Should Maxine Carr be given lifelong anonymity? [Archive]

26-02-2005, 09:26

Originally posted by beckyaa
If you look at it another way, you could say the money is not being spent protecting her but protecting all the people who may take it upon themselves to harm her.

In which case wouldn't she be better kept in prison? What sort of life is she going to have constantly looking over her shoulder, not being able to form relationships and generally not being able to live life like the rest of us.

I am alarmed that the general consensus seems to be that she was a stupid woman who couldn't help covering up for the 'man she loved' when she was interviewed for a job working with children and got it. If she was so stupid, vulnerable, easily led and pathetic as is being made out how did she fool the educationalists who employed her?

Even more alarmingly, as she supposedly didn't play a part in murdering those children and was only jailed for her part giving Huntley a false alibi is she on the register as not fit to work with children or not.

Sidla

26-02-2005, 11:15

I blame the press entirely for this whole debacle. If they weren't being so sensationalistic about the whole affair then it wouldn't have been blown to these ridiculous lengths.

The public seemingly believe that Carr is a child abuser and murderer, when in reality she has done nothing wrong other than trust the wrong person. The press do nothing help Maxine, and look upon her as a way to sell papers. "Maxine Carr in £50M Protection Scandal" - It's sensationalistic tosh and they know it. The reason it could cost as much as 50M to protect her is all their fault!

muddycoffee

26-02-2005, 11:27

Originally posted by Mo
In which case wouldn't she be better kept in prison?
So you are advocating a life sentance in prison for being stupid and trying to protect her boyfriend who she may have believed was innocent anyway, and the outcome of the case wasn't altered at all if she'd have been truthful to the police.

What next, solitary confinement for anyone who is stupid enough to have a baby on board sticker on their car?

What sentence are you going to impose on anyone who assults her when she's in the community, hanging?

when she was interviewed for a job working with children and got it. If she was so stupid, vulnerable, easily led and pathetic as is being made out how did she fool the educationalists who employed her?

If there is less than 100 people on the registered list of users on the sheffield forum who have lied in a job interview or application, I will eat my trousers on the town hall steps this afternoon.
Quite clearly there was no checking done, that's the fault of the employers.

Sidla

26-02-2005, 11:30

Originally posted by muddycoffee
If there is less than 100 people on the registered list of users on the sheffield forum who have lied in a job interview or application, I will eat my trousers on the town hall steps this afternoon.
Shall I attach a poll? :P

Don_Kiddick

26-02-2005, 12:20

Yes lets have a poll.
Can you put on it Hor or Not too
cos I think she's hot. Really. :twisted:

saxon51

26-02-2005, 12:30

26-02-2005, 13:24

Originally posted by muddycoffee
So you are advocating a life sentance in prison for being stupid and trying to protect her boyfriend who she may have believed was innocent anyway, and the outcome of the case wasn't altered at all if she'd have been truthful to the police.

What next, solitary confinement for anyone who is stupid enough to have a baby on board sticker on their car?

What sentence are you going to impose on anyone who assults her when she's in the community, hanging?

If there is less than 100 people on the registered list of users on the sheffield forum who have lied in a job interview or application, I will eat my trousers on the town hall steps this afternoon.
Quite clearly there was no checking done, that's the fault of the employers.

No I am not, what I am saying is that she will never have a normal life again, whether that is behind bars or in the community with 24 hr protection, either way she is a prisoner.

What nobody has mentioned yet is that BOTH of them had changed their names prior to the murders...he became Nixon and she had been Capp. How many people do you know who have changed their names? It doesn't happen very often and I don't know anybody other than changes by marriage. For both to change suggests something very sinister to me.

Kristian

26-02-2005, 13:32

Originally posted by Mo
How many people do you know who have changed their names? It doesn't happen very often and I don't know anybody other than changes by marriage. For both to change suggests something very sinister to me.

I know four people that have done this, and no deceit or impropriety was involved!

K x

26-02-2005, 13:35

Originally posted by Kristian
I know four people that have done this, and no deceit or impropriety was involved!

K x

Trust you :rolleyes: xxx.

Kristian

26-02-2005, 13:46

Originally posted by Mo
Trust you :rolleyes: xxx.

True! One was named after someone they hated, two had horrible names, and one was fleeing a violent relationship!

Back to topic, that of course doesn't mean that Maxine and Ian weren't doing something dodgy!

K x

muddycoffee

26-02-2005, 13:58

I know someone who changed their name because they preferred their more modern 2nd forename.
There are people who change their surname If they find out what their real father's surname is.
Axel Rose, Liv Tyler.
I have met a Singaporean who took on an english name (Alan), to Better himself, but he was scared that his parents would find out, because it would bring shame to the family.
And this is just like all those indian call centre people who have names like Dave and Wendy, when they sound like they are pure Madras or Bombay.
Marti Caine's Real Name was Lynn Shepherd
Cheryl Baker's real name was Rita Crudgington
Bridget Bardot was Camille Javal
Tony Christie was Tony Fitzgerald
John Peel was John Ravenscroft
Vic Reeves was Jim Moir
Bill Wyman was Bill Perks because Mick Jagger didn't want to say Perks on stage when he introduced the band.
Kieth Richard added an S on the end in the 70s to **** his family off
Roy Wood's real name is Ulysses wood!
John Bon Jovi's original name was Bongiovi

Even Our Dear Old Queen.
She wasn't Born Elizabeth Windsor :-
Elizabeth Saxe-Coburg

Kristian

26-02-2005, 14:08

Originally posted by muddycoffee
And this is just like all those indian call centre people who have names like Dave and Wendy, when they sound like they are pure Madras or Bombay

That happens in English call centres too!

Lot's of people who do outbound cold-calling work use an assumed name. I can't imagine a lady using her real name of, say, Mildred, if she worked on one of those naughty lines either!

Sorry to go so far off topic! :blush:

K x

26-02-2005, 14:12

Originally posted by muddycoffee
I know someone who changed their name because they preferred their more modern 2nd forename.
There are people who change their surname If they find out what their real father's surname is.
Axel Rose, Liv Tyler.
I have met a Singaporean who took on an english name (Alan), to Better himself, but he was scared that his parents would find out, because it would bring shame to the family.
And this is just like all those indian call centre people who have names like Dave and Wendy, when they sound like they are pure Madras or Bombay.
Marti Caine's Real Name was Lynn Shepherd
Cheryl Baker's real name was Rita Crudgington
Bridget Bardot was Camille Javal
Tony Christie was Tony Fitzgerald
John Peel was John Ravenscroft
Vic Reeves was Jim Moir
Bill Wyman was Bill Perks because Mick Jagger didn't want to say Perks on stage when he introduced the band.
Kieth Richard added an S on the end in the 70s to **** his family off
Roy Wood's real name is Ulysses wood!
John Bon Jovi's original name was Bongiovi

Stop taking the urine.

These aren't real people in the real world .They are actors,singers etc who use stage names if they applied for a job or was filling in official forms in they would obviously revert to their real names.

DanSumption

26-02-2005, 14:15

Originally posted by Mo
How many people do you know who have changed their names? It doesn't happen very often and I don't know anybody other than changes by marriage.

Erm, how about the last prime-minister of this country, for a start? I know he was far from a perfect individual, but I certainly don't think it was because he was a child molester that he, err, dropped a Ball.

muddycoffee

26-02-2005, 14:38

Originally posted by Mo
Stop taking the urine.

These aren't real people in the real world .They are actors,singers etc who use stage names if they applied for a job or was filling in official forms in they would obviously revert to their real names.
Ok then. People who I actually know personally I can think of 2.

1) The bloke who changed his forname because he wanted a modern sounding one, I signed his passport and helped him to get that change.

2) Another mate who 20 years ago changed his name to ******** after a serious car accident for no apparent reason. I play music with him from time to time and have helped him with his website (check out my comedy name change javascript code) He's even got a bank account under that name.
http://www.********.com

happychick

26-02-2005, 14:51

No definatly not.Iv'e been reading about this.She deserves nothing,no protection,nothing.I don,t care what anydody else thinks,she's a disgrace to the human population.
She can,t be trusted.A manipulative,nasty,cruel liar.It makes me so angry.Why should our income tax be used to prtect someone like this?
She is a dangerous woman, a walking time bomb.Lets hope the only other person she manages to hurt is herself.Grrrrrrr :x

Kristian

26-02-2005, 14:55

Originally posted by happychick
No definatly not.Iv'e been reading about this.She deserves nothing,no protection,nothing.I don,t care what anydody else thinks,she's a disgrace to the human population.
She can,t be trusted.A manipulative,nasty,cruel liar.It makes me so angry.Why should our income tax be used to prtect someone like this?
She is a dangerous woman, a walking time bomb.Lets hope the only other person she manages to hurt is herself.Grrrrrrr :x

Well, you've definately won me over with your reasoned opinion! Have you actually read the thread? On what basis do you deem her to be dangerous, or a walking timebomb? :huh:

K x

DanSumption

26-02-2005, 14:58

Squeaker

26-02-2005, 15:04

Originally posted by Mo
With reports in some newspapers claiming costs of up to £50m to give Carr anonymity do you think that she is worth it?

Yes she has served her time but shouldn't she just take her chance like the rest of us and if she is attacked let her ring 999 and wait in a queue as the rest of us have to.

I suspect that £50m is on the steep side but nevertheless half that amount could benefit many vulnerable members of our society.

