FabSwingers.com > Forums > The Lounge > Baby P's mother released early?

Baby P's mother released early?

By (user no longer on site) OP over a year ago

The press are reporting the mother of Baby P has been released from prison.

Apparently she was freed after the Parole Board recommended her release following a second re_iew of her case even though she was jailed indefinitely with a minimum of five years in May 2009 for causing or allowing her son Peter's death.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *emmefataleWoman over a year ago

dirtybigbadsgirlville

I have no words here.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *empting Devil.Woman over a year ago

Sheffield

I believe she's been out for a few days.

She has served her court-ordered time.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

Makes me shudder to think that someone like that is given early release. A minimum of five years should be exactly that, not four years. Where's the justice for the poor child who suffered agonising torture and never had a chance at life.

She is one of the lowest forms of life and doesn't deserve freedom or compassion.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

She should never have been released early. In fact someone so evil should not be released at all....My opinion.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

she wasnt released early.

taking into account the time she spent on parole she has served the 5 years.

however low she is, she has served her time.

its such a shame she cant be sterilised so as not to put any further offspring of hers in harms way

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

Yet another child failed when it comes to justice for them.

I don't think anything would bring it but they could at least keep to what they originally give them.

Its so sad

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"she wasnt released early.

taking into account the time she spent on parole she has served the 5 years.

however low she is, she has served her time.

its such a shame she cant be sterilised so as not to put any further offspring of hers in harms way"

I'm sure you mean time spent on remand rather than parole. However, 10 years would be too early. She allowed her child to be tortured, abused and ultimately killed, she should serve what would have been the child's lifetime, say 65yrs. Personally though I'd have preffered she got a bullet in the back of the head, but that's just me.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ove bi guysWoman over a year ago

Birmingham

My worry is she may still have more children .... A horrible, horrible thought

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"she wasnt released early.

taking into account the time she spent on parole she has served the 5 years.

however low she is, she has served her time.

its such a shame she cant be sterilised so as not to put any further offspring of hers in harms way

sorry, yes, remand.

lets not forget, she didnt kill her child, she allowed others to kill him.

there is a slight difference, although again, still distasteful.

would anyone here like to be convicted for 50 years because they saw a fight, took no action, but it resulted in someone being killed?

thats kinda the same thing.

she got given a sentence and she has served it.

sure she wont get a seconds peace when people find her anyway, so she is getting a life sentence.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *nnyMan over a year ago

Glasgow

I don't know whether her sentence was correct or not. I, like most folk, didn't sit through the entire trial or read all the reports.

I can't believe people find it acceptable that, after someone has served the sentence of the court, it's OK to make the rest of her life hell.

Is that really the sort of country people want to live in? Mob rule?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"I don't know whether her sentence was correct or not. I, like most folk, didn't sit through the entire trial or read all the reports.

I can't believe people find it acceptable that, after someone has served the sentence of the court, it's OK to make the rest of her life hell.

Is that really the sort of country people want to live in? Mob rule?"

have you not read the threads lately on mobs, vigilantes and general thuggery today?

of course you have.

you expressed similar disbelief in those too lol

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

so whats the point in a justice system that recommends a minimum of five years and lets her out in four?

there's no wonder people have little faith in it

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"she wasnt released early.

taking into account the time she spent on parole she has served the 5 years.

however low she is, she has served her time.

its such a shame she cant be sterilised so as not to put any further offspring of hers in harms way"

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

It's always difficult to judge when you don't know all the facts. It certainly makes the judges look stupid though when this happens. The sentence should state something like "a balance of two years".

I hear there's a sex offender who was put on probation and has absconded. Now that IS someone not doing their job properly.

Then again, if he was on here he'd be too knackered to get up to anything

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"I don't know whether her sentence was correct or not. I, like most folk, didn't sit through the entire trial or read all the reports.

I can't believe people find it acceptable that, after someone has served the sentence of the court, it's OK to make the rest of her life hell.

Is that really the sort of country people want to live in? Mob rule?"

A voice of reason. Thank you.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

Any person convicted of any crime against children should be expected to serve the full sentence given to them. Period .

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

Jason Owen only did 3 years for his part in the killing

how can you kill a child and only serve 3 and 4 years?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *kywatcherMan over a year ago

Southwick

"so whats the point in a justice system that recommends a minimum of five years and lets her out in four?

there's no wonder people have little faith in it"

If you read the thread properly and news reports you will see that is not the case

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"she wasnt released early.

taking into account the time she spent on parole she has served the 5 years.

however low she is, she has served her time.

its such a shame she cant be sterilised so as not to put any further offspring of hers in harms way

sorry, yes, remand.

lets not forget, she didnt kill her child, she allowed others to kill him.

there is a slight difference, although again, still distasteful.

would anyone here like to be convicted for 50 years because they saw a fight, took no action, but it resulted in someone being killed?

thats kinda the same thing.

she got given a sentence and she has served it.

sure she wont get a seconds peace when people find her anyway, so she is getting a life sentence."

I agree, she didnt actualy kill the child but i think she is a bad person.

i wouldnt trust her to look after anyone like old people, children or animals. The man who killed the little boy is i think dangerous and should never be let out of prison.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *nnyMan over a year ago

Glasgow

"so whats the point in a justice system that recommends a minimum of five years and lets her out in four?

there's no wonder people have little faith in it

If you read the thread properly and news reports you will see that is not the case

Some people only read the bits which suit them.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

she was too weak-willed to protect her son and deserves life imprisonment or the death penalty?

That's my limited understanding of the case and the way I see some points of _iew in this thread.

Sadly when children are abused by one parent, the partner is often abused too (doesn'thave to be physical). This removes the ability to protect. Very sad but true.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"I don't know whether her sentence was correct or not. I, like most folk, didn't sit through the entire trial or read all the reports.

I can't believe people find it acceptable that, after someone has served the sentence of the court, it's OK to make the rest of her life hell.

Is that really the sort of country people want to live in? Mob rule?"

I agree...mob mentality! ..and add to that not ONE of them will even know half the facts about the true circumstances of the case,

It irritates me when folks sit in judgement of others, their lives and their mistakes...have none of YOU made mistakes?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *B9 QueenWoman over a year ago

Over the rainbow, under the bridge

"My worry is she may still have more children .... A horrible, horrible thought"

Social services will be informed if she does and she will be registered now.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *rynewMan over a year ago

warrington

"she wasnt released early.

taking into account the time she spent on parole she has served the 5 years.

however low she is, she has served her time.

its such a shame she cant be sterilised so as not to put any further offspring of hers in harms way

sorry, yes, remand.

lets not forget, she didnt kill her child, she allowed others to kill him.

there is a slight difference, although again, still distasteful.

would anyone here like to be convicted for 50 years because they saw a fight, took no action, but it resulted in someone being killed?

thats kinda the same thing.

she got given a sentence and she has served it.

sure she wont get a seconds peace when people find her anyway, so she is getting a life sentence."

Seeing a fight and someone getting killed is far removed from this situation. The lady in question witnessed the prolonged and sustained abuse of her own child, granted by others but she witnessed her own flesh and blood being abused and tortured over a period of time that resulted in the poor childs death. So to say this is the same as witnessing a fight and seeing someone killed is way way off the mark.

Sorry but this is a statement that has wound me up!

Granted the lady in question who I refuse to call a mother, has served the minimum sentence imposed by our judicial system and therefore re_iewable for release. The actual sentence passed by the judge who has his own set of guidelines was disgusting in the first place and disrespectful to the memory of the porr child.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *kywatcherMan over a year ago

Southwick

"so whats the point in a justice system that recommends a minimum of five years and lets her out in four?

there's no wonder people have little faith in it

If you read the thread properly and news reports you will see that is not the case

Some people only read the bits which suit them."

Can't agree more..."let's jump in with both feet" etc

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"she wasnt released early.

taking into account the time she spent on parole she has served the 5 years.

however low she is, she has served her time.

its such a shame she cant be sterilised so as not to put any further offspring of hers in harms way

sorry, yes, remand.

lets not forget, she didnt kill her child, she allowed others to kill him.

there is a slight difference, although again, still distasteful.

would anyone here like to be convicted for 50 years because they saw a fight, took no action, but it resulted in someone being killed?

thats kinda the same thing.

she got given a sentence and she has served it.

sure she wont get a seconds peace when people find her anyway, so she is getting a life sentence.

