Why paedophiles love the gender revolution

They get shorter sentences and even escape jail because of judges acting on advice from....someone

‘Jessica’ Smith

A couple of years ago it was revealed that one in 50 male prisoners identify as women, four times the figure in the general population, which led to theorising that some male prisoners were simply saying they identified as a woman in the hope they could receive certain privileges, potentially even a transfer to a women’s prison or an early release from jail altogether.

April 2021 taught us that it’s surprising the figure is only one in 50.

In that month alone, at least three separate UK trials took place involving child abusers, in which the defendant claimed they now identify as a woman, and that this identity means they should receive a lesser sentence, or even none at all.

Incredibly, in two of the three trials, the judge agreed.

The first involved Alex Smith, formerly known as Matthew Burren, a convicted child rapist (the child was a five-year-old boy). As Matthew, after being released from jail, he was given a community order after being found with sexualised drawings of youngsters and in 2015, a Sexual Harm Prevention Order (SHPO) after being found with prohibited images of children. There was also evidence that he had tried to contact children online.

Since then, Matthew has become Alex and the SHPO has been breached FIVE times. In March, when police paid Alex an unannounced visit and found a hidden mobile phone that hadn’t been declared for inspection, Alex threatened suicide in front of the officers.

The case went to trial in April - but the judge, who said that Alex presents a “danger to children”, did not send Alex to jail.. because of Alex’s transgender status.

“I’m not going to send you to prison and the reason for that is because … you’re currently undergoing gender reassignment. If you were not vulnerable I would probably send you to prison,” she said.

The same week saw the trial of Denen Anderson, whose legal name, as we revealed earlier this year, is actually Steven Anderson, but is referred to as ‘she / her’ in all media reports. Denen / Steven downloaded a toddler rape video and researched murdering babies.

Despite the seriousness of the crime, Denen / Steven also avoided jail, with the sheriff stating: “[This] is something which would often require a custodial sentence. I will impose a Community Payback Order because of the exceptional circumstances involving mental health and various other reasons.”

Just a few days later saw the trial of Jessica Ann Smith, who had sent sexual pictures to what Jessica thought were children, and then tried to meet one, only to discover it was a group of ‘paedophile hunters’. It was noted that Jessica, a biological male, was a “person dressed as a male” when he tried to meet the fictitious child.

In court, ‘Jessica’ said he was vulnerable, isolated “because of her complex gender identity issues”, terrified of going to a male prison and was currently going through the process of gender reassignment.

The judge accepted a psychiatric report that stated Jessica’s ‘dysphoria and sexual identity’ contributed to his anxiety and depression but said there was no evidence of a psychotic disorder and, unlike the other two judges, sent the defendant to jail, in this case for two years and 10 months.

So where are judges getting this absurd advice? According to ‘The Article’, it’s from ‘The Equal Treatment Bench Book’, which appears to have been drawn up by trans activists, who are allowed to remain nameless.

“A lot of the language used in the transgender guidance looks rather like language used in, well, rather a lot of other documents, emanating from our public sector, where a small number of transgender-focused lobby groups have significant influence. However, according to the Law Gazette, “The Judicial College declined to identify the external experts and organisations that assist in training and formulation of policy.”

This week, on BBC’s Any Questions (at 33:40), five politicians from five political parties were asked what a woman is. Not only did all five fail to answer this question, but they all explicitly stated or suggested that men who identify as women are the most ‘vulnerable’ in society.

Even if that was true, it would be naïve to think that criminals, particularly child abusers who might fear going to a men’s jail, would shrink from exploiting this discourse in order to receive less or even no jail time. Now that judges effectively encourage this, surely only a sense of decency would stop male sex offenders from using their ‘gender identity’ as a defence.

And a sense of decency is something convicted paedophiles don’t tend to possess.