With speculation that she has been offered a £1m to write a book how can she expect police protection? She will be deliberately promoting herself and raising her public profile and profiteering in the process. And they say 'crime doesn't pay' :rant:

I agree that anonymity is unjust in her case, but I think that figure quoted is incorrect tabloid fiction....
I wouldn't want to live next door to her, and I think perhaps she may have to leave the country if she wants any peace.... In face if she does write a book...it's the publishers who should be taken to court...but that won't happen, people out there do end up buying that trite at the end of the day....the demand is there! I wouldn't buy it though

happychick

26-02-2005, 15:12

Because any normal human being would have noticed her "boyfriends" strange attention seeking behaviour,couple that with him needing her to give him an alibi,should have aroused some suspicion in her.
And we arn't talking some petty little theft here, two beautiful little girls had gone missing for gods sake!
she was covering her own back as well as his. She's not some innocent little victim,she's the criminal, the one that got put in prison for her part in it all.
The victims are the two little girls and their families,Who will have to live with it for the rest of their lives.Yet these people have tried to behave with dignity from the start.This woman can never make up for what she has done,(shes too arroagant to try).And i for one am fed up of reading about how she,s faring.I dont care if she has a nervous breakdown,or any thing else for that matter.The only people my thoughts are with are those two poor families who will struggle to live the rest of their lives knowing what this woman did.

happychick

26-02-2005, 15:15

Originally posted by DanSumption
Happychick?
I am usally a happy go lucky kind of person, but this kind of thing makes me so angry,and brings out the worst in me.

Kristian

26-02-2005, 15:18

Originally posted by happychick
Because any normal human being would have noticed her "boyfriends" strange attention seeking behaviour,couple that with him needing her to give him an alibi,should have aroused some suspicion in her.
And we arn't talking some petty little theft here, two beautiful little girls had gone missing for gods sake!
she was covering her own back as well as his. She's not some innocent little victim,she's the criminal, the one that got put in prison for her part in it all.
The victims are the two little girls and their families,Who will have to live with it for the rest of their lives.Yet these people have tried to behave with dignity from the start.This woman can never make up for what she has done,(shes too arroagant to try).And i for one am fed up of reading about how she,s faring.I dont care if she has a nervous breakdown,or any thing else for that matter.The only people my thoughts are with are those two poor families who will struggle to live the rest of their lives knowing what this woman did.

That doesn't answer my question; you've simply stated your opinion, and brought in irrelevant parts of the story.

Again, On what basis do you deem her to be dangerous, or a walking timebomb?

K x

muddycoffee

26-02-2005, 15:45

Originally posted by happychick
The victims are the two little girls and their families,Who will have to live with it for the rest of their lives.
I'm sorry but wether the victims were two pretty girls or two ugly old men has no bearing on the case. Especially Maxine's case.

happychick

26-02-2005, 15:57

Any human being who has behaved as she has done IS dangerous ,how many ordinary everyday people could speak and act as she,s done? .Not many,and if you are rotten enough to act as she has done ONCE already, then theres nothing to stop her doing it again.She is devious with a cruel streak.And dont bother giving me any of that crap about deserving a second chance.For that to happen every young child in this Country would no longer be safe,cause if she did do it again(God Forbid) more pain & heartache would follow .People should know where she is & be aware of her presence.

There are some things in life that cannot be left to chance & this is one of them in my opinion.So stop spouting off at me,just cause i don,t agree with you Kristen does not make me wrong. And stop trying to patronise me.I have lost a child in my family(at the hands of another "human being"),so yes i know what its like to try to carry on with a normal life after this kind of thing.

Kristian

26-02-2005, 16:05

It is not my intention to patronise you, however I'm quickly losing respect from your opinion due to the lack of evidence you are able to come up with.

You're quite correct that disagreeing with me doesn't make you wrong; however, it doesn't make you right, and you have still not been able to justify your comments!

Once again in your reply, we see irrelevant comments brought in (I assume in an attempt to add drama), without any basis for your statement. I have lost children from my family too; I didn't feel the need to mention it, because IT'S NOT RELEVANT

You say Maxine is dangerous, but she did not physically harm anyone, she just lied.

I await your reply with interest!

K x

happychick

26-02-2005, 16:28

If you read my reply properly you would have seen that i said i lost a child member of my family at the hands of somone else.They were killed by another human being physically attacking them and beating them to death.In my previous post i tried to word it a little better.So you are not getting any dramatics off me.
My opinion comes from real life experience and gut feelings.If you lose respect for me because of that then so be it.You need to explore this these from many different angles.And facts ,basis and statistics does not always mean that things are right.
Like i said before, sometimes the price that has to be paid for taking a chance & protecting people is too expensive.And a human life is too expensive a price to pay for protecting someone like this.
.She isnt even worth arguing about, she should be treat with the contempt she deserves.

Kristian

26-02-2005, 16:33

I did read your reply properly. You obviously are not reading mine.

For the record, I'm really sorry for what happened to your family.

You don't seem to be able to answer my questions to my satisfaction, and I'm tired of asking you the same thing for you to bring in other issues as a smokescreen.

I'll see you around! :thumbsup:

K x

saxon51

26-02-2005, 16:37

Originally posted by Kristian

You say Maxine is dangerous, but she did not physically harm anyone, she just lied.

I await your reply with interest!

K x

Carr did not physically harm anyone...correct!

She did however lie to protect a child murderer in order to keep him out of prison and at large. A child murderer, by the way, who had been under suspicion in the past for his dealings with kids/women.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ian_Huntley#Early_life

If her alibi had been accepted, and other evidence not brought up, he would probably be on the prowl now. THANKS TO CARR.

happychick

26-02-2005, 16:57

How narrow minded and self opinionated can u get ?.Every issue is important to discuss and evaluate a situation fully.Banging on about the basis of things,facts,etc; is not the be all and end all of something.
The families of the people involved should have had their feelings taken into account,before any decisions were made about Maxine Carr,and her future once out of prison was discussed by anyone.They are the ones that have got to live with the legacy of her actions !
How you can accuse me of of putting up a smoke screen is laughable.I was trying to put another side of the argument to you, the side that dealt with the aftermath of her actions,and that of the familes involved.But you only seem able to see your own angle on it.
You have you opinion,I have mine,and thats that.

saxon51

26-02-2005, 17:01

Hey, happychick, can you put the name of the person you're rollicking somewhere in your post. For a second there I thought you were shouting at me.;)

26-02-2005, 17:03

Originally posted by saxon51
If her alibi had been accepted, and other evidence not brought up, he would probably be on the prowl now. THANKS TO CARR.

Very True

happychick

26-02-2005, 17:04

Nope, its Kristen who,s sparring with me.:wink:

Kristian

26-02-2005, 17:56

happychick

I really didn't want to get drawn into further discussion with you, but here goes.

I asked you a queston, which several posts later you are not able, or unwilling to answer; this was On what basis do you deem her to be dangerous, or a walking timebomb?

It's very unlikely that her next boyfriend will be a murderer; Huntley and Carr did not get together because they wanted to kill children in the way that the Hindley and Brady did. Therefore she shouldn't find herself in the position of being asked to lie for someone again in a situation so terrible.

Therefore to say she is now a danger to society, or a walking timebomb is simply not true.

I don't think what Carr did was acceptable or right. I think she ought to be ashamed of herself for what she did. However, I reming you, she did not kill anyone, she simply lied after the fact.

I am not saying you should not have your own opinions, you just should be able to back them up if you are challenged. Now, do you want to have one more go at answering my question without drawing in personal experiences, or other irrelevancies?

DanSumption

26-02-2005, 18:26

Originally posted by happychick
Any human being who has behaved as she has done IS dangerous ,how many ordinary everyday people could speak and act as she,s done?

Firstly, I should admit that I didn't follow the case very closely at the time: I avoided newspapers while the story was unfolding because it disturbed me very much, as did the morbid fascination for the case shown by most people I knew and especially by the popular press.

However, from what I understand of the case, what Carr did was lied to protect somebody who she loved, somebody who had told her that he was innocent but that the police had it in for him over other matters. In the light of that, I would say that she is stupid, over-trusting, a poor judge of character, even as you say dangerous. But I would not say there is anything out-of-the-ordinary in what she did; rather than describe her as inhuman, as some have, I would say that what she did was display an extremely human failing. And I can imagine a lot of ordinary, everyday people, including many people who I know, possibly doing the same thing under those circumstances.

Originally posted by happychick
She is devious with a cruel streak.

I've seen no evidence of this. Again, stupid, bad judge, whatever, yes, but I don't believe her crime arose from deviousness or stupidity, I believe it came from foolishly mis-placed love and protectiveness.

Originally posted by happychick
And dont bother giving me any of that crap about deserving a second chance.For that to happen every young child in this Country would no longer be safe,cause if she did do it again(God Forbid) more pain & heartache would follow .People should know where she is & be aware of her presence.

As Kristian said, I see absolutely no reason why she would do it again. If she really has not learnt her lesson from this incident then, yes, she must be one seriously devious cruel person, but I imagine (conjecture again, of course) that this is something which will be heavy on her conscience for the rest of her life and which she would go to any lengths to avoid again.

I agree that life should be protected at all costs, but I don't think that Maxine Carr poses a threat to life, and I do think that she has some right to a life of her own. She has served her punishment for what is a minor crime, albeit one with very major consequences. A far more major crime, in my view, is drunk driving or driving without due care and attention, and how many people guilty of that have to put up with being hounded by the press for the rest of their living days?

Greybeard

26-02-2005, 19:44

Vengeance is an ugly beast, - and I'm sure there would be many amongst the readership of the Sun and the News of the World who would take delight in seeing vengeance have its way and Maxine Carr torn to pieces by the angry mob.

Then again there are also many among the readership of these papers who fondly believe we live in a civilised society; but I feel pretty sure that revealing the identity and whereabouts of Maxine Carr would prove that we live in a very uncivilised society indeed.

Some details of the factors behind the ruling can be found here

http://www.itn.co.uk/rssnews/index_57944.html

The threats to Maxine Carr are very real...e.g. - "A family near Blaby, Leicestershire was targeted for threats and verbal abuse after suggestions that Carr was staying with them. A gang outside their home had threatened to firebomb it."

Makes you feel proud to be British doesn't it ? :suspect:

nightrider

26-02-2005, 19:50

for all the people who say she should have her anonymity rmoved so the mobs can do what they want to her....shouldnt we lock up the mobs siince we essentially know they intend to cimmit a crime? If not then we should protect Maxine from further punishment if we are not in the busines of punishing because someone might commit a crime?

saxon51

26-02-2005, 19:55

Quote from link...