I agree, she didnt actualy kill the child but i think she is a bad person.

i wouldnt trust her to look after anyone like old people, children or animals. The man who killed the little boy is i think dangerous and should never be let out of prison."

problem is, there are may bad people walking around the world right now, unfortunately, or fortunately, being a bad person doesnt mean you should live your life in prison.

she served her minimum sentence in full, and that SHOULD be the en dof it, but it wont be.

she will be hounded and run out of any town she lives in, until the day she dies.

and then some will compain she lived too long.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"so whats the point in a justice system that recommends a minimum of five years and lets her out in four?

there's no wonder people have little faith in it

If you read the thread properly and news reports you will see that is not the case

Some people only read the bits which suit them.

Can't agree more..."let's jump in with both feet" etc

bloody hell arnt we a little touchy over details, im sorry I missed out the time served before convicted

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"she was too weak-willed to protect her son and deserves life imprisonment or the death penalty?

That's my limited understanding of the case and the way I see some points of _iew in this thread.

Sadly when children are abused by one parent, the partner is often abused too (doesn'thave to be physical). This removes the ability to protect. Very sad but true."

From what i have read her mother neglected her and their house was filthy. My parents neglected me a bit, they didnt talk to me enough and teach me things but when my son was born i made an effort to be different, i learnt how to look after him by reading a lot and taking advise from healthcare workers. I dont know if someone like her will ever change though, because some people never admit they have done things wrong.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *nnyMan over a year ago

Glasgow

I wrote earlier that I didn't know all the facts and hadn't sat through the trial but, it seems to me that although she did what is is undoubtedly a bad thing we can't be sure she's a bad person.

She certainly seems to be a weak person, possibly easily misled. That doesn't excuse her criminal behaviour but it might go some way to explain it.

Of course, some people don't want an explanation. Nothing short of blood will suffice.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

Sorry but this is a statement that has wound me up!

right or wrong, justice HAS been served.

emotion has no place in a courtroom, as thats when judgements become skewed and innacurate.

yes, she allowed her child to be abused and killed.

do we know that she is a hard faced bitch or was she suffering the same abuse?

to me, she looks a little 'simple' to say the least so i wouldnt be so sure she was in full ownership of her faculties, but thats just an opinion made from looking at pictures of the woman.

suffice to say, she didnt lift a finger to stop her child being killed, but conversly, she didnt actually lift a finger to kill her child...so the fight thing is kinda relevant

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"she wasnt released early.

taking into account the time she spent on parole she has served the 5 years.

however low she is, she has served her time.

its such a shame she cant be sterilised so as not to put any further offspring of hers in harms way

sorry, yes, remand.

lets not forget, she didnt kill her child, she allowed others to kill him.

there is a slight difference, although again, still distasteful.

would anyone here like to be convicted for 50 years because they saw a fight, took no action, but it resulted in someone being killed?

thats kinda the same thing.

she got given a sentence and she has served it.

sure she wont get a seconds peace when people find her anyway, so she is getting a life sentence.

Sorry but this is a statement that has wound me up!

I have to agree with everything said here apart from the fact that SHE is no lady. She watched her child get regularly abused by an animal. As a mother of 2, grown up kids I would do anything within my ability to protect them.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *inaTitzTV/TS over a year ago

Titz Towers, North Notts

People commit crimes, horrible crimes. They are sentenced in accordance with the law and serve their time.

Once they have done this, then they have another chance at life. People can improve and I see no need to hound anyone after they have served their time. Once a bad apple, doesn't mean always a bad apple.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *kywatcherMan over a year ago

Southwick

"so whats the point in a justice system that recommends a minimum of five years and lets her out in four?

there's no wonder people have little faith in it

If you read the thread properly and news reports you will see that is not the case

Some people only read the bits which suit them.

Can't agree more..."let's jump in with both feet" etc

bloody hell arnt we a little touchy over details, im sorry I missed out the time served before convicted

The details are very important especially to the point you were making which makes a mockery to your argument

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *RYBBWCouple over a year ago

Leeds.

"she wasnt released early.

taking into account the time she spent on parole she has served the 5 years.

however low she is, she has served her time.

its such a shame she cant be sterilised so as not to put any further offspring of hers in harms way"

I think she will be closely monitored by various organisations including Social Services. If she does become pregnant again they should remove the child from her at birth.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *RYBBWCouple over a year ago

Leeds.

"People commit crimes, horrible crimes. They are sentenced in accordance with the law and serve their time.

This I agree with 100%. But when it comes to protecting the safety of a child no amount of precautionary measures is too much.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

sometimes when you live with a man who is domineering and controlling he may do something you dont like but you are so used to him making all the decisions, you might get angry and want to say something or argue, only you tell yourself that it doesnt matter and he knows best. im not thinking of this case, i am thinking of how its been for me, wondering if thats how it was for her.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

It would appear to me, that the majority of folks on here are ONLY interested in 'revenge' for those acts 'they' deem to unacceptable to our oh so wonderful society, the truth is...its not that big of a deal, it happens all the time, maybe not to the point of death, but it still happens...and in your own homes as well!!

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *B9 QueenWoman over a year ago

Over the rainbow, under the bridge

"People commit crimes, horrible crimes. They are sentenced in accordance with the law and serve their time.

This I agree with 100%. But when it comes to protecting the safety of a child no amount of precautionary measures is too much."

Unless it comes in the form of vigilantism.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"It would appear to me, that the majority of folks on here are ONLY interested in 'revenge' for those acts 'they' deem to unacceptable to our oh so wonderful society, the truth is...its not that big of a deal, it happens all the time, maybe not to the point of death, but it still happens...and in your own homes as well!!

very very true.

how many children do people think are being abused that arent killed?

none?

yet they go unpunished because the they stop short of the ultimate abuse.

child abuse has been happening since humans became, and will go on behind closed doors until we are no longer physical beings.

not saying to accept it, just that its not really that uncommon

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

Yes bad things happen all the time, you dont get to hear about as well, but i think this was one of the worst i have heard about.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *isscheekychopsWoman over a year ago

The land of grey peas and bacon

She will be under the watchful eye of multi agency for many years to come and if she became pregnant then assessments will be carried out in terms of her ability to raise a child.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"She will be under the watchful eye of multi agency for many years to come and if she became pregnant then assessments will be carried out in terms of her ability to raise a child. "

So her human rights could be removed??

that's stupid!!

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *eryBigGirlWoman over a year ago

East Yorkshire

very very true.

how many children do people think are being abused that arent killed?

none?

yet they go unpunished because the they stop short of the ultimate abuse.

child abuse has been happening since humans became, and will go on behind closed doors until we are no longer physical beings.

not saying to accept it, just that its not really that uncommon"

Exactly it's never going to stop and it's not always going to be uncovered. There's also the argument of what is child abuse. What is classed as abuse to one person may not be seen as abusive to others.

Take for example boarding school. In some peoples eyes this is seen as a common occurrence whereas to others it could be seen as abusive and legalised abandonment. I have a friend who was left at boarding school by her parents aged 8 and she detested it and cried every single night for the years she was there and it still effects her to this day. Was that abusive to her as a child??

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

Yes bad things happen all the time, you dont get to hear about as well, but i think this was one of the worst i have heard about."

Well I know lots of people that suffered worse than babyP, survived only to endure more suffering, there are FAR worse crimes going on at the moment,

How can our government slaughter millions of people in their own countries..and yet they STILL the peoples support (via tax).

Now...that's disgusting!

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

I doubt she will be allowed to keep any future children she has.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) OP over a year ago

Although I’m very much against mob-rule and vigilante reactionaries and the advocates of a string’em up culture...

I’m not sure its rational to expect every member of the public to automatically align their emotional indignation of those individuals who commit heinous crimes with that of a reform system which advocates the matter is all but concluded once the perpetrators of those awful crimes have served the shortest possible prison sentence sanctioned by the court and convinced the parole board they no longer pose a threat to society.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *isscheekychopsWoman over a year ago

The land of grey peas and bacon

"She will be under the watchful eye of multi agency for many years to come and if she became pregnant then assessments will be carried out in terms of her ability to raise a child.

