Brighton cafe owner's concern over convicted paedophile (From The Argus)
Get involved: Send your news, views, pictures and video by texting SUPIC to 80360 or email us.
Brighton cafe owner's concern over convicted paedophile
7:41am Monday 17th September 2012 in News By Tim Ridgway, Local government reporter
A cafe owner has said he will refuse to serve a convicted paedophile if allowed under law.
Kenneth Parker, once branded one of Britain’s most wanted men, was on the run for ten years in Europe with his brother Thomas before being caught and sent to prison last year.
The 57-year-old, who is now living in a halfway house in Brighton seafront, was pictured in a national newspaper yesterday sat at a table in Pavilion Gardens, Brighton, just yards away from a toddler.
When asked about the pictures, David Sewell, of Pavilion Gardens Café, said: “If I have got a choice then I would rather not serve him.
“Obviously he’s not someone we would like to frequent our premises but I’ll have to check what’s allowed under the law.
“It did come as a shock when someone told me it was in the national newspapers.
“They say all publicity is good publicity but in this case I’m not too sure.
“We do have cameras in the garden so from my point of view it is as safe as anywhere in Brighton for people with children to come.”
The brothers, from Nuneaton, Warwickshire, went on the run after breaking their Sexual Offence Registration notification requirements.
They were tracked to the small French town in the foothills of the Pyrenees. The pair were arrested by French police and returned to Britain.
Kenneth Parker was jailed for breaching his notification requirements and released from Maidstone Prison three months ago.
Parker, 57, is allowed out of the halfway house from 8am to 8pm. He has also been spotted in Brighton’s Jubilee Library.
He was convicted in 2005 of gross indecency with a boy under 16, indecently assaulting a girl under 16 and another indecent assault of a teenage boy. They are also said to have a string of convictions for non-sexual offences.
Comments(52)
joanne_77
says...
7:54am Mon 17 Sep 12
Angryoldman
says...
8:22am Mon 17 Sep 12
michael.evans
says...
8:31am Mon 17 Sep 12
sapphireblue
says...
9:00am Mon 17 Sep 12
Angryoldman wrote:I totally agree, parents need to see what this man looks like. Not everyone reads the daily papers.
Why doesnt the Argus print a picture of him like the national papers did yesterday?
I'm sure you can refuse to serve anyone you wish if you think they will be a problem to your business or the people around you.
censored
says...
9:17am Mon 17 Sep 12
Your toddlers are safe.
Morpheus
says...
9:24am Mon 17 Sep 12
michael.evans wrote:I agree. The same type of argument could apply to anybody who has been in jail. They are punished by serving time and not afterwards. If the argument here is valid and applied elsewhere then we would lock him up permanently.
Repugnant crimes, but if he has served his sentence, and keeps to his release conditions, isn't he allowed to get a cup of tea or go to the library? Let's not get into a newspaper vigilante hunt - we know where that has got us in the past.
Skidrow
says...
10:26am Mon 17 Sep 12
Archie Bun
says...
10:34am Mon 17 Sep 12
Nick Brighton
says...
10:54am Mon 17 Sep 12
BiggerH
says...
11:22am Mon 17 Sep 12
Archie Bun
says...
11:37am Mon 17 Sep 12
leobrighton
says...
11:43am Mon 17 Sep 12
supergus
says...
11:51am Mon 17 Sep 12
.uk/sol/homepage/new
s/4540929/Sickest-si
ghtpaedo-twin-back-o
n-streets-and-ogling
-little-girl.html
link to the article in yesterdays sun
gaz scott
says...
12:10pm Mon 17 Sep 12
supergus wrote:The Sun. The guardian of the nation's morals? Don't think so. I hope the cafe refuses to serve Sun Reporters. Lowest of the low.
http://www.thesun.co
.uk/sol/homepage/new
s/4540929/Sickest-si
ghtpaedo-twin-back-o
n-streets-and-ogling
-little-girl.html
link to the article in yesterdays sun
AmboGuy
says...
