Park run
Notifications OFF
Sorry to keep asking questions but my mind is spinning with every possible scenario.
My son is a runner and has taken part in park runs is this still possible whilst on the register?
Hes been told that if he wants to join a gym he has to inform the visor which I understand because it is indoors even though he is classed as low risk but surely park run is different because it is outside and he is not directly connecting with anyone else?
The PSR and probation have both said that this is beneficial to his mental health but my fear is that the visor will need to be informed and will block it .
My son is a runner and has taken part in park runs is this still possible whilst on the register?
Hes been told that if he wants to join a gym he has to inform the visor which I understand because it is indoors even though he is classed as low risk but surely park run is different because it is outside and he is not directly connecting with anyone else?
The PSR and probation have both said that this is beneficial to his mental health but my fear is that the visor will need to be informed and will block it .
Hi Seaside,
I've never heard of informing visor on joining a gym, although some gyms do have it in their terms and conditions. Does your son has a no contact clause in his SHPO? My person doesn't and we were told that they can't impose anything that stops him from living his normal day to day life. I'm so sorry that his visor is massively intruding on your sons life xxx
I've never heard of informing visor on joining a gym, although some gyms do have it in their terms and conditions. Does your son has a no contact clause in his SHPO? My person doesn't and we were told that they can't impose anything that stops him from living his normal day to day life. I'm so sorry that his visor is massively intruding on your sons life xxx
Omg why would they block it? That would be a breach of his human rights surely? They've taken enough away from him. How do they expect people to turn their lives round if they take their jobs off them and everything ekse that keeps their minds healthy? He's a human being for goodness sake! Sorry I'm just going through angry phases of heartbreak and after reading your son lost his job because of them I'm fining on your behalf x
No there is nothing in his SHPO
My husband still goes to parkrun. (Post sentencing and on SOR). I don't think there is anything to say that they can't. Parkrun is very much about inclusion for all. There can't be much risk. We did have to cancel our gym membership as the first line says (it was very nicely put, which surprised me and doesn't spell it out) no-one on SOR can be a member.
Tbh I have never thought about gyms, and has never been mentioned by probation or the police liaison. Probation also encouraged my partner to go to the gym for wellbeing. Never bothered to read the Ts and C's for such places.
From I can gather your person doesn't have the no contact clause in their SHPO? If so then I really think you need to try to go above this visor's head to have this visor brought back to reality.
I'm a bit confused as what a visor is....is this the police officer assigned your person's case? That they will continue to monitor after the suspended sentence?
In regard to park run, I really don't see how they can justify the need for disclosure unless deemed a higher risk. If there is the no contact clause I could somewhat understand - people might bring their kids to watch or meet up after a run and therefore more likely to invite a convicted person to chat without knowing of the conviction.
My person's police liaison has used the excuse of 'what if this, what if that' to the point they wanted my person to disclose to my family members I barely see. Thankfully got them to back down in the end
From I can gather your person doesn't have the no contact clause in their SHPO? If so then I really think you need to try to go above this visor's head to have this visor brought back to reality.
I'm a bit confused as what a visor is....is this the police officer assigned your person's case? That they will continue to monitor after the suspended sentence?
In regard to park run, I really don't see how they can justify the need for disclosure unless deemed a higher risk. If there is the no contact clause I could somewhat understand - people might bring their kids to watch or meet up after a run and therefore more likely to invite a convicted person to chat without knowing of the conviction.
My person's police liaison has used the excuse of 'what if this, what if that' to the point they wanted my person to disclose to my family members I barely see. Thankfully got them to back down in the end
Hi Majestic this is what is confusing me tbh there is nothing in the SHPO about contact because the whole section was taken out and agreed by the judge as not being applicable but the visor ( same as police liaison) seems intent on trying to enforce it.
We've also had the " what if " and he was forced to either disclose or resign from his job which did not involve any direct contact with children because apparently parents would want to know -well as a parent it would actually never even have occurred to me in that particular job and are we saying that parents want to know whether they are standing next to someone on the register when at the supermarket?
We've also had the " what if " and he was forced to either disclose or resign from his job which did not involve any direct contact with children because apparently parents would want to know -well as a parent it would actually never even have occurred to me in that particular job and are we saying that parents want to know whether they are standing next to someone on the register when at the supermarket?
I wish the judge considered the no contact clause as not applicable, it was questioned in court but was dismissed and the judge just said to appeal it. But we were then advised to wait five years on. Over time being on this forum I realise we should have kicked up more fuss. But alas I didn't know about the forum until after the window for appeal.
Makes sense now when people refer to visor. I would request the visor gets a second opinion from their supervisor, that is what we did and they had their supervisor agree to back off. But they did caveat they could change their mind! Probation should be backing up your person too, maybe ask the probation officer to have their supervisor engage with the visor.
Sounds like the visor would like offenders to have a big sign around their neck. Part of being managed in the community is to help offenders get back to normal as best as possible. The visor you mention needs to reminded of this- but best hearing it from probation and Thier own supervisor
Makes sense now when people refer to visor. I would request the visor gets a second opinion from their supervisor, that is what we did and they had their supervisor agree to back off. But they did caveat they could change their mind! Probation should be backing up your person too, maybe ask the probation officer to have their supervisor engage with the visor.
Sounds like the visor would like offenders to have a big sign around their neck. Part of being managed in the community is to help offenders get back to normal as best as possible. The visor you mention needs to reminded of this- but best hearing it from probation and Thier own supervisor
Hi, sorry to but in on your post. I can only go on our experience. My son was 16 when we got the knock, 17 when sentenced. 5 year shpo with no contact clause taken out.
HOWEVER, we have been told it doesn't matter what the court says as what the police say is now his law and if he doesn't comply they can choose to make his life incredibly difficult. As a result, he is not allowed to do anything that may have contact with under 18s as he has turned 18 6 months ago, before that it was 16. He is not allowed to join any clubs or do sports where there could be anyone under 18 as the police will disclose to the club that he's SOR, and to any parents of any clubs to ask if they're happy for their children to possibly come into contact with him as he's SOR, even if this was a running club etc. he's only allowed to do anything if there's expressly 18+ clubs, of which there are now so he can't make friends and doesn't have even one friend x
HOWEVER, we have been told it doesn't matter what the court says as what the police say is now his law and if he doesn't comply they can choose to make his life incredibly difficult. As a result, he is not allowed to do anything that may have contact with under 18s as he has turned 18 6 months ago, before that it was 16. He is not allowed to join any clubs or do sports where there could be anyone under 18 as the police will disclose to the club that he's SOR, and to any parents of any clubs to ask if they're happy for their children to possibly come into contact with him as he's SOR, even if this was a running club etc. he's only allowed to do anything if there's expressly 18+ clubs, of which there are now so he can't make friends and doesn't have even one friend x