So her human rights could be removed??

that's stupid!!

I never said anything about removal of human rights. She will be supported by many agencies on her release the same as everyone else and if children die in someone care and they go on to have further children then it is assessed as to whether that child can be in their care...im not sure what part of my statement above wad stupid.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ptimusDMan over a year ago

Birmingham

The law may be an ass but it is the law that we are governed by, so justice has served its course as far as her case is concerned.

She now has the right to carry on with her life, if you can call it that, like any other citizen.

To this end she will probably be given a new identity or given further assistance to protect her right to a private life. The costs of which will obviously be borne by the taxpayer.

As bizarre as it may sound, she can also be classed as a victim because no right thinking person, with free will and in full control of their faculties will carry on the way she did leading up to her son's death.

If the public can quench its thirst for revenge and allow her rehabilitation to take place without interference, she may well learn her lesson and rejoin society as a decent citizen.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) OP over a year ago

Punishment and forgiveness are two entirely different reactions…

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

I think we're very lucky living in a country where people such as her and the bulger killers are allowed to walk amongst us once there time has been served.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

But they don't pose a threat to society..only to their own child and even then..if the said child hasn't been registered then the child wouldn't even be a member of society!!

I don't think punishment is the way forward here, I think understanding the circumstances and helping the ofender to overcome them would be more benefitial to the child, parent and society!! A wee bit of

and understanding will always win over hate and revenge!

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"She will be under the watchful eye of multi agency for many years to come and if she became pregnant then assessments will be carried out in terms of her ability to raise a child.

So her human rights could be removed??

that's stupid!!

Sweetheart if someone other than YOU decides wether or not you can keep your own children....that IS removal of ones rights as a HUMAN!

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) OP over a year ago

But surely in order for any civilised society to protect human rights its also necessary for that society to restrict the behaviour of individuals whose actions have been proven to cause a negative impact on the rights of others to live safely within that society….

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ptimusDMan over a year ago

Birmingham

"I think we're very lucky living in a country where people such as her and the bulger killers are allowed to walk amongst us once there time has been served.

And what will you rather was done to them after they'd served their time?

Maybe we should find an uninhabited island and send them there to spend the rest of their lives.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

[Removed by poster at 01/11/13 13:02:22]

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

[Removed by poster at 01/11/13 13:03:05]

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *rumCoupleCouple over a year ago

birmingham

"She will be under the watchful eye of multi agency for many years to come and if she became pregnant then assessments will be carried out in terms of her ability to raise a child.

So her human rights could be removed??

that's stupid!!

Sweetheart if someone other than YOU decides wether or not you can keep your own children....that IS removal of ones rights as a HUMAN!

So? It's a human right to be free, yet we lock people up.

Funny that most times we read the words "human rights" it's in the context of somebody not understanding them.

There should be a civics course on the syllabus

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *aucy3Couple over a year ago

glasgow

"I think we're very lucky living in a country where people such as her and the bulger killers are allowed to walk amongst us once there time has been served.

And what will you rather was done to them after they'd served their time?

Maybe we should find an uninhabited island and send them there to spend the rest of their lives."

The victims don't get a second chance,why should the perpetrators.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"But surely in order for any civilised society to protect human rights its also necessary for that society to restrict the behaviour of individuals whose actions have been proven to cause a negative impact on the rights of others to live safely within that society….

Society does restrict the behaviour of individuals whose actions have been proven to cause a negative impact on the rights of others to live safely within that society!

They get locked up for a specified amount of time, and then released after that time has been served.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

Bring hanging back

End off

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *rynewMan over a year ago

warrington

Sorry but this is a statement that has wound me up!

right or wrong, justice HAS been served.

emotion has no place in a courtroom, as thats when judgements become skewed and innacurate.

yes, she allowed her child to be abused and killed.

do we know that she is a hard faced bitch or was she suffering the same abuse?

to me, she looks a little 'simple' to say the least so i wouldnt be so sure she was in full ownership of her faculties, but thats just an opinion made from looking at pictures of the woman.

suffice to say, she didnt lift a finger to stop her child being killed, but conversly, she didnt actually lift a finger to kill her child...so the fight thing is kinda relevant"

I am not for one minute saying justice hasn't been served but what I am saying is that the sentence for what has occurred has been extremely lenient and that the judges had a set of guidelines that they have followed and imparted a minimum sentence which granted has been served.

With regards to her persona and state of mind you can not judge a person as you have done simply on the photographs that you have seen so to say she is "simple" is extremely judgemental and if you like bringing your emotions into it.

I have not said that she was innocent or guilty of the whole thing but an act of violence such as a fight lasts a short period of time where as the abuse taken place with baby peter was sustained, planned, motivated, premeditated, tortorus and cruel. These two scenarios that you mention are so far apart that you are being blinded by the outcome.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *isscheekychopsWoman over a year ago

The land of grey peas and bacon

"She will be under the watchful eye of multi agency for many years to come and if she became pregnant then assessments will be carried out in terms of her ability to raise a child.

So her human rights could be removed??

that's stupid!!

Sweetheart if someone other than YOU decides wether or not you can keep your own children....that IS removal of ones rights as a HUMAN!

please don't call me sweetheart.....what utter rubbish that its a removal of human rights its called safeguarding of children which is allowed in 2013....

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *nnyMan over a year ago

Glasgow

Sorry but this is a statement that has wound me up!

right or wrong, justice HAS been served.

emotion has no place in a courtroom, as thats when judgements become skewed and innacurate.

yes, she allowed her child to be abused and killed.

do we know that she is a hard faced bitch or was she suffering the same abuse?

to me, she looks a little 'simple' to say the least so i wouldnt be so sure she was in full ownership of her faculties, but thats just an opinion made from looking at pictures of the woman.

suffice to say, she didnt lift a finger to stop her child being killed, but conversly, she didnt actually lift a finger to kill her child...so the fight thing is kinda relevant

I've mentioned above that I didn't sit through the trial and I suspect nobody else here did either.

That suggests that all comments on what did or didn't happen to cause this death are gleaned from whichever bit of the media suits the poster's agenda.

Given what we know about the press and the telly, that's maybe not the brightest move.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

I guess this thread may well turn out to be controversial in as much of others opinions and thoughts.

I agree and disagree with what others have said but for my tuppence worth albeit she was party to allowing this innocent child to suffer at the hands of others a sentence was passed down and guess she has served her time.

That all said and done I for one certainly wouldn't want to know her or for that matter ever consider arranging a meet with her if she were a member on here in fact I would rather slide down a mountain naked with razor blades for brakes on me bollocks but guess she has served her time and as rightly pointed out it is very unlikely to get peace wherever she tries to settle.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

To stand by and allow anyone to inflict pain and suffering on your child makes you just as guilty as they are.I hope Karma prevails.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *iewMan over a year ago
Forum Mod

Angus & Findhorn

I hope she carries the pain until her last breath, but I also hope that she will move forward and contribute to society in a positive way.

poor wee soul.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) OP over a year ago

Society does restrict the behaviour of individuals whose actions have been proven to cause a negative impact on the rights of others to live safely within that society!

They get locked up for a specified amount of time, and then released after that time has been served."

Fair point and one, which I totally support... My comment was simply to illustrate that defending Human Rights within a society sometimes requires the temporay removal of individual freedom from those who willing violate the rights of others....

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ptimusDMan over a year ago

Birmingham

"I think we're very lucky living in a country where people such as her and the bulger killers are allowed to walk amongst us once there time has been served.

And what will you rather was done to them after they'd served their time?

Maybe we should find an uninhabited island and send them there to spend the rest of their lives.

The victims don't get a second chance,why should the perpetrators."

It so happens that the death penalty is not an option. So, short of that what would you like to see done?

Locking them for life isn't a viable option either because there simply aren't enough prison spaces and in any case the costs will be prohibitive.

Every new prisoner costs £120,000 in their first year and almost £40,000 every year afterwards. It will have cost the taxpayer less if Baby P's mother had the same upbringing as any of the royal offspring for the first 18 years of her life. And I mean nannies, riding lessons, luxury holidays, private & finishing school included. She will most definitely have turned out a lot better than she did and will have given more in over the course of her lifetime back to society than what was spent on her until she was 18.