"He said that there was evidence of persistent threats from one particular source and of actual incidents of harassment and threats involving Carr.
There had also been a series of incidents involving people mistaken for her who had been assaulted, threatened, harassed or abused.
An innocent woman was physically assaulted on a busy street in Grimsby after being mistaken for Carr.
A woman in East Kilbride became the victim of a vicious hate campaign, with a mob gathering outside her home and issuing death threats on the internet.
A family near Blaby, Leicestershire was targeted for threats and verbal abuse after suggestions that Carr was staying with them. A gang outside their home had threatened to firebomb it.
A person who was considered a Carr lookalike, who lived in Derbyshire, had received threatening letters and verbal harassment.
In July 2004, there had been a number of alleged sightings in the Worcestershire area and police had received information that a person mistaken for Carr was spat at and refused service in a supermarket.
In September 2004, there were mistaken sightings of Carr in Chepstow and a person was reportedly spat at in supermarket aisles."

These people are being threatened and abused because nobody knows where Carr is, and they'll continue to be threatened and abused. Yes, the abusers are wrong to do it, but Carr is the cause. And while she is hidden, these innocent people are at risk......... End of story.

nightrider

26-02-2005, 20:00

Originally posted by saxon51
Quote from link...

"He said that there was evidence of persistent threats from one particular source and of actual incidents of harassment and threats involving Carr.
There had also been a series of incidents involving people mistaken for her who had been assaulted, threatened, harassed or abused.
An innocent woman was physically assaulted on a busy street in Grimsby after being mistaken for Carr.
A woman in East Kilbride became the victim of a vicious hate campaign, with a mob gathering outside her home and issuing death threats on the internet.
A family near Blaby, Leicestershire was targeted for threats and verbal abuse after suggestions that Carr was staying with them. A gang outside their home had threatened to firebomb it.
A person who was considered a Carr lookalike, who lived in Derbyshire, had received threatening letters and verbal harassment.
In July 2004, there had been a number of alleged sightings in the Worcestershire area and police had received information that a person mistaken for Carr was spat at and refused service in a supermarket.
In September 2004, there were mistaken sightings of Carr in Chepstow and a person was reportedly spat at in supermarket aisles."

These people are being threatened and abused because nobody knows where Carr is, and they'll continue to be threatened and abused. Yes, the abusers are wrong to do it, but Carr is the cause. And while she is hidden, these innocent people are at risk......... End of story.

you are seriously suggesting we hand someone over to a mob just to stop them attacking people? Surely we should lock up the people in the mob, not pander to them?

saxon51

26-02-2005, 20:10

Originally posted by nightrider
you are seriously suggesting we hand someone over to a mob just to stop them attacking people? Surely we should lock up the people in the mob, not pander to them?

The mob wouldn't get arrested until AFTER they've assaulted, maimed or killed one of these Carr lookalikes now would they.

But Carr is protected, so that's okay then.

To be honest, I personally don't give a flying shiite what happens to Carr, but I do feel for the girl's families and these innocent lookalikes who are in danger of attack because of her. Silly me, I'm sympathising with the victims on the Sheffield Forum. So shoot me!!!

nightrider

26-02-2005, 20:27

Originally posted by saxon51
The mob wouldn't get arrested until AFTER they've assaulted, maimed or killed one of these Carr lookalikes now would they.

But Carr is protected, so that's okay then.

To be honest, I personally don't give a flying shiite what happens to Carr, but I do feel for the girl's families and these innocent lookalikes who are in danger of attack because of her. Silly me, I'm sympathising with the victims on the Sheffield Forum. So shoot me!!!

threats and harassment are illegal. So they can be arrested now.

saxon51

26-02-2005, 20:39

Originally posted by nightrider
threats and harassment are illegal. So they can be arrested now.

Exactly, so why should Carr worry about it more than the innocents who are ACTUALLY being got at. All this seems twisted to me.

Fire bombing and assault are neither threats nor harrassment. They can maim and kill, and only take seconds. THEN the perpetrators are arrested when it is too late, so it looks as though the woman in the street who is unfortunate enough to look like her had better live with it, eh!

You have probably realised by now that I have no respect nor sympathy for someone who is willing to protect a childkiller. I have yet to meet anyone at work, in the street, or in my daily life who agrees that she should have any choices other than, 'Get out there and face the music', or 'Stay locked up in protective custody'.

nightrider

26-02-2005, 20:59

Originally posted by saxon51
Exactly, so why should Carr worry about it more than the innocents who are ACTUALLY being got at. All this seems twisted to me.

well the police can give the lookalikes protection too cant they?

saxon51

26-02-2005, 21:08

Originally posted by nightrider
well the police can give the lookalikes protection too cant they?

Wonderful..:thumbsup: :rolleyes:

Normal citizens with police officers following them around because they are unfortunate enough to look like Carr. That makes them really free to come and go as they please and lead normal lives, doesn't it. Still, as long as Carr's okay, that's fair.:loopy:

This is beginning to look like a 'Bugger the rest, look after Carr', scenario to me.:suspect:

nightrider

26-02-2005, 21:23

Originally posted by saxon51
Wonderful..:thumbsup: :rolleyes:

Normal citizens with police officers following them around because they are unfortunate enough to look like Carr. That makes them really free to come and go as they please and lead normal lives, doesn't it. Still, as long as Carr's okay, that's fair.:loopy:

This is beginning to look like a 'Bugger the rest, look after Carr', scenario to me.:suspect:

well the alternative is to allow people to maim and kill criminals as they see fit!! These people are the ones breaking the law, NOT maxine carr.

Greybeard

26-02-2005, 21:31

[i]
These people are being threatened and abused because nobody knows where Carr is, and they'll continue to be threatened and abused. Yes, the abusers are wrong to do it, but Carr is the cause. And while she is hidden, these innocent people are at risk......... End of story. [/B]

It's a little strange to suggest that Maxine Carr is the cause of mob mentality.

One of the reasons mob mentallity persists is that some sections of the media give it lots of publicity and seem reluctant to condemn it. Heck...it sells newspapers !!

Politicians too could do more to condemn it than they do, but then they also find it useful. ;)

saxon51

26-02-2005, 21:36

Originally posted by nightrider
well the alternative is to allow people to maim and kill criminals as they see fit!! These people are the ones breaking the law, NOT maxine carr.

So what's going off now is better than the alternative???

saxon51

26-02-2005, 21:41

Originally posted by Greybeard
It's a little strange to suggest that Maxine Carr is the cause of mob mentality.

One of the reasons mob mentallity persists is that some sections of the media give it lots of publicity and seem reluctant to condemn it. Heck...it sells newspapers !!

Politicians too could do more to condemn it than they do, but then they also find it useful. ;)

Nobody's suggesting that Carr is responsible for mob rule. But don't forget that SHE alone got herself in this situation by her own hand.

The innocents, however, have been forced into it against their will.

happychick

27-02-2005, 10:14

The point myself,Saxon and a few others are trying to make is this.See it from the victims side of things.The people who have been hurt,not the perprataors of it all.
Why anyone would think Maxine Carr deserves to be protected is beyond me.
What do we do then? protect her,and let the public be at risk by not knowing she is living alongside them and their familes

Tell you what ,those of you out there who think she should be protected,let her come and live next to you.And see if you have got peace of mind in your daily life then.You have her,because myself (and a lot of others in this country) dont bloody well want her anywhere near us.

Her actions led to a lot of extra heartaches for a lot of people,be careful, because next time it might just be you and your familes who get hurt by her.

And i am leaving this thread now.My opinion stays at this. and no one will change my mind.End of story.:!:

DanSumption

27-02-2005, 10:23

Originally posted by happychick
The point myself,Saxon and a few others are trying to make is this.See it from the victims side of things.The people who have been hurt,not the perprataors of it all.

I can certainly see it from the victims' point of view, it is a lifelong sentence for them, I don't deny that. However, whatever happens to Maxine Carr that's not going to change.

The principles of this country's justice system are reform and protection of the public, not vengeance (although most of the tabloid press seem to thing otherwise). There is far too much demand for vengeance these days, and I believe it is ultimately damaging for both sides. Forgiveness and understanding are a lot harder to practice, but at lot more healing again for both sides.

But the main difference of opinion here seems to be whether or not Maxine Carr deliberately intended to harm children, and if so whether or not she would do it again. I believe the answer is no on both counts, and the justice system recognised that in the short sentence that she got. That being the case, I'd be happy to have her live next door to me (and yes, I do have kids and, as I said, found it very hard to follow press coverage of the case because of my empathy for the victims' families).

Tony

27-02-2005, 10:35

I couldn't care less if she lived next door either from what I know of her.

However, I wouldn't want her to simply because of the retard vigilantes and the press dogs that would make my life a misery.

venger

27-02-2005, 11:22

I was liking the comments on how we can so easily demonstrate how uncivilised we can be as a society.

I do however find it hard to digest some of the shallow remarks and opinions posted on this thread.

I have lost respect for a couple of long time users for allowing their emotions control their judgements and lapping up the sensationalism.

There is no doubt that what happened to those girls and their respected loved ones is tragic, but that is not the issue here.

Should Maxine Carr be given lifelong anonymity?

There is no other way IMO

owdlad

27-02-2005, 11:46

I did jump on the "hang her high" bandwagon and after a lot of thought I still can't honestly say one way or the other how I feel.

Yes she did wrong in giving Huntley a false alibi, but those two girls were said to be dead by the time she was asked to give it to him, so she can't be accused of having anything to do with the murder.

No she didn't do anything to help the police to catch Huntley even when she knew what he had done, and for that she ought to have recieved a longer sentence.

Should she be afforded Police protection is another thing altogether, Yes she should, if only to protect her from the idiots who want to make a name for themselves as the one's who got Carr.

The losers are the ordinary people of whichever area she is moved to, because the Police have enough problems fighting crime without having to baby sit Carr.

Whilst all this is going on Carr should be also prevented from hiding behind her anonymity and doing the same as some other murderers who hid behind the law then wrote books and made a profit from their crimes, this would be totally unacceptable.

venger

27-02-2005, 12:05

Originally posted by owdlad

Whilst all this is going on Carr should be also prevented from hiding behind her anonymity and doing the same as some other murderers who hid behind the law then wrote books and made a profit from their crimes, this would be totally unacceptable.

