"Pervert on submarine is let off.......,"

#1
"... because he was bored"

Express, Wednesday 10th November:

A Royal Navy dotor who downloaded almost 4,000 images of child porn because he was bored after spending eight months on a submarine has been allowed ro keep his job.
Surgeon lieutenant Stuart Ruthven, 27, who admitted a catalogue of offences, said his behaviour was triggered by the need to rebel after being cooped up underwater for so long.

Despite 45 of the images he accessed showing adults carrying out serious sexual assaults in children, the submariner has been allowed to carry on praticising as a doctor after a disclipinary hearing ruled he did not view them for sexual gratification.

Children charities yesterday condemned the ruling by the General Medical Council and warned that it sent out a dangerous message. Ruthven, who is serving as a medical officer at HMS Drake naval base in Plymouth, will now work under the close supervision of senior staff who describe his work as "exemplary". The conditions placed on him for the next two years mean he will continue to work under supervision and bar him from working with anyone under the age of 16. They also require him from work for the armed forces or the NHS and bar him from private work or working as a locum pracitioner.

Alyson Lesile, chairman of the GMC conduct committee, said it accepted a psycharitrist's report that Ruthven was 'a brief looker rather than a doer'.

Ruthven, from Flixton, Greater Manchester, was arrested during a FBI investigation into the porn website Landslide. Police discovered he had used his credit card to downlaod more than 3,800 images. May fell into low-level catergorised but 45 were sickening images of sexual activity between adults and children.

The former Manchester Grammar school pupil first downloaded indecent images in 1999. He joined the Navy in 2001 and spend eight months on a submarine between 2002 and 2003. he told the hearing he accessed the internet because he was bored and desensitised after spending so long at sea. Last December he was prdered to sign the Sex Offender Register for five years and complete 18 months community rehabilitation after admitting making indecent images.
WTF? So we can get away with any sh1t if we use the excuse that we were bored? No - I don't think so. If that was me, I would have had a boot so severely up my arrse that it leave me walking like a ricket-suffering cowboy. And rightly so.
The GMC has shown over and over again that they are an organisation that will keep their members on as long as there is a suitable excuse, and what they interpret as suitable is a hell of a long list. Not only do they do an injustice to the victims (ok - not exactly at his physical hands but still) and the public on a whole by delivering paltry punishment to those who are supposed to be setting a professional conduct, but the reputation of the RN could also damaged in this case. I can imagine it can be a little tedous - but now the GMC says it is 'healthy' for the average twenty-odd male to be looking at kiddie porn just because he is bored - there's nothing else on the net for him to satisfy his mind? Perhaps it was thought that he was of a level that he didn't need supervision but I'm sure his bosses would of found him something else to do.

Whether looking. overseeing or performing such sexual assaults, it still mark in my book as a need such a person to have the formal punishment as described in the piece above, and the informal procedure of a head-to-door shutting process. To me, it is only the start of doing it physically - it was only the investigation that stopped him in his tracks. He should of gone for walk - outside the submarine - without the use of BAs.
:twisted:
 
#3
Don’t know the guy but I imagine that when this gains a wider currency in the Navy, his credibility as a Naval Officer and Navy doctor will be zero. I note from his entry in the Navy List he is not yet a member of any Medical Institutions (too junior). If so, hopefully the Royal College of Surgeons and the like will have more sense than the GMC and not admit the cnut in the first place. If I was a ‘medic’ I wouldn’t want to work with him.

Curiosity, boredom, research, rebellion, boll0cks. If he had a scrap of decency, he’d have been repelled by what he saw, give himself a good talking to and bin the idea of building up a collection. Paying the abusers and producers encourages them and leads to more victims.

Perhaps a Naval father will give Ruthven some old fashioned mess deck (or Wardroom) justice. I’ll be looking out for him (that is not a threat of violence) and would have to be in a bad way before I’d accept medical treatment from him.

Have to agree with Wynter about the spelling. Express you say?
 
#4
MySSL

Can you post a link to this story, or another piece posted elsewhere?
 
#5
Bad spelling in the original post and PTP's post alerts me to the possibility of a stitch up.

However

http://www.gmc-uk.org/probdocs/decisions/search.htm


Name RUTHVEN, Stuart Christopher
Field of practice General Practice/Armed Forces Doctor
Place of practice Plymouth
Type of order

On 13 October 2004 the Committee reviewed the order made on 28 October 2003 imposing conditions on Dr Ruthven’s registration and directed that the order should remain in place as follows (until 27 April 2005):
1. He shall confine his medical practice to adult patients in the care of the Royal Navy Medical Services.

2. Except in life-threatening emergencies he shall not undertake the clinical care of persons under the age of 16.

3. He shall arrange for his medical practice to be directly supervised by a responsible Royal Navy Medical Officer and for his medical supervisor to provide a report in each review of this order.
Ruthven has been up to no good. As for good spelling, like facts, good spelling is not a journalistic requirement.
 
#6
Bloody hell - you got the gist of it anyway lol. It was typed out and sent to me. Spelling corrected I hope - although corrections was not the point of the post :)
Daily Express - Page 21 - Wednesday 10th November
 
#8
Surely theres a long and proud tradition of sexual deviancy in the senior service!

