Can we stop another Sarah Payne tragedy?

It was only after the jury at Lewes Crown Court had convicted Whiting, 42, of eight-year-old Sarah's kidnap and murder that they were told he was a paedophile known to be at high risk of reoffending.

Whiting previously snatched a schoolgirl off a street in Crawley in 1995 and subjected her to a sickening sex assault.

He was given a four-year jail sentence after admitting the attack.

He was released in November 1997, despite warnings from probation officers who were convinced there was a danger he would attack another child.

He had served two-thirds of his sentence and could have been freed on licence earlier if he had not been in denial.

He moved to St Augustine Road, Littlehampton, where he was placed under supervision for six months.

Detective Superintendent Jeremy Paine, head of Sussex CID, said: "We were very worried, particularly in the early days. We heard he had visited the local leisure centre and during his period of licence he was banned from going there.

"We conducted surveillance, which revealed he was living a normal lifestyle. We always recognised he posed a real risk but we had to work within the legislation.

"After his release from prison he was free to do what he wanted and he gave no indication he would reoffend."

Since 1995 there have been some significant steps forward in the way the law deals with dangerous sex offenders.

The sex offenders' register, set up in September 1997 to help police and probation officers keep track of sex criminals, now holds about 15,000 names.

The UK now has the largest sex offender treatment programme in the world. Offered by a total of 26 jails, it involves up to 172 hours of group therapy sessions in which paedophiles learn to recognise the terror they have caused their victims.

However, as the law stands, 30 to 40 dangerous offenders are released from jail every month because they have come to the end of their sentences.

Half of these are violent criminals and half are sexual offenders.

In the aftermath of Whiting's conviction, the question being asked in pubs and Parliament is the same: What can be done to prevent Sarah's tragedy befalling another little victim?

Minutes after Whiting had been sentenced to life in jail, Sarah's mother, Sara, in an impromptu Press conference on the steps of Lewes Crown Court, was asked the question.

She replied: "You know what change I want . . . Sarah's Law."

Sara was referring to a campaign run by the News of the World, in the weeks following her daughter's death.

The paper initially tapped in to the nation's revulsion pledging to "name and shame" every paedophile in Britain.

But the campaign swiftly turned into a witch-hunt with wrongly-identified men and, in one case, a female paediatrician, being hounded out of their homes by vigilante mobs.

The campaign was quietly dropped after two weeks.

Instead the paper began calling for Sarah's Law, legislation based on Megan's Law in the US giving parents access to information about known sex offenders deemed a risk to children living in their area.

The Home Office initially said it would give "urgent and serious consideration" to the plan but withdrew after condemnation from police, probation officers and criminologists.

The central concern was the law would drive paedophiles underground where they would construct their networks in secret.

Home Office minister Beverley Hughes said: "It won't help to protect children. It will probably make protecting children even harder for the police.

"It drives offenders to ground and it's unworkable. There is nothing to stop an offender whose name has been disclosed in one area buying a van and driving 100 miles to another area."

Terry Grange, Chief Constable of Dyfed Powys Police, who deals with sex offender issues for the Association of Chief Police Officers, said: "If we start naming paedophiles a good proportion of them will disappear.

"Currently we have the register of sex offenders and 97 per cent of those who should register have. Because we know where they are, we are able to conduct assessments as to the risk they pose, monitor their movements, treat them where it is possible and manage them to the best of our ability.

"But, having said that, I have to be completely honest and say there is no absolute safety for the public."

Instead of Sarah's Law, a raft of measures was introduced to the Criminal Justice and Court Services Act 2000, which came into force in June.

Judges can now ban a convicted paedophile from ever contacting their victim, offenders are required to register in 72 hours instead of two weeks and authorities have greater powers to supervise them on their release from prison with electronic tags, psychiatric visits and police checks for up to ten years.

Various other plans and proposals have emerged, although there is no indication any will receive parliamentary time in this term.

Ms Hughes said yesterday: "Protecting children is the highest priority for this Government and we have already acted to build on and improve arrangements for protecting the public from dangerous offenders.