And by any calculation, that will be better value for money to the taxpayer than a life sentence in prison.

Think about it.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"I think we're very lucky living in a country where people such as her and the bulger killers are allowed to walk amongst us once there time has been served.

And what will you rather was done to them after they'd served their time?

Maybe we should find an uninhabited island and send them there to spend the rest of their lives."

Didn't our so called Queen already try that?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

I don't understand these types of threads. People get het up and argue the ins n outs of what happened/what didn't happen, without having a clue as to what actually happened!

If one single person knows exactly what took place within that household, then please, by all means, have your say on the merits of whether or not she should be allowed out of prison after serving her sentence.

Until then, all we can do is speculate her part in this awful crime. Don't we hear about the women that are abused and made to do things they find abhorrant all the time in the press? Perhaps, just perhaps, this is another example of that abuse.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"I don't understand these types of threads. People get het up and argue the ins n outs of what happened/what didn't happen, without having a clue as to what actually happened!

it could well be, but as a mother myself I can not understand how a mother can stand by and watch her child beaten to save herself

There is nothing on this word that would make me stand by and watch that happen to my child, I would take a beating every day to save my child from getting it

If this is what happened of course, we don't know if it is

but then we are all different

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

I do have a problem with this sort of person walking freely around the streets where my children play.That is my right. If you don't have a problem with convicted child killers/pedophiles who have served their time walking the streets where your children play then I suggest you write to the home office and let them know that you're only too happy to have them move in next door, now that their debt to society had been paid in full.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) OP over a year ago

"I don't understand these types of threads. People get het up and argue the ins n outs of what happened/what didn't happen, without having a clue as to what actually happened!

Yeah but this isn't a formal inquest, it's just an open forum for people to engage in thought exchange and air any _iews they might have that may or may not have relevance to the case...

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *rumCoupleCouple over a year ago

birmingham

All this thread shows, is why we have courts, judges, juries and the law.

Thankfully.

It's quite disturbing how many people seem to discount the idea of rehabilitation, which is core to the concept of our criminal justice system, which has 3 distinct functions:

1) Punish the offender

2) Rehabilitate the offender

3) Protect society from the offender

If we ignore (2) we effectively end up with every criminal getting a life sentence. And as the jails fill up, and we find ourselves spending more and more on keeping people locked up ????

Or do we follow the example of Draco of Greece, who when asked why the penalty for every crime was death replied that lesser crimes deserve it, and for more serious crimes there was no greater? No surprise that's where the word "Draconian" comes from.

Everyone likes the idea of being "tough on crime", but folk need to bear in mind that "criminal" is a construct of society, and subject to the whims of society. Laws *do* change.

This is a general comment on law and order, not a specific comment on this particular case or crime.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Makes me shudder to think that someone like that is given early release. A minimum of five years should be exactly that, not four years. Where's the justice for the poor child who suffered agonising torture and never had a chance at life.

She is one of the lowest forms of life and doesn't deserve freedom or compassion."

This ........

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

please don't call me sweetheart.....what utter rubbish that its a removal of human rights its called safeguarding of children which is allowed in 2013...."

"Safeguarding of children" is that by-law official term sweetheart?

I don't remember giving my approval of any by-laws..

Therefore they would be acting against MY personal rights as a living being to take a child that began as a part of me that remains in MY care until that child leaves my care when he/she sees fit....who else should be able to determine such things?? No one in my opinion!!

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"But they don't pose a threat to society..only to their own child and even then..if the said child hasn't been registered then the child wouldn't even be a member of society!!

and understanding will always win over hate and revenge!

A little to late when the child is dead !!!!

A child is part of our society registered or not

The supposed leaders of society are failing a lot of our children which is a disgrace !

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *rumCoupleCouple over a year ago

birmingham

please don't call me sweetheart.....what utter rubbish that its a removal of human rights its called safeguarding of children which is allowed in 2013....

"Safeguarding of children" is that by-law official term sweetheart?

I don't remember giving my approval of any by-laws..

Society and the law don't share your opinion, I'm afraid. Lifes like that.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

please don't call me sweetheart.....what utter rubbish that its a removal of human rights its called safeguarding of children which is allowed in 2013....

"Safeguarding of children" is that by-law official term sweetheart?

I don't remember giving my approval of any by-laws..

Your opinion but not part of British law

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

Nobody accidentally systematically abuses or neglects a child to death, if you can't do the time, don't do the crime, the time should be life. I'll gladly pay the prison costs to keep scum off the streets.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *bthreeCouple over a year ago

Yeovil

"she wasnt released early.

taking into account the time she spent on parole she has served the 5 years.

however low she is, she has served her time.

its such a shame she cant be sterilised so as not to put any further offspring of hers in harms way

Ditto

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"I do have a problem with this sort of person walking freely around the streets where my children play.That is my right. If you don't have a problem with convicted child killers/pedophiles who have served their time walking the streets where your children play then I suggest you write to the home office and let them know that you're only too happy to have them move in next door, now that their debt to society had been paid in full."

Its YOU who would have to write to the home office, as ex-cons do and always have lived amongst us...they ARE us!

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

I'm not a child killer.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

please don't call me sweetheart.....what utter rubbish that its a removal of human rights its called safeguarding of children which is allowed in 2013....

"Safeguarding of children" is that by-law official term sweetheart?

I don't remember giving my approval of any by-laws..

Your opinion but not part of British law "

Very true...the British law does pander to every idiot who thinks they should have the RIGHT to interfere in other peoples lives..I DON'T!

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

Society and the law don't share your opinion, I'm afraid. Lifes like that."

Thank god. Otherwise incest would be legal!

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"I'm not a child killer. "

I think what she means is child killers are normal everyday people to the outside world, like everyone else, they work, they have family, they lead normal life's, as an outsider you never know what goes on behind closed doors and people like the 3 who killed this little boy could be any one of us to someone else

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"I'm not a child killer. "

But you have broken laws...why shouldn't you get "life" or better still "death"?

What makes you better than criminals?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"she wasnt released early.

taking into account the time she spent on parole she has served the 5 years.

however low she is, she has served her time.

its such a shame she cant be sterilised so as not to put any further offspring of hers in harms way

Ditto

ditto + 1

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

What I'm saying is I don't want child killers released, ever. If you don't mind them being released and watching your children playing in the park etc then you're very welcome to have them as your neighbours. I would choose not to have them as my neighbours. I know this is impossible but this is my opinion.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"I'm not a child killer.

But you have broken laws...why shouldn't you get "life" or better still "death"?

What makes you better than criminals?"

Hmmm what makes me better than a child killer... That's a toughy.... I'll have to get back to you.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

please don't call me sweetheart.....what utter rubbish that its a removal of human rights its called safeguarding of children which is allowed in 2013....

"Safeguarding of children" is that by-law official term sweetheart?

I don't remember giving my approval of any by-laws..

Your opinion but not part of British law

Very true...the British law does pander to every idiot who thinks they should have the RIGHT to interfere in other peoples lives..I DON'T!

We should not interfere with child abuse and murder , really ?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

" Perhaps, just perhaps, this is another example of that abuse.

it could well be, but as a mother myself I can not understand how a mother can stand by and watch her child beaten to save herself

There is nothing on this word that would make me stand by and watch that happen to my child, I would take a beating every day to save my child from getting it

If this is what happened of course, we don't know if it is

but then we are all different "

If someone entered your property, tied you up and gagged you, then systematically abused your children, you could do nothing about it. Now make those ties and gag psychological, can you now see that PERHAPS she simply couldn't protect her baby?

Like others have said we do not know the full details.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

Society and the law don't share your opinion, I'm afraid. Lifes like that.

Thank god. Otherwise incest would be legal!"

Well if its good enough for those that supposedly RULE us and run OUR country? But its ok for us to turn a blind eye to the hideous crimes of the throne and the church?

We are full of hypocrisy are we not?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

Society and the law don't share your opinion, I'm afraid. Lifes like that.

Thank god. Otherwise incest would be legal!

Well if its good enough for those that supposedly RULE us and run OUR country? But its ok for us to turn a blind eye to the hideous crimes of the throne and the church?

We are full of hypocrisy are we not?