12:51pm Mon 17 Sep 12
gaz scott wrote:Lowest of the low? So Sun journalists are worse than convicted paedophiles?
supergus wrote:The Sun. The guardian of the nation's morals? Don't think so. I hope the cafe refuses to serve Sun Reporters. Lowest of the low.
http://www.thesun.co
.uk/sol/homepage/new
s/4540929/Sickest-si
ghtpaedo-twin-back-o
n-streets-and-ogling
-little-girl.html
link to the article in yesterdays sun
I'm no fan of many tabloid journalists but you really need to start engaging your brain before you start typing your ridiculous posts.
gusset snatcher
says...
1:00pm Mon 17 Sep 12
AmboGuy wrote:what... and the same journo's who listened in on millie dowlers voicemail giving her parents the belief she may still be alive... no that's not worse than paedophilia.... it's 10 times worse
gaz scott wrote:Lowest of the low? So Sun journalists are worse than convicted paedophiles?
supergus wrote:The Sun. The guardian of the nation's morals? Don't think so. I hope the cafe refuses to serve Sun Reporters. Lowest of the low.
http://www.thesun.co
.uk/sol/homepage/new
s/4540929/Sickest-si
ghtpaedo-twin-back-o
n-streets-and-ogling
-little-girl.html
link to the article in yesterdays sun
I'm no fan of many tabloid journalists but you really need to start engaging your brain before you start typing your ridiculous posts.
AmboGuy
says...
1:36pm Mon 17 Sep 12
gusset snatcher wrote:Ok and you know FOR A FACT that these were the exact same people do you? No thought not.
AmboGuy wrote:what... and the same journo's who listened in on millie dowlers voicemail giving her parents the belief she may still be alive... no that's not worse than paedophilia.... it's 10 times worse
gaz scott wrote:Lowest of the low? So Sun journalists are worse than convicted paedophiles?
supergus wrote:The Sun. The guardian of the nation's morals? Don't think so. I hope the cafe refuses to serve Sun Reporters. Lowest of the low.
http://www.thesun.co
.uk/sol/homepage/new
s/4540929/Sickest-si
ghtpaedo-twin-back-o
n-streets-and-ogling
-little-girl.html
link to the article in yesterdays sun
I'm no fan of many tabloid journalists but you really need to start engaging your brain before you start typing your ridiculous posts.
Try again.
gaz scott
says...
1:37pm Mon 17 Sep 12
AmboGuy wrote:My brain was fully engaged when I wrote that post unlike yours. Don't think I said they were worse than paedophiles did I? Please engage your own brain and stop accusing me of saying things I haven't as you're beginning to make a habit of it.
gaz scott wrote:Lowest of the low? So Sun journalists are worse than convicted paedophiles?
supergus wrote:The Sun. The guardian of the nation's morals? Don't think so. I hope the cafe refuses to serve Sun Reporters. Lowest of the low.
http://www.thesun.co
.uk/sol/homepage/new
s/4540929/Sickest-si
ghtpaedo-twin-back-o
n-streets-and-ogling
-little-girl.html
link to the article in yesterdays sun
I'm no fan of many tabloid journalists but you really need to start engaging your brain before you start typing your ridiculous posts.
Dr.Draconian
says...
1:51pm Mon 17 Sep 12
AmboGuy
says...
2:07pm Mon 17 Sep 12
gaz scott wrote:Well if someone is the 'lowest of the low' then they must be the worst people around Gaz. That's the whole point of being the 'lowest of the low' you see there's nobody lower than you (has the penny finally dropped for you yet Gaz - no? never mind).
AmboGuy wrote:My brain was fully engaged when I wrote that post unlike yours. Don't think I said they were worse than paedophiles did I? Please engage your own brain and stop accusing me of saying things I haven't as you're beginning to make a habit of it.
gaz scott wrote:Lowest of the low? So Sun journalists are worse than convicted paedophiles?
supergus wrote:The Sun. The guardian of the nation's morals? Don't think so. I hope the cafe refuses to serve Sun Reporters. Lowest of the low.
http://www.thesun.co
.uk/sol/homepage/new
s/4540929/Sickest-si
ghtpaedo-twin-back-o
n-streets-and-ogling
-little-girl.html
link to the article in yesterdays sun
I'm no fan of many tabloid journalists but you really need to start engaging your brain before you start typing your ridiculous posts.
Again, I'll remind you to either improve your understanding of what phrases actually mean or try to think a bit more before you type.
gaz scott
says...