That makes good sense.

saxon51

27-02-2005, 12:21

Originally posted by owdlad

The losers are the ordinary people of whichever area she is moved to, because the Police have enough problems fighting crime without having to baby sit Carr.

Whilst all this is going on Carr should be also prevented from hiding behind her anonymity and doing the same as some other murderers who hid behind the law then wrote books and made a profit from their crimes, this would be totally unacceptable.

Exactly...in a nutshell!!

I don't agree that idiots should be allowed to act as vigilantes, because I admit that she had nothing to do with the killings. I don't argue this point.

She did not however think that the murderer of two small children should face punishment, and as such put every effort into keeping him free. That is clear and obvious.

Because of this, and the fact that she put herself in this situation, she alone is to blame. I wouldn't cheer on the mob, but I wouldn't protect her either.

Gutter press hasn't put these thoughts in my head. I don't draw my opinions from other people's rantings. Child murder is, in my eyes, one of the lowest human acts possible. Anybody who protects, covers up for, or supports a child murderer is as evil as the murderer themselves.

Sure, she has served 2 years, sure she is in danger, sure there is a mob after her. Who's fault is that? Not the tax payers, not the people who are being attacked in her name, not mine, not yours. 100% her fault!!

If my disregard for the safety of, and lack of sympathy for, a child-killer's supporter loses respect for me from other forum users, then so be it.

There must be thousands of ex-criminals out there who are on someone's hit list, but aren't being given the privilege of the 'anonimity' umbrella.

Sidla

27-02-2005, 14:12

Originally posted by saxon51
Sure, she has served 2 years, sure she is in danger, sure there is a mob after her. Who's fault is that? Not the tax payers, not the people who are being attacked in her name, not mine, not yours. 100% her fault!!
Actually, I would suggest it's mostly Ian Huntley's fault.

There must be thousands of ex-criminals out there who are on someone's hit list, but aren't being given the privilege of the 'anonimity' umbrella.
No there isn't because the press don't give them as much coverage as they've given Carr.

ANGELUS

27-02-2005, 14:31

Should Maxine Carr be given lifelong anonymity?
Should she **** as like.

She defended her boyfriend after he killed 2 innocent kids.
Let the woman get whats coming to her.

saxon51

27-02-2005, 14:31

Originally posted by Sidla
Actually, I would suggest it's mostly Ian Huntley's fault.

Absolute cobblers!!!

She got herself involved. How come some people have trouble understanding this???

Sidla

27-02-2005, 14:37

Originally posted by saxon51
Absolute cobblers!!!
Why?

Sure, it is partly her fault, she lied afterall. However, it was Huntley who asked her to lie, Huntley who needed an alibi. If it wasn't for Huntley she would be living a normal life now, just like the rest of us.

Please tell me why you think this is cobblers, because it seems obvious to me.

Lucy_Smith

27-02-2005, 14:45

I was just wondering if anybody here has ever been in a relationship with somebody with anti social personality disorder or something similar?

For the record I am not defending Ian Huntley one bit, what he did was pure evil and the pain that those families have suffered doesn't even bear thinking about.

But Maxine Carr did not murder anybody. She was in fact caught up in a terrible relationship, one based on manipulation, hurt and dependance. The things that people do once they are under the influence of these people often defy all rational knowledge and thought but I'm afraid until you know what it is like to be in a relationship like that you cannot say "I wouldnt have done it".

Just so you guys know I have been in a relationship with somebody with narcissistic personality disorder. Before I met him I was the most level headed person who loved her family and friends dearly. The things I have done under his influence I would never have ever considered before. But that's what they do to you, they manipulate everything you are and make you dependent to the point of no return. You do those things because he makes it so you have nothing but him. These men (and sometimes women) are the greatest actors of all, their skills are beyond anything even the smartest people can see.

saxon51

27-02-2005, 14:47

Originally posted by Sidla
Why?

Sure, it is partly her fault, she lied afterall. However, it was Huntley who asked her to lie, Huntley who needed an alibi. If it wasn't for Huntley she would be living a normal life now, just like the rest of us.

Please tell me why you think this is cobblers, because it seems obvious to me.

How many times do you require telling why it's 100% her fault??

I'll repeat myself again, as it's obvious you don't understand plain English.

Ready?

She chose to do it. She chose to involve herself. She made that choice. She could have chosen not to.

Sidla

27-02-2005, 14:57

Originally posted by saxon51
How many times do you require telling why it's 100% her fault??

I'll repeat myself again, as it's obvious you don't understand plain English.

Ready?

She chose to do it. She chose to involve herself. She made that choice. She could have chosen not to.
Yes, but if it wasn't for Huntley she wouldn't be in the position she is in now. That makes it Huntley's fault. What part of that do you not understand?

brooksy

27-02-2005, 15:01

why is it huntleys fault, was maxine carr chained to his side or something. shes commited an act which most people would heave at and to make any comment in her innocence is disgraceful in my opinion. mighnt be me but this thread seems to be going down a hindley and bradey road, hope not

saxon51

27-02-2005, 15:08

Originally posted by Sidla
Yes, but if it wasn't for Huntley she wouldn't be in the position she is in now. That makes it Huntley's fault. What part of that do you not understand?

Sorry, but that has got to be the most pathetic arguement in her defense that I have ever heard. Blaming Huntley's crime for her crime??

Knowingly receiving stolen goods isn't made a lesser crime simply because someone else stole the goods in the first place, because it's THEIR fault.

Walking into someone's house and nicking their video because THEY left the door open doesn't make it a lesser crime.

So what's the difference?

Sidla

27-02-2005, 15:09

Originally posted by brooksy
why is it huntleys fault, was maxine carr chained to his side or something. shes commited an act which most people would heave at and to make any comment in her innocence is disgraceful in my opinion. mighnt be me but this thread seems to be going down a hindley and bradey road, hope not
Huntley told Carr he was innocent and she believed him. How is that her fault? It was Huntley who lied, she just believed him. It is Huntley who is to blame.

Sidla

27-02-2005, 15:11

Originally posted by saxon51
Sorry, but that has got to be the most pathetic arguement in her defense that I have ever heard. Blaming Huntley's crime for her crime??

Knowingly receiving stolen goods isn't made a lesser crime simply because someone else stole the goods in the first place, because it's THEIR fault.

Walking into someone's house and nicking their video because THEY left the door open doesn't make it a lesser crime.

So what's the difference?
This doesn't even make any sence to me. What does this have to do with anything?

saxon51

27-02-2005, 15:14

Originally posted by Sidla
Huntley told Carr he was innocent and she believed him. How is that her fault? It was Huntley who lied, she just believed him. It is Huntley who is to blame.

Once again, a load of cobblers. If she believed him to be innocent, then why would she agree to give him a false alibi? Is she THAT thick?

brooksy

27-02-2005, 15:16

Originally posted by Sidla
Huntley told Carr he was innocent and she believed him. How is that her fault? It was Huntley who lied, she just believed him. It is Huntley who is to blame. who right so if i told you i was the popes brother in law youd believe me, the word naive springs to mind

Lucy_Smith

27-02-2005, 15:17

Originally posted by brooksy
was maxine carr chained to his side or something

No...he had her mind in chains, making her believe she had nothing without him. If he said he was innocent to her she had to believe him or she had nothing. Very simple.

She was not thinking logically when she chose to defend him. Think of Huntley as a chemical polluting her every thought, and she believed everything he said.

saxon51

27-02-2005, 15:17

Originally posted by Sidla
This doesn't even make any sence to me. What does this have to do with anything?

Keep reading it, cos I can't see what the problem is.

It is no more confusing than the posts made in favour of the 'Poor Maxine Carr, it's not HER fault' brigade.

Unless of course you don't WANT to understand it.

Sidla

27-02-2005, 15:18

Originally posted by brooksy
who right so if i told you i was the popes brother in law youd believe me, the word naive springs to mind
Nail on head. Is being naive a crime now?

Edit: Just been reading some of the past news about the case on the BBC site. This bit sums it up pretty well:
Maxine Carr played no part in the actual murders. When the girls died, she was a hundred miles away in Grimsby, at the home of her mother.

But she did lie for Huntley, by supporting his story in interviews with the police and the media.

She later told detectives that Huntley was afraid he would be "fitted up" for the murders because he had previously been accused of rape, a charge that was eventually dropped.

Believing him to be innocent, Maxine Carr decided to support her partner. In interviews with the police, she said she could not accept that he killed the girls.

"Maxine Carr was acting under Huntley's influence," says Dr Boon.

"It would have been sheer manipulation."
Source: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3301685.stm

saxon51

27-02-2005, 15:20

Originally posted by Lucy_Smith
No...he had her mind in chains, making her believe she had nothing without him. If he said he was innocent to her she had to believe him or she had nothing. Very simple.

She was not thinking logically when she chose to defend him. Think of Huntley as a chemical polluting her every thought, and she believed everything he said.

That's right, let's make her the victim in all this.

Strewth!!!!!!!

Sidla

27-02-2005, 15:22

Originally posted by saxon51
That's right, let's make her the victim in all this.
Like it or not, she was a victim in all this!

brooksy

27-02-2005, 15:24

i have to agree with saxon, totaly gone 180 degrees this , lets get a free the maxine carr thread going. just try and remember who the real victims are here ,not to sick b-------.

Lucy_Smith

27-02-2005, 15:25

Saxon what you don't understand is that she is a victim of a very dangerous, manipulative and evil man. You have never been under the influence of such a person and if you ever are you may be amazed at what lengths you will go to to keep them happy.

But I don't expect you to understand, like I said until you have been there or experienced it. Why do you think victims of domestic violence stay with their abusers so long? Do you think they like being treated like they are? They have no way out and neither did Maxine.

saxon51

27-02-2005, 15:28

Originally posted by Lucy_Smith
Saxon what you don't understand is that she is a victim of a very dangerous, manipulative and evil man. You have never been under the influence of such a person and if you ever are you may be amazed at what lengths you will go to to keep them happy.

But I don't expect you to understand, like I said until you have been there or experienced it. Why do you think victims of domestic violence stay with their abusers so long? Do you think they like being treated like they are? They have no way out and neither did Maxine.

