Transgender Conviction Wipe?

[mushroom25]

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/7217258/trans-offender-claims-right-to-keep-gender-secret-means-convictions-should-be-wiped-from-criminal-record/
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/trans-offender-seeks-to-wipe-crimes-as-aman-from-record-qfk5w68lb
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6148595/Criminal-fights-two-convictions-removed-record-transgender.html

the law is on Helen's side in requesting this - and yet the loophole in the law this would create is obvious.
...reason enough not to do it? or a price worth paying (the invisibility of the odd rapist) to ensure transgenders are treated fairly?

[youngmafbog]

This is the most ridiculous thing I have seen for some time.

For this particular offence I dont have a problem but it opens the door for far riskier offences to be 'wiped'

And just out of interest would this still apply if the job involved working with kids or vulnerable people?

[woofgang]

I wonder how many official offence descriptions are gender specific? Surely there can't be many?

[youngmafbog]

Couldn't find any in a search, but then it didnt throw this particular offence up either.

[jackthehat]

I think it ought to be possible rather than completely wipe the conviction, to swap it with whatever charge she would have faced had she been a woman at the time.
Solicitation, as Woofgang comments, ought to be sufficient.

[kvalidir]

Agreed Jack x

[youngmafbog]

There is probably a justification for reviewing any law that is gender specific. There may actually be a problem around rape, need a legal eagle to confirm or not that.

Perhaps the underlying problem on this particular case is that soliciting should not be an offence providing the person is a non coerced adult?

[dannyk13]

Solicitation only applies to a prostitute.Procurement applies to a man.

[jackthehat]

I know that, Danny, that's what I am saying.
Had Helen been arrested for behaving in the same manner, she would likely have been charged with solicitation at the time.
So revise her Criminal Record to reflect that.

She doesn't get a 'free-pass' but neither does she have to explain something she would rather keep private from her employers.

[AuntLydia]

I think she may want to keep the fact she was convicted of Soliciting from her potential employers as well. I think this is what all this is about. She is trying to use her gender issues to wipe her criminal record.

Looking at the definition of importuning it can apply to both all genders

" to ask for sex with someone in return for payment"

definition of Soliciting" to offer sex in exchange for payment"

subtle difference but not gender specific.

[pixie374]

They seriously need to stop confusing gender with sex.
www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/09/06/transgender-person-accused-rape-remanded-female-prison-sexually/amp/

You couldn't make it up.

[jackthehat]

AL - It may be on her record as 'importuning as a man' to add an extra layer of shame, i.e. he was engaging in homosexual conduct.

There is no evidence that Helen wishes to completely expunge her criminal record, just wipe out the reference to her 'maleness'.

[dannyk13]

What is gender specific is the charge of procuring a man for an act of gross indecency, which is what he/she would have been charged with.

[pixie374]

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/09/06/transgender-person-accused-rape-remanded-female-prison-sexually/amp/

[dannyk13]

^attempting the^

[woofgang]

so change the charge to the act of procuring a person.....its not rocket science.

[mushroom25]

seems odd. the offence for which the conviction was handed down (under the 1956 act) was removed by the 2003 act. thus males convicted in the past of consensual sex with a male aged 16 or 17 could be still on the sex offenders' register when the conviction activity is either no longer a crime, or, if it is, no longer triggers the registration requirement. such persons can apply to be removed from the register. wonder why she hasn't?