"Two men looking out of a porthole sah!" :lol:
 
#9
Just wanted to make sure that with a piece this sensitive, Arrse had it's arrse covered :D

There have been restrictions placed upon him, and the punishment for his offence(s) have been determined and administered.

Which is a roundabout way of me saying "Please temper your replies"
 
#11
Just to be controversial...

You can kind of understand the idea that he would be curious, not necessarily a pervert... in the same way that people download videos of abductees being beheaded, purely out of curiosity.

It doesn't mean they approve of it, or like it in any way at all - they just want to know what the fuss is about. Has anyone here not been tempted to have just one peek when they've seen a link? (before deciding No and moving on)

However, the guy knew what he was doing was illegal, so he can hardly be innocent of crime. Looks like his punishment will be in his reputation, as Seadog pointed out.
Plus... 4,000 images? :x That's a lot of boredom.
 
#12
I am sorry but civiliian courts are sending people to prison for far less than 3,800 images. a Police Sgt got 12 months for a similar offence.

How come this guy is not inside? Did it go to court martial?

This appears to be a very leniant sentence indeed.

Trotsky
 
#15
Badger_lady said:
Just to be controversial...

You can kind of understand the idea that he would be curious, not necessarily a pervert... in the same way that people download videos of abductees being beheaded, purely out of curiosity.

It doesn't mean they approve of it, or like it in any way at all - they just want to know what the fuss is about. Has anyone here not been tempted to have just one peek when they've seen a link? (before deciding No and moving on)

However, the guy knew what he was doing was illegal, so he can hardly be innocent of crime. Looks like his punishment will be in his reputation, as Seadog pointed out.
Plus... 4,000 images? :x That's a lot of boredom.
It has been suggested in police circles that we have compeltly misunderstood the motivation behind this kind of crime.

It would seem that whilst many of those arrested were "classic" paedophiles in many other cases the motivation seems to be not a sexual attraction to children but a perverse attraction to (not always sexual) extremes. Along side the paedophile images will be executions, car crash victims etc etc

Perhaps making such people "sexual" offenders does them, and society, no justice at all.

Trotsky
 
#16
Axeman said:
SIB investigate lesbo floorshow in Iraq which will no doubt result in brown and smelly all round for those involved. Maybe even a little spell in MCTC.
Navy doctor let off

Justice anyone?
SIB investigate ...etc.
Got a link?
 
#17
...a disclipinary hearing ruled he did not view them for sexual gratification...

...The conditions placed on him for the next two years mean he will continue to work under supervision and bar him from working with anyone under the age of 16...

...Last December he was ordered to sign the Sex Offender Register for five years and complete 18 months community rehabilitation after admitting making indecent images...
They should make their minds up. Either he was getting a sexual kick or not. If he was then he should go to jail and get raped off Mr Big who's in with the warders. If he wasn't then there's no reason why he should be on the sex offenders register and bannd from working with kids.

This kind of muddy thinking only helps to fuel the idiotic obsession with paedophiles in our gutter press. Our tabloids go on about pervs, then they "unveil" a topless page 3 girl on her 16th birthday. And they were all over Charlotte Church as rear of the year (when she's under 16) with pictures of her arse on the front pages. They contribute to the disgusting sexualisation of chuildren then stand back to take a pop shot at the pervs who appear. Hypocritical scum.

I suppose it's a lot safer if people stick to milfs!
:wink:

PD
 
#18
Trotsky said:
It has been suggested in police circles that we have compeltly misunderstood the motivation behind this kind of crime.

It would seem that whilst many of those arrested were "classic" paedophiles in many other cases the motivation seems to be not a sexual attraction to children but a perverse attraction to (not always sexual) extremes. Along side the paedophile images will be executions, car crash victims etc etc

Perhaps making such people "sexual" offenders does them, and society, no justice at all.

Trotsky
In that case, wouldn't you expect to see a roughly even split between images of all their 'fantasies'.

How many computers from a random sample will have pictures from ogrish and the like?

msr
 
#19
I am a bit surprised as to how he could be bored during his naval service from 2000, and managed to have downloads from 1999!

All of the Landslide material is pre-September 1999, as that was when the side was shut down following raids in USA.

Unless naval medical officers have discovered the secret of time travel someone has managed to pull the wool over the eyes of the court or GMC.

This was reported in a civilian newspaper recently, and obviously was not dealt with by court-martial. The penalty in military terms for such an offence would normally involve an immediate loss of appointment for an officer. The nature of the photographs would depend on whether an immediate custodial sentence was likely. There is a scale depending on the image depicted in the photograph. That was how the former head of the army legal services, and subsequently a judge, was able to receive a community service order to the surprise of many. Knowing that the images were only at the bottom end of the scale explains to those in the know why such a sentence would be passed.
 
#20
Before anyone jumps down my throat, I'm not defending the pervert. But I would like to point out that the reaction to this mans crime is that he should be castrated and banished from civilisation.

Nothing really wrong there. But isn't that exactly how gay people were classed less than 50 years ago? Does this mean that in 50 years from now we will have to keep all children indoors and away from the Paedophile Rights Marches? Will every employer have to prove that they have at least one paedophile in their employment and will many of the presenters on TV be openly paedophile?

Sick though isn't it :?
 

Similar threads

New Posts

Latest Threads

Top