Present day?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *isscheekychopsWoman over a year ago

The land of grey peas and bacon

please don't call me sweetheart.....what utter rubbish that its a removal of human rights its called safeguarding of children which is allowed in 2013....

"Safeguarding of children" is that by-law official term sweetheart?

I don't remember giving my approval of any by-laws..

you live in your bubble and ill live in mine...

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

" Perhaps, just perhaps, this is another example of that abuse.

it could well be, but as a mother myself I can not understand how a mother can stand by and watch her child beaten to save herself

There is nothing on this word that would make me stand by and watch that happen to my child, I would take a beating every day to save my child from getting it

If this is what happened of course, we don't know if it is

but then we are all different

Like others have said we do not know the full details."

me personally no I cant, that does not by no means make me right though, I just can not see how any mother would sit back and let her own child get beaten to death in order to save her own neck, I would have thought any loving mother would jump in to save their child getting tortured even if it ment getting a beating yourself

like I said that does not mean I think im right I just cant understand how anybody could sit back and let that happen, im sorry I just cant

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *eryBigGirlWoman over a year ago

East Yorkshire

please don't call me sweetheart.....what utter rubbish that its a removal of human rights its called safeguarding of children which is allowed in 2013....

"Safeguarding of children" is that by-law official term sweetheart?

I don't remember giving my approval of any by-laws..

And what about the rights of the child to be brought up in an environment safe from harm!! Thankfully there are laws and people who govern this and do have the right to remove a child from a parents care!!!

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

please don't call me sweetheart.....what utter rubbish that its a removal of human rights its called safeguarding of children which is allowed in 2013....

"Safeguarding of children" is that by-law official term sweetheart?

I don't remember giving my approval of any by-laws..

well this thread shows that's debatable

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *rumCoupleCouple over a year ago

birmingham

" Perhaps, just perhaps, this is another example of that abuse.

it could well be, but as a mother myself I can not understand how a mother can stand by and watch her child beaten to save herself

There is nothing on this word that would make me stand by and watch that happen to my child, I would take a beating every day to save my child from getting it

If this is what happened of course, we don't know if it is

but then we are all different

Like others have said we do not know the full details.

like I said that does not mean I think im right I just cant understand how anybody could sit back and let that happen, im sorry I just cant"

There are mothers (and fathers) who have killed their own children or helped others to kill them, trying to "exorcise demons".

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

please don't call me sweetheart.....what utter rubbish that its a removal of human rights its called safeguarding of children which is allowed in 2013....

"Safeguarding of children" is that by-law official term sweetheart?

I don't remember giving my approval of any by-laws..

Your opinion but not part of British law

Very true...the British law does pander to every idiot who thinks they should have the RIGHT to interfere in other peoples lives..I DON'T!

We should not interfere with child abuse and murder , really ?"

Nope....mind yer own buisness, educate and council people who abuse, offer help! All you people want is PUNISH, PUNISH, PUNISH, PUNISH!! Kids don't want to be apart from their abusive parents, they want help NOT removal, why do you think they don't tell??

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *eryBigGirlWoman over a year ago

East Yorkshire

please don't call me sweetheart.....what utter rubbish that its a removal of human rights its called safeguarding of children which is allowed in 2013....

"Safeguarding of children" is that by-law official term sweetheart?

I don't remember giving my approval of any by-laws..

well this thread shows that's debatable

True but for each one that sadly gets missed and hits the media there's many many others who are saved from a life of abuse but no one bothers to highlight them

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

please don't call me sweetheart.....what utter rubbish that its a removal of human rights its called safeguarding of children which is allowed in 2013....

"Safeguarding of children" is that by-law official term sweetheart?

I don't remember giving my approval of any by-laws..

Your opinion but not part of British law

Very true...the British law does pander to every idiot who thinks they should have the RIGHT to interfere in other peoples lives..I DON'T!

We should not interfere with child abuse and murder , really ?

I thought you was on a wind up for a long time, I know you are now

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

please don't call me sweetheart.....what utter rubbish that its a removal of human rights its called safeguarding of children which is allowed in 2013....

"Safeguarding of children" is that by-law official term sweetheart?

I don't remember giving my approval of any by-laws..

Your opinion but not part of British law

Very true...the British law does pander to every idiot who thinks they should have the RIGHT to interfere in other peoples lives..I DON'T!

We should not interfere with child abuse and murder , really ?

I thought you was on a wind up for a long time, I know you are now

I don't wind people up...please don't make personal assumptions about ME on a public forum...it IS against rules, this is a discussion!!!

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *eryBigGirlWoman over a year ago

East Yorkshire

They don't tell because they're scared, they don't tell because they don't know its wrong, they don't tell because they are too young to tell, they don't tell because they're told they will be punished!!

Many abused kids want to stay with their parents because to them its normal life and they don't know they're being abused but many don't want to stay either. I'm all for reeducation as often those who abuse have deep rooted problems stemming from their own childhoods but never whilst leaving a vulnerable child in their care!!

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *isscheekychopsWoman over a year ago

The land of grey peas and bacon

ya think naughty

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

I would like to know who re education all these people if we are all minding our own business one contradicts the other

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *eryBigGirlWoman over a year ago

East Yorkshire

"I would like to know who re education all these people if we are all minding our own business one contradicts the other

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

Discusted.... speechless

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"I would like to know who re education all these people if we are all minding our own business one contradicts the other

There is a difference with helping folk and forcing folk ye know...

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"I would like to know who re education all these people if we are all minding our own business one contradicts the other

There is a difference with helping folk and forcing folk ye know...

totally agree but not everyone wants help, what then? we just leave them to get on with it? you cant force help on someone its something they have to want and if they don't want help you cant just leave them to abuse kids, sometimes we have to poke our noses in where its not wanted for the sake of the innocent

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *lentyoffun40Couple over a year ago

Lancashire

Well said

I work in cp and my role is listening to children ( not families) about their lives

I've only met one child who didn't want to remain with their family . The rest Just want their parents to stop .

Millions of children are subject to child protection plans . Nobody ever mentions the success stories about families getting support and turning things around

It happens every day but we don't here it and I guess until you work in this arena you never will

Fact is there will always be children that slip through the net . As shit as that is its impossible to accept that every child is going to be safe .

Lets be thankful we have a child protection system that on the whole works very well and we have a justice system

If baby p's mum has served her sentence then leave her be

The judge who came up with 5 years is the one you need to be questioning

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *nnyMan over a year ago

Glasgow

Well said

I work in cp and my role is listening to children ( not families) about their lives

I've only met one child who didn't want to remain with their family . The rest Just want their parents to stop .

Millions of children are subject to child protection plans . Nobody ever mentions the success stories about families getting support and turning things around

It happens every day but we don't here it and I guess until you work in this arena you never will

Fact is there will always be children that slip through the net . As shit as that is its impossible to accept that every child is going to be safe .

Lets be thankful we have a child protection system that on the whole works very well and we have a justice system

If baby p's mum has served her sentence then leave her be

The judge who came up with 5 years is the one you need to be questioning "

The judge is just about the only person in this who's heard the whole story.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"I would like to know who re education all these people if we are all minding our own business one contradicts the other

There is a difference with helping folk and forcing folk ye know...

Yes leave them to be abused and abuse others...you can't fix a problem if you REFUSE to go to the originating source of it, usually in the fucked up mind of the abuser, fix the abuser, fix the issue. Ignore the abuser and continue to treat them as monsters rather than the abused people that were kicked aside by THIS society when they most needed our help!

Its a vicious circle perpetuated by our condemnation!!

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

We really are a fk'd up country-she should at least be sterallised.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *rumCoupleCouple over a year ago

birmingham

I really don't know what's going on in the heads of people who defend child abusers / murderers. We're talking about defenceless CHILDREN at the mercy of ADULTS here! Some people need to go away and have a word with themselves."

Just out of interest who here has defended child abusers ?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"People like that child abusers or sexaul abusers or rapests should all die to free up space and to stop them afending again well it would save money won't ever have to worry about them again and won't as a tax payer have to pay for there petty lifes in prison if it was legal I would go out of my way and collect there bountys for killing them my self

So you'd like to be a murderer?