2:19pm Mon 17 Sep 12
AmboGuy wrote:For goodness sake my post was about the morals and moralising of the gutter press and specifically the Sun. You choose to interpret it a way that suits you in order to throw a cheap insult at me but then that's what you do so it's no surprise.
gaz scott wrote:Well if someone is the 'lowest of the low' then they must be the worst people around Gaz. That's the whole point of being the 'lowest of the low' you see there's nobody lower than you (has the penny finally dropped for you yet Gaz - no? never mind).
AmboGuy wrote:My brain was fully engaged when I wrote that post unlike yours. Don't think I said they were worse than paedophiles did I? Please engage your own brain and stop accusing me of saying things I haven't as you're beginning to make a habit of it.
gaz scott wrote:Lowest of the low? So Sun journalists are worse than convicted paedophiles?
supergus wrote:The Sun. The guardian of the nation's morals? Don't think so. I hope the cafe refuses to serve Sun Reporters. Lowest of the low.
http://www.thesun.co
.uk/sol/homepage/new
s/4540929/Sickest-si
ghtpaedo-twin-back-o
n-streets-and-ogling
-little-girl.html
link to the article in yesterdays sun
I'm no fan of many tabloid journalists but you really need to start engaging your brain before you start typing your ridiculous posts.
Again, I'll remind you to either improve your understanding of what phrases actually mean or try to think a bit more before you type.
And your wriggling explanation of what I supposedly said makes no sense anyway!
elainepkils
says...
2:25pm Mon 17 Sep 12
chrisinbrighton
says...
2:29pm Mon 17 Sep 12
gaz scott wrote:And Sun readers
supergus wrote:The Sun. The guardian of the nation's morals? Don't think so. I hope the cafe refuses to serve Sun Reporters. Lowest of the low.
http://www.thesun.co
.uk/sol/homepage/new
s/4540929/Sickest-si
ghtpaedo-twin-back-o
n-streets-and-ogling
-little-girl.html
link to the article in yesterdays sun
chrisinbrighton
says...
2:29pm Mon 17 Sep 12
gaz scott wrote:And Sun readers
supergus wrote:The Sun. The guardian of the nation's morals? Don't think so. I hope the cafe refuses to serve Sun Reporters. Lowest of the low.
http://www.thesun.co
.uk/sol/homepage/new
s/4540929/Sickest-si
ghtpaedo-twin-back-o
n-streets-and-ogling
-little-girl.html
link to the article in yesterdays sun
TheDrive
says...
2:30pm Mon 17 Sep 12
Morpheus wrote:That sort of liberal 'reforming' attitude is why we have so many offenders with long lists of offences to their name. They don't stop because they accept the weak punishment as an occupational hazard - time to be served before carrying on just as before. He should be persecuted on sight until he has to go and live in a cave away from decent society, or even better, jump off the pier and save the expense of monitoring him.
michael.evans wrote:I agree. The same type of argument could apply to anybody who has been in jail. They are punished by serving time and not afterwards. If the argument here is valid and applied elsewhere then we would lock him up permanently.
Repugnant crimes, but if he has served his sentence, and keeps to his release conditions, isn't he allowed to get a cup of tea or go to the library? Let's not get into a newspaper vigilante hunt - we know where that has got us in the past.
gusset snatcher
says...
2:59pm Mon 17 Sep 12
Dr.Draconian wrote:it is when your 15 yr old daughter's been kidnapped by the most despicable thing that can be labelled a human being - Levi Bellfield - then raped and murdered in the most awful way imaginable. Then to have some despicable journo's hacking her phone in the hope of getting some little titbit of information and in that process making her parents think she may still be alive.... you're obviously an illiterate sun reader......., i wouldn't use that trash to wipe my a***
Phone hacking is "10 times worse" than being a pedophile? What the f@&k are you smoking????
CHARLES C
says...
3:35pm Mon 17 Sep 12
AmboGuy
says...
4:48pm Mon 17 Sep 12
gaz scott wrote:If by mean 'interpret' you mean read exactly what you wrote then yea I did 'interpret'it that way.
