SIR,

As a parent to seven children I was shocked at the story of the English Bicknor man who recieved such a light sentence for something so awful.

While the subject matter was horrific, publishing it was the difficult and distasteful but morally right thing to do, so I was upset to read that many people found fault with the Beacon for printing the story.

A dangerous individual was able to insinuate himself as an upstanding member of society and has been properly exposed for the sort of person he really is; accessing and viewing the images and subject matter which he enjoyed is not accidental and is not victimless.

The Beacon has done a service to its readership. Furthermore, the gravity of his offences could only have been properly highlighted by the detail published.

It is worth noting that many communities in the United States require similar offenders to have a sign outside their homes listing the name of the offender and their offences.

I can see how some readers may have taken offence to the particular facts behind the case, however, they and their families are now better armed to protect themselves from such horrors.

That some may say the publishing of a web address has enabled curious minors to view such images shows an alarming lack of responsibility on the part of parents in the prevention of applying family controls over their internet access.

The Beacon has done a sterling job.

That some readers may have been put off their cornflakes while reading it might be regrettable, however, this is minor collateral damage compared to its beneficial informative effect.

Jim Bewley

(Penallt)