No and yes to all the sick people out there that deserve it I would collect there bountys overall today's world is differant but ide like to make a change for the better if you know what I mean not for the worst hope that made sence

But I get wound up with all the sick people that only in my eyes are getting a slap on the rist

They get a clean jail cell with all the stuff they can get away with behind bars only to come out and do it all again

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

So you'd like to be a murderer?

But I get wound up with all the sick people that only in my eyes are getting a slap on the rist

They get a clean jail cell with all the stuff they can get away with behind bars only to come out and do it all again"

So you want to play god and decides who lives and who dies?

Just like the abuser we are discussing....

like I said earlier...WE are NO different to the murderers, rapists and whomever else you wanna throw onto the shit heap!

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

So you'd like to be a murderer?

But I get wound up with all the sick people that only in my eyes are getting a slap on the rist

They get a clean jail cell with all the stuff they can get away with behind bars only to come out and do it all again

So you want to play god and decides who lives and who dies?

Just like the abuser we are discussing....

like I said earlier...WE are NO different to the murderers, rapists and whomever else you wanna throw onto the shit heap!

And you're just as wrong as you were earlier, in my opinion.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"She will be under the watchful eye of multi agency for many years to come and if she became pregnant then assessments will be carried out in terms of her ability to raise a child.

So her human rights could be removed??

that's stupid!!

Sweetheart if someone other than YOU decides wether or not you can keep your own children....that IS removal of ones rights as a HUMAN!

So? It's a human right to be free, yet we lock people up.

Funny that most times we read the words "human rights" it's in the context of somebody not understanding them.

There should be a civics course on the syllabus

I'm more than happy to educate you on the rights of a living being?? Far better than having the people who rule us teaching you their bastardised versions!

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

And you're just as wrong as you were earlier, in my opinion."

Really?

How can my own opinion be wrong?

Are you sure its not just different?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

Society and the law don't share your opinion, I'm afraid. Lifes like that.

Thank god. Otherwise incest would be legal!

Well if its good enough for those that supposedly RULE us and run OUR country? But its ok for us to turn a blind eye to the hideous crimes of the throne and the church?

We are full of hypocrisy are we not?

Present day?"

And???

Are the Royals and Church not still covered with the blood of others???

Yes...and why?

Because we allow it!!

Sort the ones that run the country before worring about the rest of us...

How can you condemn us but not "our betters"

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *aucy3Couple over a year ago

glasgow

"I think we're very lucky living in a country where people such as her and the bulger killers are allowed to walk amongst us once there time has been served.

And what will you rather was done to them after they'd served their time?

Maybe we should find an uninhabited island and send them there to spend the rest of their lives.

The victims don't get a second chance,why should the perpetrators.

It so happens that the death penalty is not an option. So, short of that what would you like to see done?

Locking them for life isn't a viable option either because there simply aren't enough prison spaces and in any case the costs will be prohibitive.

Every new prisoner costs £120,000 in their first year and almost £40,000 every year afterwards. It will have cost the taxpayer less if Baby P's mother had the same upbringing as any of the royal offspring for the first 18 years of her life. And I mean nannies, riding lessons, luxury holidays, private & finishing school included. She will most definitely have turnedI out a lot better than she did and will have given more in over the course of her lifetime back to society than what was spent on her until she was 18.

And by any calculation, that will be better value for money to the taxpayer than a life sentence in prison.

Think about it."

I've thought about it.

Anyone guilty of such a heinous crime,should remain in jail,for as long as the murdered child remains dead.

Dead people,the victims,don't get a second chance.

When we start Seeing the financial implications,as more important than the victims right to life,we become a sadder society.

having said that,I'm thinking,the cost of keeping baby Ps mother incognito,for the rest of her life,Will be considerable.

Perhaps outstripping the cost of letting her rot in jail.

So even the financial implications argument,doesn't really hold water.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

Ok if you want peodophile child killers living next door to you then you're welcome to them. I'd rather not.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *heffmistressWoman over a year ago

sheffield

"Any person convicted of any crime against children should be expected to serve the full sentence given to them. Period ."

Well thank f*ck you are not a law maker! She has served her time, that is how our justice system works. It is not ruled by the mob

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

Society and the law don't share your opinion, I'm afraid. Lifes like that.

Thank god. Otherwise incest would be legal!

Well if its good enough for those that supposedly RULE us and run OUR country? But its ok for us to turn a blind eye to the hideous crimes of the throne and the church?

We are full of hypocrisy are we not?

Present day?

And???

Are the Royals and Church not still covered with the blood of others???

Yes...and why?

Because we allow it!!

Sort the ones that run the country before worring about the rest of us...

How can you condemn us but not "our betters"

I asked a question that wasn't answered so your comment only makes assumptions. Who is condemning who?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *heffmistressWoman over a year ago

sheffield

"Ok if you want peodophile child killers living next door to you then you're welcome to them. I'd rather not."

But a granny killer living next door to you is ok?

How do you know the past of your neighbours?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *RYBBWCouple over a year ago

Leeds.

"She will be under the watchful eye of multi agency for many years to come and if she became pregnant then assessments will be carried out in terms of her ability to raise a child.

So her human rights could be removed??

that's stupid!!

She permanently removed her baby son's human rights. She has no right to moan about hers being infringed.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *nnyMan over a year ago

Glasgow

"She will be under the watchful eye of multi agency for many years to come and if she became pregnant then assessments will be carried out in terms of her ability to raise a child.

So her human rights could be removed??

that's stupid!!

She permanently removed her baby son's human rights. She has no right to moan about hers being infringed."

IS she moaning?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"We are full of hypocrisy are we not?

Present day?

And???

Are the Royals and Church not still covered with the blood of others???

Yes...and why?

Because we allow it!!

Sort the ones that run the country before worring about the rest of us...

How can you condemn us but not "our betters"

I asked a question that wasn't answered so your comment only makes assumptions. Who is condemning who?"

I add - if I was an ancestor of a royal bastard or of the Borgia pope, should I be accountable for their sins?

History is there for us to learn from not make comparisons to cos it suits our argument... It's ridiculous.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"She will be under the watchful eye of multi agency for many years to come and if she became pregnant then assessments will be carried out in terms of her ability to raise a child.

So her human rights could be removed??

that's

stupid!!

She permanently removed her baby son's human rights. She has no right to moan about hers being infringed."

She isn't, as far as I'm aware!

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

It does make me laugh when people talk about this so called civilised Society that we live in when no other Animal on this planet is known to treat or allow to be treated its own offspring the way Humans do.

Social Services and other Government Agencies ..Weren't they the ones who were found to have Failed this child ?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Any person convicted of any crime against children should be expected to serve the full sentence given to them. Period .

Well thank f*ck you are not a law maker! She has served her time, that is how our justice system works. It is not ruled by the mob"

It maybe an emotive subject but do you really think asking for a full sentence to be served is mob rule

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"It does make me laugh when people talk about this so called civilised Society that we live in when no other Animal on this planet is known to treat or allow to be treated its own offspring the way Humans do.

Social Services and other Government Agencies ..Weren't they the ones who were found to have Failed this child ?"

Most species that live in social groups such as ours DO behave in the exact same way as humans the only difference being, we constantly judge each other while portraying ourselves to be superior, where as all other species act upon instinct, they deal with negative social acts upon their groups instantly and then its done with, they don't persecute each other for a lifetime!!

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *nnyMan over a year ago

Glasgow

"Any person convicted of any crime against children should be expected to serve the full sentence given to them. Period .

Well thank f*ck you are not a law maker! She has served her time, that is how our justice system works. It is not ruled by the mob

It maybe an emotive subject but do you really think asking for a full sentence to be served is mob rule"

She served her full sentence. You/ we may not think the sentence was sufficient but the judge did and the CPS didn't challenge it.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *nnyMan over a year ago

Glasgow

Social Services and other Government Agencies ..Weren't they the ones who were found to have Failed this child ?

Many animals kill their young.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *aisy100Woman over a year ago

wakefield

"she wasnt released early.

taking into account the time she spent on parole she has served the 5 years.

however low she is, she has served her time.

its such a shame she cant be sterilised so as not to put any further offspring of hers in harms way

sorry, yes, remand.

lets not forget, she didnt kill her child, she allowed others to kill him.

there is a slight difference, although again, still distasteful.

would anyone here like to be convicted for 50 years because they saw a fight, took no action, but it resulted in someone being killed?

thats kinda the same thing.

she got given a sentence and she has served it.

sure she wont get a seconds peace when people find her anyway, so she is getting a life sentence.