AmboGuy wrote:For goodness sake my post was about the morals and moralising of the gutter press and specifically the Sun. You choose to interpret it a way that suits you in order to throw a cheap insult at me but then that's what you do so it's no surprise.
gaz scott wrote:Well if someone is the 'lowest of the low' then they must be the worst people around Gaz. That's the whole point of being the 'lowest of the low' you see there's nobody lower than you (has the penny finally dropped for you yet Gaz - no? never mind).
AmboGuy wrote:My brain was fully engaged when I wrote that post unlike yours. Don't think I said they were worse than paedophiles did I? Please engage your own brain and stop accusing me of saying things I haven't as you're beginning to make a habit of it.
gaz scott wrote:Lowest of the low? So Sun journalists are worse than convicted paedophiles?
supergus wrote:The Sun. The guardian of the nation's morals? Don't think so. I hope the cafe refuses to serve Sun Reporters. Lowest of the low.
http://www.thesun.co
.uk/sol/homepage/new
s/4540929/Sickest-si
ghtpaedo-twin-back-o
n-streets-and-ogling
-little-girl.html
link to the article in yesterdays sun
I'm no fan of many tabloid journalists but you really need to start engaging your brain before you start typing your ridiculous posts.
Again, I'll remind you to either improve your understanding of what phrases actually mean or try to think a bit more before you type.
And your wriggling explanation of what I supposedly said makes no sense anyway!
Poor Gaz you do sometimes get a bit confused don't you.
gaz scott
says...
5:54pm Mon 17 Sep 12
And talking of confusion and people meaning exactly what they write you never did explain how you got "Door" mixed up with "Bomb" on a previous thread.
Roundbill
says...
6:22pm Mon 17 Sep 12
AmboGuy
says...
6:57pm Mon 17 Sep 12
gaz scott wrote:Gaz this story is about a convicted peadophile in Brighton and not your beloved 'rent a thug' group SmashEDO. Do you have any comment on this story? I wont get into a discussion about SmashEDO as that has been done to death by now so please try to keep on topic.
Ok Ambo. You seem to always see things in Black and White terms (at least when it suits you) so I can totally understand your confusion. I'll try to make it a bit easier for you to understand in future.
And talking of confusion and people meaning exactly what they write you never did explain how you got "Door" mixed up with "Bomb" on a previous thread.
hubby
says...
9:07pm Mon 17 Sep 12
So your toddlers are OK but watch out for your thirteen year old sons and daughters.
Dodgy place Brighton!
Jimmy Stewart's Imaginary Rabbit
says...
9:16pm Mon 17 Sep 12
"Right lads, we're still in a bit of doo-doo due to our Hillsborough 'Truth' expose, so how can we deflect attention and make the more gullible members of the public think we're a decent newspaper?"
I know guv, how about starting a baseless witch-hunt against a guy who's served his time? He's a paedophile, so we should be onto a winner!"
Char-Brighton
says...
9:28pm Mon 17 Sep 12
Char-Brighton
says...
9:28pm Mon 17 Sep 12
Jimmy Stewart's Imaginary Rabbit
says...
12:03pm Tue 18 Sep 12
Char-Brighton wrote:Yeah, served his time. He was caught and imprisoned. And do you really believe that photo is genuine? It was in the Sun, it's either been produced with a bit of camera trickery or it's been out-and-out Photoshopped.
Served his time? He was on the run for 10 years jailed last year and out now! I say they should throw him back in and throw away the key! The cafe owner I think has the right to refuse his custom and rightly so, why should all his other customers have to sit in the same place as this man especially if they have children! The sun has pictures of this man and I'd advise parents in Brighton to have a look at them!!
Lewesroadresident
says...
2:05pm Tue 18 Sep 12
TheDrive wrote:Are you aware of the word 'irony' I wonder? So a decent society is one that persecutes a man who the justice system (a system run by those we elect) has decided has been punished sufficiently to be released, until he decides to kill himself? Clearly you would prefer there to be no rehabilitation at all, so everyone arrested is locked up forever, the country is covered in prisons, and there are massive tax rises to pay for the huge increase in prisoner numbers. That does sound lovely.
