal in Glasgow, he found two members of Mr. Devine’s group.
The group faced Sutherland at the meeting and waited with him until the police arrived. They posted the match on social media and handed over the evidence to the authorities.Sutherland was convicted in August 2018 for trying to communicate improperly with an older child and related crimes, and was sentenced to two years in prison. He had previously been imprisoned for sending open pictures to a 12-year-old boy.
What did Sutherland’s lawyers argue?
At the hearing in June, Sutherland’s lawyers argued that his right to private life had been violated.This right is included in Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights and states that everyone has the right to respect for his private life and correspondence.
“The police are aware that there are a number of hunting organizations operating in Scotland and the UK, and evidence from these organizations has led to a series of criminal investigations and convictions,” said his lawyer, Gordon Jackson QC.
Mr. Jackson said there was “discomfort” about the work of such groups, and that police and prosecutors gave them “implicit incentives”. He alleged that “a large number of” cases were tried on the basis of the knowledge of these organizations.
According to the HM Consular Inspectorate (HMICS) in Scotland, almost half of online grooming cases are caused by the activities of awake groups. The inspectorate said these groups were irregular and untrained, and in its report in February 2020, “Police said Scotland’s stronger proactive capability would reduce their opportunities to work.”