Sorry but this is a statement that has wound me up!

I totally agree with your comments, the child was her own flesh and blood and it was her duty to protect him, a random person on the street doesnt come anywhere near your own child, you cant compare the two.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

Social Services and other Government Agencies ..Weren't they the ones who were found to have Failed this child ?

I would disagree there, very few Mammals kill purely for pleasure and i cant think of one that would sit there and watch its offspring be systematically be tortured by another, and yes they do tend to act instantly, either by banishing from the group forever or killing

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

Call me old fashioned but I do like the idea of capital punishment being brought back where there is no shadow of doubt on the persons guilt! !

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *nnyMan over a year ago

Glasgow

"Call me old fashioned but I do like the idea of capital punishment being brought back where there is no shadow of doubt on the persons guilt! ! "

There's a whole thread elsewhere on capital punishment and why it won't happen.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Call me old fashioned but I do like the idea of capital punishment being brought back where there is no shadow of doubt on the persons guilt! ! "

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Any person convicted of any crime against children should be expected to serve the full sentence given to them. Period .

Well thank f*ck you are not a law maker! She has served her time, that is how our justice system works. It is not ruled by the mob

It maybe an emotive subject but do you really think asking for a full sentence to be served is mob rule

She served her full sentence. You/ we may not think the sentence was sufficient but the judge did and the CPS didn't challenge it."

I don't disagree with that

I replied to a post that is was mob law to ask for a full sentence to be served

And ...... It is not

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Any person convicted of any crime against children should be expected to serve the full sentence given to them. Period .

Well thank f*ck you are not a law maker! She has served her time, that is how our justice system works. It is not ruled by the mob

It maybe an emotive subject but do you really think asking for a full sentence to be served is mob rule

She served her full sentence. You/ we may not think the sentence was sufficient but the judge did and the CPS didn't challenge it."

I don't disagree with that

I replied to a post that is was mob law to ask for a full sentence to be served

And ...... It is not

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ugby 123Couple over a year ago
Forum Mod

O o O oo

Posts have been removed.

If people keep posting experiences of their own the thread will have to be shut, so please don't do it.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ugby 123Couple over a year ago
Forum Mod

O o O oo

would anyone here like to be convicted for 50 years because they saw a fight, took no action, but it resulted in someone being killed?

thats kinda the same thing.

No it isn't, and to try and compare the two is insulting to the memory of what happened to the little lad.

I find it a worse crime because I would protect my children even now if needed ( they are obviously grown up ) so I can't understand any woman failing their own child , and she failed her child big time.

To the sentance, I think it should have been longer when convicted, but as it it wasn't and it is over, then there isn't any point in anyone shouting about it.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

It was terrible what happened to that lad.

It is terrible that her sentence was not longer.

It is terrible that we have these sort of people in society.

It also makes me sick that Sharon Shoesmith got a 6 figure payout.

It seems that the life of this child and the everything around him after his death is sickening.

I hope his mother lives in terror of someone recognising her. I hope she does not sleep at night wondering if her door will be kicked down by someone seeking vengeance...... just then she may know what her child lived with every day of his short life.

As for Sharon Shoesmith... what a revolting person.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *tirling DarkCouple over a year ago

Stirling

Social Services and other Government Agencies ..Weren't they the ones who were found to have Failed this child ?"

You need to do more research, many animals eat their young!

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *tirling DarkCouple over a year ago

Stirling

"It was terrible what happened to that lad.

It is terrible that her sentence was not longer.

It is terrible that we have these sort of people in society.

It also makes me sick that Sharon Shoesmith got a 6 figure payout.

It seems that the life of this child and the everything around him after his death is sickening.

As for Sharon Shoesmith... what a revolting person."

And of course you know Ms Shoesmith so well to make that comment. Or are you just merely jumping on the Daily Mail band wagon?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *lentyoffun40Couple over a year ago

Lancashire

"It was terrible what happened to that lad.

It is terrible that her sentence was not longer.

It is terrible that we have these sort of people in society.

It also makes me sick that Sharon Shoesmith got a 6 figure payout.

It seems that the life of this child and the everything around him after his death is sickening.

As for Sharon Shoesmith... what a revolting person."

And you sir no nothing about her or her role

Clueless

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"It was terrible what happened to that lad.

It is terrible that her sentence was not longer.

It is terrible that we have these sort of people in society.

It also makes me sick that Sharon Shoesmith got a 6 figure payout.

It seems that the life of this child and the everything around him after his death is sickening.

As for Sharon Shoesmith... what a revolting person.

And of course you know Ms Shoesmith so well to make that comment. Or are you just merely jumping on the Daily Mail band wagon? "

pathetic response

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *tirling DarkCouple over a year ago

Stirling

"It was terrible what happened to that lad.

It is terrible that her sentence was not longer.

It is terrible that we have these sort of people in society.

It also makes me sick that Sharon Shoesmith got a 6 figure payout.

It seems that the life of this child and the everything around him after his death is sickening.

As for Sharon Shoesmith... what a revolting person.

And of course you know Ms Shoesmith so well to make that comment. Or are you just merely jumping on the Daily Mail band wagon?

pathetic response

And calling someone revolting when you do not know the whole story, and the UK press also doesn't know it all, is a tadge pathetic. Mob mentality at its "best". Have a fun even with your bitter indignation

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"It was terrible what happened to that lad.

It is terrible that her sentence was not longer.

It is terrible that we have these sort of people in society.

It also makes me sick that Sharon Shoesmith got a 6 figure payout.

It seems that the life of this child and the everything around him after his death is sickening.

As for Sharon Shoesmith... what a revolting person.

And of course you know Ms Shoesmith so well to make that comment. Or are you just merely jumping on the Daily Mail band wagon? "

Another moronic Daily Mail comment is that the best you can do to back up your comment

The buck stops with shoesmith when you are at the top in management you take responsibility that's what she got paid for

We are not discussing a missed appointment or any other minor matter

But a child's murder

I think some of you should take a look at that lads picture and think how he was tortured

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"It was terrible what happened to that lad.

It is terrible that her sentence was not longer.

It is terrible that we have these sort of people in society.

It also makes me sick that Sharon Shoesmith got a 6 figure payout.

It seems that the life of this child and the everything around him after his death is sickening.

As for Sharon Shoesmith... what a revolting person.

And of course you know Ms Shoesmith so well to make that comment. Or are you just merely jumping on the Daily Mail band wagon?

pathetic response

Tortured , murdered while those that we're supposed to protect did next to nothing

No excuse to justify their lack of action

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *tirling DarkCouple over a year ago

Stirling

"It was terrible what happened to that lad.

It is terrible that her sentence was not longer.

It is terrible that we have these sort of people in society.

It also makes me sick that Sharon Shoesmith got a 6 figure payout.

It seems that the life of this child and the everything around him after his death is sickening.

As for Sharon Shoesmith... what a revolting person.

And of course you know Ms Shoesmith so well to make that comment. Or are you just merely jumping on the Daily Mail band wagon?

Another moronic Daily Mail comment is that the best you can do to back up your comment

The buck stops with shoesmith when you are at the top in management you take responsibility that's what she got paid for

We are not discussing a missed appointment or any other minor matter

But a child's murder

I think some of you should take a look at that lads picture and think how he was tortured "

So every General who has a man killed or maimed in action, due to another persons mistake, is to be held to account in this way? Every Chief Constable is responsible for a pedestrian killed by a Police car driven badly? The ward charge nurse held to account for the actions of one of their qualified nurses? Of course they aren't held to account in this way, otherwise you would not get the people doing these jobs. Wake up to the reality of senior management.

Ms Shoesmith had a team of professional social workers, the failings start there and work up. In your world nothing will get done, everyone would be too scared for their careers. So easy to cast stones, more difficult to make the decisions these people make day in and day out.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

Social Services and other Government Agencies ..Weren't they the ones who were found to have Failed this child ?

Lions!

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *nnyMan over a year ago

Glasgow

It's hard to see why those in receipt of large salaries ought not to be held to account for the actions of those below them in an organisation.