Lucy, please show me a link to this. One that proves she was under his power, or whatever her excuse is.

brooksy

27-02-2005, 15:31

Originally posted by Lucy_Smith
Saxon what you don't understand is that she is a victim of a very dangerous, manipulative and evil man. You have never been under the influence of such a person and if you ever are you may be amazed at what lengths you will go to to keep them happy.

But I don't expect you to understand, like I said until you have been there or experienced it. Why do you think victims of domestic violence stay with their abusers so long? Do you think they like being treated like they are? They have no way out and neither did Maxine. i think your way of the mark with that quote. to try to compare this situation to domestic violence is outrages. my sister suffered at the hands of this but stayed for her children. totally differant.

Sidla

27-02-2005, 15:31

Originally posted by saxon51
Lucy, please show me a link to this. One that proves she was under his power, or whatever her excuse is.
Please refer to my quote above:
Maxine Carr played no part in the actual murders. When the girls died, she was a hundred miles away in Grimsby, at the home of her mother.

But she did lie for Huntley, by supporting his story in interviews with the police and the media.

She later told detectives that Huntley was afraid he would be "fitted up" for the murders because he had previously been accused of rape, a charge that was eventually dropped.

Believing him to be innocent, Maxine Carr decided to support her partner. In interviews with the police, she said she could not accept that he killed the girls.

"Maxine Carr was acting under Huntley's influence," says Dr Boon.

"It would have been sheer manipulation."
Source: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3301685.stm

This has all been accepted as the truth in courts of law.

saxon51

27-02-2005, 15:45

So...believing him to be innocent, she decided to lie to protect him. Sorry, doesn't make any sense at all. If he was innocent, why would SHE think he needed a false alibi.

Still don't see any evidence of his overwhelming hold over her yet.

And you can argue your case till the cows come home, but you will never convince me that she should be treated any differently than the lying, child murder supporter that she clearly is.

This thread has nothing to do with what happened in court. It concerns what we think should happen now. Those of us who find her part in the case to be evil (ie defending her child murdering lover), and she should deal with it, are stating how we feel about her and her actions.

Lucy_Smith

27-02-2005, 15:45

Sidla's link does the job perfectly. "Psychopath" is the layman's term for somebody with anti-social personality disorder.

And yes, it is exactly the same as domestic violence. Most abusers have some sort of personality disorder but are so manipulative at first you don't see it. I thought my abuser was my soulmate. I have now learnt that he secretly searched for everything I wanted in a man and became that person. He was a wonderful actor and he had me hooked. And that is how it happens, it happened to me, it happened to your sister and it happened to Maxine Carr.

But like I said, I don't expect any of you to understand because you have never experienced it, but it does annoy me when you are so judgemental about something you know nothing about.

brooksy

27-02-2005, 15:49

so what in your opinion is she actually guilty of in the eyes of the law. thats what we have courts for, you are making out shes totally innocent and just been used in this whole case. are you saying she was just naive, cause ithink not.

Lucy_Smith

27-02-2005, 15:51

I think (correct me if I'm wrong anybody) he told her he had been in trouble with the police before and that they were going to "set him up" for what happened with the girls. So believing this to be true and because she was so hooked, she lied for him, thinking that would be that. But what she didn't for one minute believe could be true was that he could have possibly killed the girls. In her mind he was absolutely perfect.

brooksy

27-02-2005, 15:53

so in your opinion shes guilty of no crime whatsoever, in that case why is she in prison at the moment. lost me a bit there.

Lucy_Smith

27-02-2005, 15:54

No I do believe she was guilty. She lied and invented a false alibi. Fact. But the reasons why she did this are complicated and involve a little bit more than being naive.

Jesus...I have spent years of my life studying Psychology, you would think I would have been able to spot somebody like this?! If it could happen to me it can happen to anybody. Abuse doesn't just strike people who are naive.

Sidla

27-02-2005, 15:54

Originally posted by saxon51
So...believing him to be innocent, she decided to lie to protect him. Sorry, doesn't make any sense at all. If he was innocent, why would SHE think he needed a false alibi.
That quote explains it all, if you would just read it.
She later told detectives that Huntley was afraid he would be "fitted up" for the murders because he had previously been accused of rape, a charge that was eventually dropped.
That is why Huntley convinced her to give him an alibi, as Lucy said.

Sidla

27-02-2005, 15:57

Originally posted by brooksy
why is she in prison at the moment. lost me a bit there.
Err, she's not in prison at the moment...

Just goes to show you've carefully analysed all the facts. :loopy:

brooksy

27-02-2005, 16:01

smart ars , suppose thats you are a moderator and im just a mere mortal. back to the original subject and a final point, i think she either in prison or out of prison should be left to suffer whatever abuse or mental torment she mau get. in my opinion she deserves it , end of story.:loopy:

Sidla

27-02-2005, 16:06

Originally posted by brooksy
in my opinion she deserves it , end of story.:loopy:
But we're back where we started. She simply doesn't deserve it. She's already suffered too much IMO.

brooksy

27-02-2005, 16:11

well imo she hasnt suffered and to be honest i cannot see how a gown adult can not have seen what was happening in front of her own eyes. the argument tou are putting would probably apply to hundreds of cases in britain, where do you draw the line ?.

saxon51

27-02-2005, 16:14

Originally posted by Lucy_Smith
No I do believe she was guilty. She lied and invented a false alibi. Fact. But the reasons why she did this are complicated and involve a little bit more than being naive.

Jesus...I have spent years of my life studying Psychology, you would think I would have been able to spot somebody like this?! If it could happen to me it can happen to anybody. Abuse doesn't just strike people who are naive.

I haven't seen any evidence that she was abused.

And Sidla, if she was forced into lying for the toerag due to his Psychopathic nature, and she was so out of control of the whole situation, then why did she serve 2 years?

Either she's lied to protect a murderer, or she hasn't. Irrespective of 'assumed' behaviour in their relationship.

brooksy

27-02-2005, 16:18

just one more point on the subject, what would the to girls parents think of your thoughts. why in this country do the guilty seem to get more sympathy than the victims. does anybody in the generallpublic care less if she rots in hell, ithink not.

Lucy_Smith

27-02-2005, 16:24

Abuse doesn't have to be physical. Brainwashing somebody and making them believe things that aren't true is abuse.

She served two years because in this country you are punished for your crimes whether you did them intentionally are whether you were mentally incapacitated. How many cases have you heard of women who lash out at their abusive husbands only to be charged with ABH/GBH? And yes, she was right to be punished. She broke the law plain and simple. But what I don't understand why we are much happier to blame Carr for what happened than Huntley.

Brooksy-I am used to your sort of comments. At the end of the day you are just ignorant. You don't know what it is like. You think it could never happen to you. But it can, grown person, child, doctor, unemployed...it doesn't matter! You can be as intelligent or as stupid as you want, they find a way.

Lucy_Smith

27-02-2005, 16:26

And Brooksy if you actually took the time to read my previous comments you would see that I have said I have the utmost sympathy for the girls' parents. Far more so than for Carr.

brooksy

27-02-2005, 16:30

Originally posted by Lucy_Smith
Abuse doesn't have to be physical. Brainwashing somebody and making them believe things that aren't true is abuse.

She served two years because in this country you are punished for your crimes whether you did them intentionally are whether you were mentally incapacitated. How many cases have you heard of women who lash out at their abusive husbands only to be charged with ABH/GBH? And yes, she was right to be punished. She broke the law plain and simple. But what I don't understand why we are much happier to blame Carr for what happened than Huntley.

Brooksy-I am used to your sort of comments. At the end of the day you are just ignorant. You don't know what it is like. You think it could never happen to you. But it can, grown person, child, doctor, unemployed...it doesn't matter! You can be as intelligent or as stupid as you want, they find a way. my opinion is my opnion, i dont claim to be an expert on anything, you obviousley do, as for being ignorant i dont no. youl have to ask people who realy no me. im obviously not as intelligent as you because of your comments. the one think im not is blinkered and self obssesive.

Sidla

27-02-2005, 16:30

Originally posted by brooksy
well imo she hasnt suffered and to be honest i cannot see how a gown adult can not have seen what was happening in front of her own eyes.
It's wasn't for you to decide, it is what has already been decided by the jury. And she has suffered greatly by being vilified by the press so now almost everyone believes she is a child molesting murderess.

Saxon, she served 2 years for providing Huntley with a false alibi, in a "Conspiracy to pervert the course of justice". The length of the sentence was probably due the severity of the crime committed by Huntley.

Sidla

27-02-2005, 16:34

Originally posted by brooksy
just one more point on the subject, what would the to girls parents think of your thoughts. why in this country do the guilty seem to get more sympathy than the victims. does anybody in the generallpublic care less if she rots in hell, ithink not.
I have every sympathy for the parents of Holly and Jessica, and pray that I will never face the same situation myself. However, if I was in their position I hope that I would still listen to reason and logic, and realise that Maxine is in no way to blame for the death of my daughter.

Lucy_Smith

27-02-2005, 16:37

I'm not an expert but I have far more experience about this than you. And after all I've been through I still can't stand comments such as "you should have known", "anybody could've seen through it" and all the rest of it. When I call you ignorant I mean about this particular situation because you are judging people without knowing anything about it.

brooksy

27-02-2005, 16:44

i personally dont no what youv been thro, thats not my buissand its not what this thread is about. everyones opinions vary and thats why we live in a civilised society. your opinions are yours , dosnt by any stretch of the imagination make them right. if you think they do then thats your problem im afraid, exp or not in this matter.

saxon51

27-02-2005, 16:48

Originally posted by Sidla
It's wasn't for you to decide, it is what has already been decided by the jury. And she has suffered greatly by being vilified by the press so now almost everyone believes she is a child molesting murderess.

Saxon, she served 2 years for providing Huntley with a false alibi, in a "Conspiracy to pervert the course of justice". The length of the sentence was probably due the severity of the crime committed by Huntley.

I for one am not saying she is a child molesting murderer. I have already stated that she had nothing to do with the murders. That was a totally different crime.