Morpheus wrote:That sort of liberal 'reforming' attitude is why we have so many offenders with long lists of offences to their name. They don't stop because they accept the weak punishment as an occupational hazard - time to be served before carrying on just as before. He should be persecuted on sight until he has to go and live in a cave away from decent society, or even better, jump off the pier and save the expense of monitoring him.michael.evans wrote: Repugnant crimes, but if he has served his sentence, and keeps to his release conditions, isn't he allowed to get a cup of tea or go to the library? Let's not get into a newspaper vigilante hunt - we know where that has got us in the past.I agree. The same type of argument could apply to anybody who has been in jail. They are punished by serving time and not afterwards. If the argument here is valid and applied elsewhere then we would lock him up permanently.
Stall69
says...
3:18pm Tue 18 Sep 12
Its my understanding he is still currently 'doing his time' with part of his custodial sentence by living in a halfway house.
That 'punishment' seems to allow him to wander the streets uninhibited between the hours of 8am & 8pm. Surely the issue is whether the public feel that this is the correct punishment for the crime committed?
We're up here
says...
10:28pm Tue 18 Sep 12
Lewesroadresident wrote:Paedophiles are different to your average ex-con. They will always **** after children....always. Their crimes are horrendous and their victims mentally scarred for life. They can never be rehabilitated unless they agree to a chemical or surgical castration. I have no sympathy, not a jot. If a paedophile decides to end his life because he cannot bear the persecution then so be it. They have no place in society. I know I sound harsh, but on this subject, my feelings are non-negotiable.
TheDrive wrote:Are you aware of the word 'irony' I wonder? So a decent society is one that persecutes a man who the justice system (a system run by those we elect) has decided has been punished sufficiently to be released, until he decides to kill himself? Clearly you would prefer there to be no rehabilitation at all, so everyone arrested is locked up forever, the country is covered in prisons, and there are massive tax rises to pay for the huge increase in prisoner numbers. That does sound lovely.
Morpheus wrote:That sort of liberal 'reforming' attitude is why we have so many offenders with long lists of offences to their name. They don't stop because they accept the weak punishment as an occupational hazard - time to be served before carrying on just as before. He should be persecuted on sight until he has to go and live in a cave away from decent society, or even better, jump off the pier and save the expense of monitoring him.michael.evans wrote: Repugnant crimes, but if he has served his sentence, and keeps to his release conditions, isn't he allowed to get a cup of tea or go to the library? Let's not get into a newspaper vigilante hunt - we know where that has got us in the past.I agree. The same type of argument could apply to anybody who has been in jail. They are punished by serving time and not afterwards. If the argument here is valid and applied elsewhere then we would lock him up permanently.
We're up here
says...
10:30pm Tue 18 Sep 12
Retired Loon in Brighton
says...
11:08pm Tue 18 Sep 12
I would urge people to avail themselves of the facts and prior criminal behaviour of anyone soon to join their community. People might find they require more help from politicians than is available, ever. However, I very humbly suggest in profound ignorance, should be done by those who we all pay to protect us that have acces to details about truly horrible people that are working their way through a system that places no value on victim suffering.
martyt
says...
11:20pm Tue 18 Sep 12
Morpheus wrote:but our sexual preferences are what we are born with ,straight, gay, bi or tg so some one like this will always hunt young children as there is no cure for ones sexual preferences ,there is only two things you can do .1 lock them up for life or 2 hang them !
michael.evans wrote:I agree. The same type of argument could apply to anybody who has been in jail. They are punished by serving time and not afterwards. If the argument here is valid and applied elsewhere then we would lock him up permanently.
Repugnant crimes, but if he has served his sentence, and keeps to his release conditions, isn't he allowed to get a cup of tea or go to the library? Let's not get into a newspaper vigilante hunt - we know where that has got us in the past.
Char-Brighton
says...
12:00am Wed 19 Sep 12
Retired Loon in Brighton
says...
12:13am Wed 19 Sep 12
Prevelent morality seems important sometimes. Perhaps anyone having sex with a 9 year old girl that the same man married 3 years before may have been entirely appropriate at some point in history? It is never for me to comment on any great religion. Over a billion people might need to make very clear whether such behaviour needs to be rejected in this day and age? Is it wrong now? Honestly, have times changed? If so, can all other scripture please be reviewed to deal with advocating hate crimes? I guess someone at the Argus will know what to do with this post? Hope so.
Absolutely no offence intended. Just want to know if anyone, anywhere, is still ok with having sex with children because it is written down as historically acceptable.