The money is not for any extra workload - it's for the additional responsibility that goes with the job, with the emphasis on RESPONSIBILITY.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

It's hard to see why those in receipt of large salaries ought not to be held to account for the actions of those below them in an organisation.

The money is not for any extra workload - it's for the additional responsibility that goes with the job, with the emphasis on RESPONSIBILITY."

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

It's hard to see why those in receipt of large salaries ought not to be held to account for the actions of those below them in an organisation.

The money is not for any extra workload - it's for the additional responsibility that goes with the job, with the emphasis on RESPONSIBILITY."

well said that man.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *tirling DarkCouple over a year ago

Stirling

It's hard to see why those in receipt of large salaries ought not to be held to account for the actions of those below them in an organisation.

The money is not for any extra workload - it's for the additional responsibility that goes with the job, with the emphasis on RESPONSIBILITY."

And now back in the real world.

So are we going to court martial all the generals for allowing the use of snatch landrovers? They knew they offered little protection and yet let troops go out on patrol in them. They were responsible for those soldiers and by your argument should be held to account.

Is the commissioner of the met going to resign due to the actions of officers involved in plebegate? He is RESPONSIBLE after all.

It doesn't work in the way you want it to, know matter how often you scream and shout. If you want these senior civil servants to take full responsibility then you better dig deep, pay more taxes and give them all the resources they need to provide that 100% safe environment for all. Do you really think thats the world we live in?

You can not eliminate all risk. Senior managers, politicians and judges realise that fact.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

It's hard to see why those in receipt of large salaries ought not to be held to account for the actions of those below them in an organisation.

The money is not for any extra workload - it's for the additional responsibility that goes with the job, with the emphasis on RESPONSIBILITY.

And now back in the real world.

Is the commissioner of the met going to resign due to the actions of officers involved in plebegate? He is RESPONSIBLE after all.

You can not eliminate all risk. Senior managers, politicians and judges realise that fact.

So in your world a dead child is collateral damage and no one should be held responsible? I hope to christ you are not in a position of responsibility or god help the people who work under you!

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *nnyMan over a year ago

Glasgow

It's hard to see why those in receipt of large salaries ought not to be held to account for the actions of those below them in an organisation.

The money is not for any extra workload - it's for the additional responsibility that goes with the job, with the emphasis on RESPONSIBILITY.

And now back in the real world.

Is the commissioner of the met going to resign due to the actions of officers involved in plebegate? He is RESPONSIBLE after all.

You can not eliminate all risk. Senior managers, politicians and judges realise that fact.

As Harry Truman said The Buck Stops Here.

If you take the money and the cars and the fancy office and the big house and all the trappings of power - you take the responsibility.

For years we had Cabinet Responsibility which meant that all Govt Ministers supported Govt policy (at least in public) and we had Ministerial Responsibility which mean that the Minister at the head of a department took responsibility for everything which happened in that department, no matter how trivial.

Both kept Ministers o their toes.

Re snatch Land Rovers. The responsibility lay on the desk of the SoS for Defence.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *heScotandthegirlCouple over a year ago

London & Edinburgh

"My worry is she may still have more children .... A horrible, horrible thought

Social services will be informed if she does and she will be registered now."

Social services apparently visited her regarding this case 60 times....they should also have served time

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"My worry is she may still have more children .... A horrible, horrible thought

Social services will be informed if she does and she will be registered now.

Social services apparently visited her regarding this case 60 times....they should also have served time"

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *nnyMan over a year ago

Glasgow

"My worry is she may still have more children .... A horrible, horrible thought

Social services will be informed if she does and she will be registered now.

Social services apparently visited her regarding this case 60 times....they should also have served time"

What we can't know is how many children were saved by not spending 24x7 trying to get in to see this particular child.

Only so many social workers and so many hours in the day.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

What disturbed me the most in this weeks news, was not thereported £600k payout vis a vis a High court judges comment of £33k plus some pension but the fact that :

Ms Shoesmith wants to work with children again.

Now, i admit, i know nothing of the woman personally, except that she TOTALLY failed in her role as head of Children's services. Whoever employs her in such a role again, any similar role, wants their head examining.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"My worry is she may still have more children .... A horrible, horrible thought

Social services will be informed if she does and she will be registered now.

Social services apparently visited her regarding this case 60 times....they should also have served time

What we can't know is how many children were saved by not spending 24x7 trying to get in to see this particular child.

Only so many social workers and so many hours in the day."

I agree, though they did fail this child in this case and nothing can excuse that social services do a lot of good work and help many children, its just those cases don't make the news

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"My worry is she may still have more children .... A horrible, horrible thought

Social services will be informed if she does and she will be registered now.

Social services apparently visited her regarding this case 60 times....they should also have served time

What we can't know is how many children were saved by not spending 24x7 trying to get in to see this particular child.

Only so many social workers and so many hours in the day."

Would you rather have 1 failing at the top on £133k pa or 4 at ground level on £33k and a bit each?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"It was terrible what happened to that lad.

It is terrible that her sentence was not longer.

It is terrible that we have these sort of people in society.

It also makes me sick that Sharon Shoesmith got a 6 figure payout.

It seems that the life of this child and the everything around him after his death is sickening.

As for Sharon Shoesmith... what a revolting person."

Bang on track

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"I think we're very lucky living in a country where people such as her and the bulger killers are allowed to walk amongst us once there time has been served.

And what will you rather was done to them after they'd served their time?

Maybe we should find an uninhabited island and send them there to spend the rest of their lives.

Didn't our so called Queen already try that?

So Called ? Her Royal Highness Queen Elizabeth 11 as far as i know is the Monarch of the United Kingdom still unless i have missed something ?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"It was terrible what happened to that lad.

It is terrible that her sentence was not longer.

It is terrible that we have these sort of people in society.

It also makes me sick that Sharon Shoesmith got a 6 figure payout.

It seems that the life of this child and the everything around him after his death is sickening.

As for Sharon Shoesmith... what a revolting person.

And of course you know Ms Shoesmith so well to make that comment. Or are you just merely jumping on the Daily Mail band wagon?

Another moronic Daily Mail comment is that the best you can do to back up your comment

The buck stops with shoesmith when you are at the top in management you take responsibility that's what she got paid for

We are not discussing a missed appointment or any other minor matter

But a child's murder

I think some of you should take a look at that lads picture and think how he was tortured

That's why you take the £100,000 per year to tLe responsibility war and generals has got nothing to do with child abuse and murder !!!!!!

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

Social Services and other Government Agencies ..Weren't they the ones who were found to have Failed this child ?

Lions!"

Lions do not torture other Lions or cubs, they will fight amongst themselves for the mating rights and the loser walks away

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

I keep seeing pounds shillings and pence mentioned

How much is YOUR child worth

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

*take

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

Social Services and other Government Agencies ..Weren't they the ones who were found to have Failed this child ?

Lions!

Lions do not torture other Lions or cubs, they will fight amongst themselves for the mating rights and the loser walks away"

male lions will and do kill cubs fathered by other males as the mothers come back into estrogen if her cubs are killed, meaning the males can mate her and have her bring up their own young

not that that is at all relevant to the thread but everyone else seems to be talking about Lions

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

Social Services and other Government Agencies ..Weren't they the ones who were found to have Failed this child ?

Lions!

Lions do not torture other Lions or cubs, they will fight amongst themselves for the mating rights and the loser walks away

male lions will and do kill cubs fathered by other males as the mothers come back into estrogen if her cubs are killed, meaning the males can mate her and have her bring up their own young

not that that is at all relevant to the thread but everyone else seems to be talking about Lions

Yes they do but they will kill them outright through inbred necessity not over a period of time for pleasure

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

Social Services and other Government Agencies ..Weren't they the ones who were found to have Failed this child ?

Lions!

Lions do not torture other Lions or cubs, they will fight amongst themselves for the mating rights and the loser walks away

male lions will and do kill cubs fathered by other males as the mothers come back into estrogen if her cubs are killed, meaning the males can mate her and have her bring up their own young

not that that is at all relevant to the thread but everyone else seems to be talking about Lions

Yes they do but they will kill them outright through inbred necessity not over a period of time for pleasure"

well no but we don't need this thread to realise that human's are the earths parasite that's sucking it and everything on it dry do we

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)