The two years was for "Conspiracy to pervert the course of justice", in that she knowingly (and unless I see evidence, not conjecture, to the contrary) and willingly gave a false alibi to a suspected child murderer in order that he should be free irrespective of whether he did it or not. Maybe next time she teams up with a bloke, she ought to be a bit more choosey about the lies she tells to protect him.

As far as his influence on her is concerned, then let's hope other criminals are offered the same respect when they are (allegedly) influenced by someone else....be they male or female!

Lucy_Smith

27-02-2005, 16:51

That women in relationships with men with personality disorders are abused and brainwashed is not an opinion it is a fact.

And, again, if you would've read my previous posts I have been very open in saying I have been in a relationship with a man with narcissistic personality disorder.

Why don't you get on google and look up the FACTS of antisocial personality disorder (which is what Ian Huntley has) before posting comments such as "I cannot see how a grown adult can not have seen what was happening in front of her own eyes".

It may make you realise why I get so defensive.

Lucy_Smith

27-02-2005, 17:01

http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/ency/article/000921.htm

"Individuals with antisocial personality disorder are often angry and arrogant but may be capable of superficial wit and charm. They may be adept at flattery and at manipulating the emotions of others"

brooksy

27-02-2005, 17:03

sorry to hear about your past relationship, im sure it was terrible but like i said its about opinions . if you dont agree then fine im sure theres issues ive had bad exps with but thats not what this thread is about. i stick by my comments because i to feel strongly on issues, exp or not

saxon51

27-02-2005, 17:05

Originally posted by Lucy_Smith
http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/ency/article/000921.htm

"Individuals with antisocial personality disorder are often angry and arrogant but may be capable of superficial wit and charm. They may be adept at flattery and at manipulating the emotions of others"

Not wishing to belittle the seriousness of this thread, or make light of your past experiences Lucy, but aren't the above required traits for politicians.

And don't we make our own minds up whether we agree with, or vote for, them?

Lucy_Smith

27-02-2005, 17:07

You still don't get it though. It's not an opinion it is a fact. Yes it is an opinion as to whether Maxine Carr should be protected or not. But the fact that she has been abused is exactly that, a fact.

I think the thing that annoys me the most is comments you made about her not seeing what was happening. She wasn't capable of seeing. That is a fact.

Lucy_Smith

27-02-2005, 17:10

LOL Saxon, you aren't far off! I can't remember actual research but have been told something like 20% of company directors and polictians show signs of APD!

In all seriousness, only a small percentage of people with APD actually do something as serious as Huntley. But when they do it is awful and although I have been defending Maxine here, nothing she has gone through is ever comparable to the parents of those children.

brooksy

27-02-2005, 17:11

so going back to the original question do you think she should begiven lifelong anonymity, putting aside your own exp and your opinion she was abused.

Sidla

27-02-2005, 17:12

Originally posted by saxon51
The two years was for "Conspiracy to pervert the course of justice", in that she knowingly (and unless I see evidence, not conjecture, to the contrary) and willingly gave a false alibi to a suspected child murderer in order that he should be free irrespective of whether he did it or not.
She did knowingly and willingly give a false alibi, I'm not denying that.

The bit I take exception to is that you seem to be presuming that she knew, or had at least the slightest inckling, that Huntley was guilty. Come off it, she loved this man, there was no doubt in her mind that he was innocent.

After she realised the truth she even verbally attacked Huntley. It seems obvious to me that she would not have defended Huntley if she knew the truth.

Just to add, my opinion is that she should recieve anonymity, because she has suffered enough at the hands of Huntley, the press and the mob.

If I thought that she protected Huntley knowing he was guilty then I wouldn't give a stuff what happens to her.

Lucy_Smith

27-02-2005, 17:14

Yes I do believe she should be given lifelong anonymity because if not I doubt she would last a day. And I do not feel it is right for her to die because she was a victim of Huntley as well, she was just a normal woman who fell for the wrong man.

brooksy

27-02-2005, 17:16

floodgates spring to mind im afraid.

saxon51

27-02-2005, 17:18

Originally posted by Lucy_Smith
LOL Saxon, you aren't far off! I can't remember actual research but have been told something like 20% of company directors and polictians show signs of APD!

In all seriousness, only a small percentage of people with APD actually do something as serious as Huntley. But when they do it is awful and although I have been defending Maxine here, nothing she has gone through is ever comparable to the parents of those children.

Fair enough, let's let it lie there. My opinion hasn't changed, she committed the crime, she should live with it.

Any other extenuating circumstances aside, and maybe Huntley has a few aswell, are either real or assumed in her defence. No one will ever know.

Back to the question.......Should she have anonimity?

IMO (and finally)....No!!!

Lucy_Smith

27-02-2005, 17:21

We agree to disagree then. And it is probably best because I'm supposed to be working!

But next time you go to vote for a politician...make sure you see through the "superficial charm"!

brooksy

27-02-2005, 17:22

yes think its run its course this thread and imo she shoudnt be given any kind of anonymity. suspect a poll would have backed this up????.

brooksy

27-02-2005, 17:33

just a quick note lucy smith nothing personal in any comments, dont work to hard by the way.

happychick

28-02-2005, 11:43

Hi folks, this was a great debate.I left the thread earlier on because i could feel myself getting so angry,and i didnt want to start slinging insults around.That wouldn't have been at all productive,and, the subject of the thread was too good to get it closed down by behaving badly.

A big thanks to all you guys out there who managed to keep the thread going,:clap:

roughy101

21-08-2005, 16:45

maxine carr has been sent to a £2000 a week private clinic suffering from stress,she has been admitted as a nhs patient to a new private hostpital ,her course of treatment will last over 16 weeks to the tune of over £30.000,i think this is disgraceful,why cant she be treated in an ordinary phyciatric unit like the rest of joe public,she is already costing the tax payer enough money having to have police protection 24/7:loopy: :loopy:

ANGELUS

21-08-2005, 16:48

Why cant she just be shot more like!
And Ian Huntley as well.

Why should we be made to pay for them both.. its disgusting.

Sidla

21-08-2005, 16:59

Originally posted by roughy101
maxine carr has been sent to a £2000 a week private clinic suffering from stress,she has been admitted as a nhs patient to a new private hostpital ,her course of treatment will last over 16 weeks to the tune of over £30.000,i think this is disgraceful,why cant she be treated in an ordinary phyciatric unit like the rest of joe public,she is already costing the tax payer enough money having to have police protection 24/7:loopy: :loopy:
They don't send NHS patients to private hospitals do they?

Where did you find this story? I can't see anything about it after a brief search.

banesmabes

21-08-2005, 17:00

Originally posted by ANGELUS
Why cant she just be shot more like!
And Ian Huntley as well.

Why should we be made to pay for them both.. its disgusting.

Please remember she wasn't found guilty of murder. She did not kill those girls. Yes, she did a terrible thing trying to cover up for her boyfriend - but she didn't kill them.

roughy101

21-08-2005, 17:03

Originally posted by Sidla
They don't send NHS patients to private hospitals do they?

Where did you find this story? I can't see anything about it after a brief search. it is in todays sunday people.

pdrnsf

21-08-2005, 17:05

People say love can do a number of things, but its truley shocking what it made Maxine do, just because she loved Ian.

roughy101

21-08-2005, 17:06

pdrnsf

21-08-2005, 17:10

Was that pointed at me?! I didnt say you did it-did i?!

I just think she covered up for Ian because she loved him, and in my opinion love is a force to be reckoned with if it makes people cover up for someone who has committed murder.

Thats all, no dig at you meant.

ANGELUS

21-08-2005, 17:11

Originally posted by banesmabes
Please remember she wasn't found guilty of murder. She did not kill those girls. Yes, she did a terrible thing trying to cover up for her boyfriend - but she didn't kill them.

Hey there!

She wasnt found guilty, but she lied to police, the courts and everybody.. which for me, when you know your BF has killed 2 kiddies and you cover it up.. is just as bad.

And she's still shafting us all by letting us pay our hard earned cash into looking after her in her 'ill' state.

venger

21-08-2005, 17:33

Originally posted by ANGELUS
Hey there!

She wasnt found guilty, but she lied to police, the courts and everybody.. which for me, when you know your BF has killed 2 kiddies and you cover it up.. is just as bad.

And she's still shafting us all by letting us pay our hard earned cash into looking after her in her 'ill' state.

Let it lie !

It's bad enough that you support Man United, let alone having opinions like this :suspect:

ANGELUS

21-08-2005, 17:40

Originally posted by venger
Let it lie !

It's bad enough that you support Man United, let alone having opinions like this :suspect:

Why you little!!
-Angelus shaking Venger by the throat- ala Homer stylee-
:)

She's a liar- who covered up for her murdered boyfriend.
She gets all thats coming to her for me matey.

depoix

21-08-2005, 18:29

stress? what the xxxx would she know about stress,cops protecting her 24/7,probably doing her shopping for her,does she have a job? or does a new id give her a pension?

stress? id give the lying,bitch stress, she aids and abets a murderer and then gets to make a living out of it,

crime doesnt pay? i think it does in her case and also the bulger murderers, wise up mr blair,they are taking the pixx

Sidla

21-08-2005, 18:31

Originally posted by ANGELUS
when you know your BF has killed 2 kiddies and you cover it up..
The fact of the matter is that she didn't know that at all. She thought the police were trying to stitch Huntley up with it.

This has all been discussed in a huge uber-thread somewhere else. Maybe this should be merged?

Ant

21-08-2005, 18:38

It's all a bit tabloidy gut reaction, isn't it? Lost for a headline in the silly season? "EVIL SOHAM CARR ALLOWED TO USE PUBLIC TRANSPORT". She protected someone she loved, unaware (I hope) of his guilt, and has served her time. Let her get on with her life.

depoix

21-08-2005, 18:43

Originally posted by Sidla
The fact of the matter is that she didn't know that at all. She thought the police were trying to stitch Huntley up with it.