Char-Brighton
says...
1:14am Wed 19 Sep 12
We're up here wrote:I completely agree with the way you feel! This man and all others who think it is right to interfere with children are humanly wrong in the head. It may sound harsh to others but they need to think of it from a parents point of view and sit and think "would I feel the same if my child lived in Brighton and could be his next victim!" it's disgusting he shouldn't be allowed out of his cell let alone the place he is now living!!
Lewesroadresident wrote:Paedophiles are different to your average ex-con. They will always **** after children....always. Their crimes are horrendous and their victims mentally scarred for life. They can never be rehabilitated unless they agree to a chemical or surgical castration. I have no sympathy, not a jot. If a paedophile decides to end his life because he cannot bear the persecution then so be it. They have no place in society. I know I sound harsh, but on this subject, my feelings are non-negotiable.
TheDrive wrote:Are you aware of the word 'irony' I wonder? So a decent society is one that persecutes a man who the justice system (a system run by those we elect) has decided has been punished sufficiently to be released, until he decides to kill himself? Clearly you would prefer there to be no rehabilitation at all, so everyone arrested is locked up forever, the country is covered in prisons, and there are massive tax rises to pay for the huge increase in prisoner numbers. That does sound lovely.
Morpheus wrote:That sort of liberal 'reforming' attitude is why we have so many offenders with long lists of offences to their name. They don't stop because they accept the weak punishment as an occupational hazard - time to be served before carrying on just as before. He should be persecuted on sight until he has to go and live in a cave away from decent society, or even better, jump off the pier and save the expense of monitoring him.michael.evans wrote: Repugnant crimes, but if he has served his sentence, and keeps to his release conditions, isn't he allowed to get a cup of tea or go to the library? Let's not get into a newspaper vigilante hunt - we know where that has got us in the past.I agree. The same type of argument could apply to anybody who has been in jail. They are punished by serving time and not afterwards. If the argument here is valid and applied elsewhere then we would lock him up permanently.
bluemonday
says...
8:01am Wed 19 Sep 12
Paulie Walnuts
says...
12:35pm Wed 19 Sep 12
A spokesman said "This is the one thing we didn't want to happen".
Jimmy Stewart's Imaginary Rabbit
says...
10:55am Thu 20 Sep 12
Char-Brighton wrote:Yes, I'm a father. And no, I'm really not over-worried about predatory paedophiles as they're not the greatest menace facing children - despite the scaremongering of a tabloid desperately trying to win back some popular support. Can't you see you're being manipulated?
So jimmy Stewart's imaginary rabbits, the sun would print a picture of some one completed unrelated to this story....? I highly doubt that. This man should not be allowed out he has hardly served his time being out within a year has he? Are you a father? If so would you be happy to allow your children in the same areas as this vile man? I highly doubt it so I think the picture is a good idea for people to be able to see who he is. I think all peados should have their image somewhere for public to be able to see.
I suppose next week The Sun will be running a special offer on pitchforks and burning torches.
Cash Cow
says...
11:45am Thu 20 Sep 12
The same could probably be said about myself, so there is no point in me just banging on about how much I destest paedophiles and that I have absolutely no sympathy for any of them, and that in my opinion should be executed, no point whatsoever. In my opinion most criminals, with the correct guidance, could be rehabilitated. A drug addict can be cured, so can an alcohic, and a burglar can be made to see and understand the wrongs of his ways. Though a paedophile may be a drug addict, a drunk, a doctor, a vicar, a politician, a policeman, or anything but he will always be a paedophile.
So if was the owner of the cafe and a well known ex-convict came in for a cup of tea and a bacon roll I would be happy to serve that person, though if Patrick Duncan Ophile having just been realised from prison, walked in, I would eject him in an instant!
just-a-person
says...
5:09pm Thu 20 Sep 12
hubby wrote:Are you sure your not homesick? Considering you left the South Coast for Spain so your family had a better quality of life you spend an awful lot of time reading about all the downsides going on over here.
He didn't seem to spend a lot of time in prison did he?
So your toddlers are OK but watch out for your thirteen year old sons and daughters.
Dodgy place Brighton!
Dirk Von Roden
says...
2:26pm Fri 21 Sep 12
wole says...
7:54am Mon 17 Sep 12