"However, we will be studying the details of this case very carefully to make sure that we learn from it ways of improving these arrangements still further."

She said the four-year sentence given to Whiting for his previous offence had been inadequate.

"I think many people, including myself and many parents, will find that sentence completely incomprehensible, if not an outrage."

Brian Clark, chief officer for the Sussex probation area, said he was confident Whiting had been properly supervised following his release from jail in 1997 but officers did not have the powers to continue monitoring him indefinitely.

He said: "Legislation has changed. Since the 1998 Crime and Disorder Act it is possible for a judge to make a supervision order for up to ten years.

"There can be no guarantees about public safety but, in this case, it would have done a lot to minimise the risk to the general public."

Government measures already in place to defend society from sex offenders include the possibility of an extended period of supervision after release of up to ten years for sexual and violent offenders.

The number of treatment programmes in prisons has also grown.

The police and probation services have been told to establish multi-agency public protection panels to assess the risk and handling of dangerous people on release.

Sentencing for sexual and violent offenders and the Sex Offenders Act is also under review.

While serving his sentence, Whiting refused to take part in a prison rehabilitation scheme. The probation officers' union Napo has called for reform of the sex offenders' treatment programme so it is more effective in dealing with abusers like Whiting who are "in denial".

Certainly the strongest argument to emerge is that by releasing Whiting after two years with no rehabilitation the police and probation service were left with a timebomb.

Lewes MP Norman Baker has called for tougher legislation to keep child sex offenders behind bars unless they can prove beyond doubt they no longer pose a threat.

He said: "I will be asking the Home Secretary to review this case to see what lessons can be learnt and whether there should be legislation to make sure those offenders unable to prove they no longer pose a danger are not released."

MP Nigel Waterson said: "If treatment is then accepted and has clearly worked the possibility of release could be considered. If treatment is refused or not deemed to have worked the offender should remain in prison."

Such legislation has been proposed in a White Paper to reform the Mental Health Act but it was not part of the Queen's Speech.

Home Office minister Keith Bradley yesterday gave a hint that the law may be on the way, saying: "I am determined to legislate in this area to bring in tough sentences and long sentences to ensure that violent and dangerous offenders are not released from prison.

"And where they are, there is continued supervision of them in the community to ensure the public and children are protected from them."

In the meantime, the Government has set up the dangerous offenders unit at the Home Office, which is given the names of all dangerous offenders who are released from jail.

It keeps tabs on them, in partnership with probation officers, to ensure they are getting proper supervision and suitable accommodation.

The final question is whether the jury should have been told about Whiting's earlier conviction for an almost identical attack.

Despite the enormous police investigation the evidence against him hung, literally, by a few threads.

If he had been found not guilty there would have been uproar when his previous conviction came to light.

In an October review of the justice system, Lord Justice Auld recommended such information should be put to juries where relevant.

However, lawyers have long argued that telling juries about a defendant's past crimes would be a recipe for unfair trials.

The Government's commitment to changing the law became clear in October, when Home Office officials left a sheaf of confidential papers in a Westminster pub.

The papers revealed that changing the rules on previous convictions was "a clear priority for the Prime Minister".

But in Whiting's case Judge Mr Justice Curtis ruled his history was not to be revealed.

Sending Whiting down for life, he told him: "I deliberately ordered that you be tried on the facts of this murder and this kidnap, and not on your record."

Whiting will be allowed the choice to be segregated from other jail inmates for his own protection.

But history shows even when segregated, paedophiles may not be safe.

Notorious child sex killer Leslie Bailey was strangled in his prison cell by two other inmates in October 1993.

The 40-year-old paedophile had admitted his part in the murders of six-year-old Barry Lewis, seven-year-old Mark Tildesley and Jason Swift, 14.

He had been segregated with 125 other "vulnerable prisoners" at top security Whitemoor jail in Cambridgeshire because of fears for his safety.

Whiting is likely to be moved straight to Belmarsh high security prison in south east London where he will be assessed before transfer to a suitable jail.