This has all been discussed in a huge uber-thread somewhere else. Maybe this should be merged? i cant believe she didnt know, she lived with him,any one who lives with some one notices changes in their mood,attitude etc, he couldnt have been cold/cool enough to not give things away to her.......she must have had some suspicion,daily tv reports,police searches in the area, the same school as he worked, no, she must have had suspicions,and then theres the personal moments together,he must have made some comment,the jobs crap lets move, i was down the pub when that happened,that sort of thing, i dont accept she did not know something that may have helped the police at the time

ANGELUS

21-08-2005, 18:48

Originally posted by depoix
stress? what the xxxx would she know about stress,cops protecting her 24/7,probably doing her shopping for her,does she have a job? or does a new id give her a pension?

stress? id give the lying,bitch stress, she aids and abets a murderer and then gets to make a living out of it,

crime doesnt pay? i think it does in her case and also the bulger murderers, wise up mr blair,they are taking the pixx

Loving the post!
And very true as well.

Why should we all pay for them to cosy up in prison at our expense, why for the love of god?

I, and I'm sure 99% of people in Sheffield are law abiding and havent done anything wrong in their lives.. so why should we pay for both of them to be protected from what they have done?

She knew summat was up, and yet instead of turning him into the police in horror at what he had done, she lied for him!

nick2

21-08-2005, 18:50

Originally posted by Sidla
They don't send NHS patients to private hospitals do they?

Yes, my mate had her appendix out on the NHS in a private hospital.

tulip

21-08-2005, 18:53

Originally posted by pdrnsf
Was that pointed at me?! I didnt say you did it-did i?!

I just think she covered up for Ian because she loved him, and in my opinion love is a force to be reckoned with if it makes people cover up for someone who has committed murder.

Thats all, no dig at you meant. There are limits to what I would do for love, I wouldn't have a partner who was a convicted rapist in the first place and I wouldn't give him an alibi just because he said 'I didn't do it':gag:

Ant

21-08-2005, 18:57

When all's said and done, we didn't sit on the jury, so we don't have all the facts. She's served her time for the things she did wrong.

tulip

21-08-2005, 19:01

I didn't serve any time and did nothing wrong but I couldn't get an nhs dentist! Who do you ask to pay for your private treatment? I should have stayed in England if they are giving out free private medical care:rolleyes:

Sidla

21-08-2005, 19:03

Originally posted by Ant
It's all a bit tabloidy gut reaction, isn't it? Lost for a headline in the silly season? "EVIL SOHAM CARR ALLOWED TO USE PUBLIC TRANSPORT". She protected someone she loved, unaware (I hope) of his guilt, and has served her time. Let her get on with her life.
Yep, they're obviously short on news today.

Reporter: Bad news Mr. Editor, I don't have anything to report!
Editor: What??? This is terrible. You're going to have to come up with something otherwise we'll never be up to the standards of the News of the World!
Reporter: Yeah, I know sir, but what can I do?
Editor: We need a subject that really gets people going.
Reporter: Like what?
Editor: (ponders for a second) What's Maxine Carr up to these days?
Reporter: Ah, nothing much. She's suffering from stress which is as expected I suppose.
Editor: Where abouts?
Reporter: She's being treated in a private hospital as the NHS didn't have the right resources.
Editor: Oh right. So she's paying? That must be expensive, how can she afford it?
Reporter: Oh no sir, the NHS are paying.
Editor: What?? Now this is good.
Reporter: But sir, as I said, she's only in a private hospital because the NHS couldn't cope.
Editor: But the tax-payers are paying for her to be in a private hospital!! Roll the front page! "Tax-payers fund Carr's Private Treatment"!
Reporter: Well if you say so sir.

Ant

21-08-2005, 19:05

So you're envious of Maxine Carr, tulip? I'm sure that - apart from the fact that she gets free dental work - her life is pretty much screwed up. Let her get her nice teeth and we'll all get on with our lives.

owdlad

21-08-2005, 19:10

I am waiting to see how long it is before she if given plastic surgery to change the way she looks, so that she will be able to live "in the community" again.

tulip

21-08-2005, 19:13

Originally posted by Ant
So you're envious of Maxine Carr, tulip? I'm sure that - apart from the fact that she gets free dental work - her life is pretty much screwed up. Let her get her nice teeth and we'll all get on with our lives. I suppose you're right. She made a huge mistake covering up for her perverted lover but it's not unforgivable unless you are the parents/family of the dead girls. I hope the family of the dead girls get free private treatment just to balance things out a little. I'd rather die in a gutter than be in Maxine Carrs shoes ................ there but for the grace of god?

roughy101

21-08-2005, 19:13

Originally posted by Ant
So you're envious of Maxine Carr, tulip? I'm sure that - apart from the fact that she gets free dental work - her life is pretty much screwed up. Let her get her nice teeth and we'll all get on with our lives. for gods sake,lets all feel sorry for maxine carr,i feel sorry for the peron who is suffering depression because they have lost a child to some pervert. you can bet your life they wouldnt be sent to a private clinic to the tune of £30.000 :rant:

roughy101

21-08-2005, 19:17

Originally posted by owdlad
I am waiting to see how long it is before she if given plastic surgery to change the way she looks, so that she will be able to live "in the community" again. hasnt she already been offered plastic surgery and a new life somewhere else, i think australia was mentioned and she refusedbecause she wanted to be near her mother,imo i think she enjoyes the publicity.

Ant

21-08-2005, 19:21

for gods sake,lets all feel sorry for maxine carr,i feel sorry for the peron who is suffering depression because they have lost a child to some pervert. you can bet your life they wouldnt be sent to a private clinic to the tune of £30.000

Nah, you've got it wrong. I don't feel sorry for Maxine Carr. I just don't begrudge her dental treatment. The girls' parents have nothing to do with Maxine Carr's dental treatment, if you look at it logically.

Ant

21-08-2005, 19:23

imo i think she enjoyes the publicity. Really? How'd you work that one out?

roughy101

21-08-2005, 19:25

Originally posted by Ant
Nah, you've got it wrong. I don't feel sorry for Maxine Carr. I just don't begrudge her dental treatment. The girls' parents have nothing to do with Maxine Carr's dental treatment, if you look at it logically. i dont think i have got it wrong i never mentioned dental treatment you are taking the thread a little off subject:thumbsup:

Ant

21-08-2005, 19:29

Ah, I'd been told at work it was dental treatment. Ok, if you want to be pedantic, I don't begrudge Maxine Carr psychiatric treatment.

tulip

21-08-2005, 19:37

Originally posted by Ant
Ah, I'd been told at work it was dental treatment. Ok, if you want to be pedantic, I don't begrudge Maxine Carr psychiatric treatment. Roughy101 is not the one being pedantic. The thread stated "Soham liar maxine in £2000 a week clinic" I think the point is, it seems unjust that the innocents are given less help than the guilty - it's nothing to do with whether people should get free medical care.

Sidla

21-08-2005, 19:44

Originally posted by tulip
it seems unjust that the innocents are given less help than the guilty
You'll probably find that they're both equal, just that nobody hears about it when Joe Public gets private treatment on the NHS. Anyway, Carr is not guilty of anything anymore. She has served her sentence and is now a free woman.

Ant

21-08-2005, 19:44

I'm not aware that she is being given more help than anyone else, innocent or otherwise. I simply said that I don't begrudge her that treatment, free or otherwise.

depoix

21-08-2005, 19:55

Originally posted by Sidla
You'll probably find that they're both equal, just that nobody hears about it when Joe Public gets private treatment on the NHS. Anyway, Carr is not guilty of anything anymore. She has served her sentence and is now a free woman. back to the standard reply,
a couple of months in jail and all is forgiven, the publics memory is erased due to instigated lack of media reporting

roughy101

21-08-2005, 19:58

i dont begrudge her any treatment i just dont think it should be in a brand new private hostpital,as for whats going on in her head she only has herselfe to blame ,she ought imo never to have a peceful moment again.

Ant

21-08-2005, 20:05

Originally posted by roughy101
i dont begrudge her any treatment i just dont think it should be in a brand new private hostpital,as for whats going on in her head she only has herselfe to blame ,she ought imo never to have a peceful moment again.

Is it her fault she's in a brand new hospital? Someone has to be in a brand new hospital. Or should recently released inmates be forced to use scruffy old ones? Bit hard to legislate for, that one.

And you've missed the point entirely. She isn't a child killer. She very stupidly helped her boyfriend out with an alibi after he persuaded her he was being hounded by them. You weren't on the jury, and you're not a judge; it's not for you to decide her sentence. How would you have dealt with her life after her release if you were Home Secretary? You said she should never have a peaceful moment. Would employing someone with a pointy stick to prod her bottom 24/7 have done the trick?

tulip

21-08-2005, 20:11

Originally posted by Ant
Is it her fault she's in a brand new hospital? Someone has to be in a brand new hospital. Or should recently released inmates be forced to use scruffy old ones? Bit hard to legislate for, that one.

And you've missed the point entirely. She isn't a child killer. She very stupidly helped her boyfriend out with an alibi after he persuaded her he was being hounded by them. You weren't on the jury, and you're not a judge; it's not for you to decide her sentence. How would you have dealt with her life after her release if you were Home Secretary? You said she should never have a peaceful moment. Would employing someone with a pointy stick to prod her bottom 24/7 have done the trick? NONE OF US HAVE SAID SHE'S A CHILD KILLER!!!! Can't you find any worthy causes to fight?

depoix

21-08-2005, 20:13

Originally posted by Ant
Is it her fault she's in a brand new hospital? Someone has to be in a brand new hospital. Or should recently released inmates be forced to use scruffy old ones? Bit hard to legislate for, that one.

And you've missed the point entirely. She isn't a child killer. She very stupidly helped her boyfriend out with an alibi after he persuaded her he was being hounded by them. You weren't on the jury, and you're not a judge; it's not for you to decide her sentence. How would you have dealt with her life after her release if you were Home Secretary? You said she should never have a peaceful moment. Would employing someone with a pointy stick to prod her bottom 24/7 have done the trick? how do you know she is not a judge?i think the lady has a valid point, pointing out that the criminal is often better treated than the victim

roughy101

21-08-2005, 20:18

Originally posted by Ant
for, that one.

And you've missed the point entirely. She isn't a child killer. She very stupidly helped her boyfriend out with an alibi after he persuaded her he was being hounded by them. You weren't on the jury, and you're not a judge; it's not for you to decide her sentence. How would you have dealt with her life after her release if you were Home Secretary? You said she should never have a peaceful moment. Would employing someone with a pointy stick to prod her bottom 24/7 have done the trick? a BRAND NEW PRIVATE HOSPITAL i have never said she was a child killer,DID I? i said imo which i am entitled to as far as i am concerned ,whenever she closes her eyes at night she should see the charred sexually abused bodies of holly and jessica and live her worste nightmare, but back on thread which you obviousley havnt read from the beginning my post had nothing to do with her sentence it was about someone who is already costing the tax payer a fortune in police protection. you tell me why she should get better treatment than the taxpayers, :loopy:

Ant

21-08-2005, 20:20

You're being a little silly, tulip. I'm not supporting Maxine Carr's cause, I'm contributing to a discussion.

The point I'm making about the child killer referrence (you don't need to shout by the way), is that all Maxine Carr was found guilty of (as I remember) was perjury. Her crime is being lumped in with that of Ian Huntley's, which was infinitely more abhorrent. She has served her sentence, and should now be considered a free woman without being hounded by either the press, or the public. So what if she's suffering from stress and is receiving treatment on the NHS in a posh hospital? It could have happened to anyone - it's not her fault. Why should it bother you?

Ant

21-08-2005, 20:22

how do you know she is not a judge Law of averages.

owdlad

21-08-2005, 20:23

Seeing as she lives not far (allegedly) from Sheffield, there is a chance that she may read this forum. :| Then how would you all react to her reading what you think of her?

tulip

21-08-2005, 20:27

Originally posted by roughy101
a BRAND NEW PRIVATE HOSPITAL i have never said she was a child killer,DID I? i said imo which i am entitled to as far as i am concerned ,whenever she closes her eyes at night she should see the charred sexually abused bodies of holly and jessica and live her worste nightmare, but back on thread which you obviousley havnt read from the beginning my post had nothing to do with her sentence it was about someone who is already costing the tax payer a fortune in police protection. you tell me why she should get better treatment than the taxpayers, :loopy: I think all criminals should be forgiven whatever they have done EVEN if they keep repeat offending over and over again. They should have the best private health care that the tax payers can afford while our friends/relatives die waiting for NHS treatment. Holidays abroad so that they can overcome the stress of prison life and lovely houses in the New Forest. There I feel soooooooooooo much better now:loopy: :loopy:

:loopy: Alan BC would make a very good judge:clap: :clap:

roughy101

21-08-2005, 20:31

Originally posted by owdlad
Seeing as she lives not far (allegedly) from Sheffield, there is a chance that she may read this forum. :| Then how would you all react to her reading what you think of her? owdlad i wouldnt mind at all,she could have gone away with a new identity with her mother the same as the boys who killed jamie bulge, we dont hear about them all the time ,she wanted to stay in grimsby where sh is well known,yes she did serve her sentence and was very misguided,but i do think she enjoyes the publicity making her out to be a victim

Ant

21-08-2005, 20:33

as i am concerned ,whenever she closes her eyes at night she should see the charred sexually abused bodies of holly and jessica and live her worste nightmare, but back on thread which you obviousley havnt read from the beginning my post had nothing to do with her sentence it was about someone who is already costing the tax payer a fortune in police protection. you tell me why she should get better treatment than the taxpayers,

I'm sure she does indeed have unpleasant thoughts tormenting her at night. Do you honestly think she was happy at finding out she'd covered for her child-murdering boyfriend? The children's deaths of course, weren't her fault, so why wish on her everlasting images of their deaths?

I have now read all the posts so I am up to speed. Thanks for highlighting that. I have chosen to make no comments on her police protection, and have addressed only the title of your thread. She is entitled to exactly the same medical treatment as you or I, and no more. But I will say something over her police protection, now you've prompted me. Why shouldn't she have it? If her life has been threatened, she is entitled to the same response from the police as we all are. I'm sure there have been very many threats that the police have obviously taken very seriously. She's now a free woman and if people stopped hounding her and making threats on her life, the police protection would be unnecessary.

roughy101

21-08-2005, 20:34

Originally posted by tulip
I think all criminals should be forgiven whatever they have done EVEN if they keep repeat offending over and over again. They should have the best private health care that the tax payers can afford while our friends/relatives die waiting for NHS treatment. Holidays abroad so that they can overcome the stress of prison life and lovely houses in the New Forest. There I feel soooooooooooo much better now:loopy: :loopy:

:loopy: Alan BC would make a very good judge:clap: :clap: tulip you forgot the peadophiles:loopy: you slipping girl:hihi:

tulip

21-08-2005, 20:34

ANGELUS

21-08-2005, 20:35

Originally posted by Ant
You're being a little silly, tulip. I'm not supporting Maxine Carr's cause, I'm contributing to a discussion.

The point I'm making about the child killer referrence (you don't nead to shout by the way), is that all Maxine Carr was found guilty of (as I remember) is contempt of court. Her crime is being lumped in with that of Ian Huntley's, which was infinitely more abhorrent. She has served her sentence, and should now be considered a free woman without being hounded by neither the press, nor the public. So what if she's suffering from stress and is receiving treatment on the NHS in a posh hospital? It could have happened to anyone - it's not her fault. Why should it bother you?

Oh Ant?? Why mate?

She was found guilty of lying about the case to pervert the course of justice, lying to cover Huntleys tracks.

He killed the kids, fair enough, but for her to lie about it and cover Huntley-- she deserves everything she gets.

She hopefully will never get an easy ride in life, or she should not do for what she has done.

But to say- 'It could happen to anyone - its not her fault' ???

Sometimes, I dont get people on here, I really dont.

She knew full well what she was doing.
She should be punished for it to the full extent of the law and be locked up for life.

And it bothers me because the oh so wholesome british public seems to forget about these things very quickly in time, things we should never forget ie: The Bulger Killers, now walking scott free among us again.. and now Maxine Carr free to roam the world.

It sickens me sometimes this country, it really does.

Next we will be forgiving the people who blew up the 52 people in london as well :(

ANGELUS

21-08-2005, 20:36

Originally posted by tulip
Yes, you are right, I totally agree. Of couse it could 'happen to anyone' We should all have a minutes silence for Maxine Car, just in case she's reading this. Shame on everyone for adding to her stress:confused:

I know - poor old maxine.. bless her cotton socks!
She is innocent in all this isnt she, the poor little lamb.

Lets also say a minutes silence, for the killers of the people dead in the Trade Center bombings, the Bulger Killers, Princess Dianas & Jill Dando's killer as well-- all convicted- by they havent done anything also.. ********.

If Maxine is reading this.. have a nice life.. I'm sure someone hopefully will be sorting you soon enough :(

Rot in hell baby!

Ant

21-08-2005, 20:36

but i do think she enjoyes the publicity making her out to be a victim

How'd you work that one out? If your life were threatened to the degree that police protection were necessary, would you not be ever so slightly miffed?

tulip

21-08-2005, 20:37

Originally posted by roughy101
tulip you forgot the peadophiles:loopy: you slipping girl:hihi: How disrespectful of you roughy101, you mentioned the 'P' word - the thread will get pulled and then what will maxine carr have to be stressed about?

ANGELUS

21-08-2005, 20:39

Originally posted by tulip
How disrespectful of you roughy101, you mentioned the 'P' word - the thread will get pulled and then what will maxine carr have to be stressed about?

Oh yes- forgot Roy Whiting as well.
Silly me.. another convicted perv and killer.

He must be sorry now- lets give him lots of treatment and send him back out into the world again shall we?

Too many bleeding hearts in this country, which will be our downfall :(

tulip

21-08-2005, 20:43

Originally posted by ANGELUS
I know - poor old maxine.. bless her cotton socks!
She is innocent in all this isnt she, the poor little lamb.

Lets also say a minutes silence, for the killers of the people dead in the Trade Center bombings, the Bulger Killers, Princess Dianas & Jill Dando's killer as well-- all convicted- by they havent done anything also.. ********.

If Maxine is reading this.. have a nice life.. I'm sure someone hopefully will be sorting you soon enough :(

Rot in hell baby! But you forget, she did it for love didn't she? Anyone would have done the same. All you parents out there you would forgive her lapse of judgement wouldn't you? All she did was give a child killer an alibi:confused: Nothing serious:loopy:

Babooshka

21-08-2005, 20:44

Angelus, she has been punished to the full extent of the law that was passed against her. That punishment has since ended. It is not up to us to decide that further punishment is necessary, nor do we have to the right to ensure that said punishment will be delivered. This British public do not forget the atrocities that have occurred. We do, however, adhere to our justice system and behave in a fashion that is right and proper. When a criminal has served his time, he is no longer a criminal.

tulip

21-08-2005, 20:45

Originally posted by ANGELUS
Oh yes- forgot Roy Whiting as well.
Silly me.. another convicted perv and killer.

He must be sorry now- lets give him lots of treatment and send him back out into the world again shall we?

Too many bleeding hearts in this country, which will be our downfall :( He doesn't need treatment ,silly. He promisednot to do it again:rolleyes:

ANGELUS

21-08-2005, 20:47

Originally posted by tulip
But you forget, she did it for love didn't she? Anyone would have done the same. All you parents out there you would forgive her lapse of judgement wouldn't you? All she did was give a child killer an alibi:confused: Nothing serious:loopy:

I agree with you Tulip- you speak complete sense to me!

To prove the point let the government let out the perverts and kid killers and kid rapists shall we- see how safe we are then.

I'm sure we would be safe in our neighbourhoods while they are all out preying on the kids of the nation, because we can trust out 'nice trustworthy police force' to keep them all in check cant we?

Ant

21-08-2005, 20:48

Originally posted by ANGELUS
Oh Ant?? Why mate?

She was found guilty of lying about the case to pervert the course of justice, lying to cover Huntleys tracks.

He killed the kids, fair enough, but for her to lie about it and cover Huntley-- she deserves everything she gets.

She hopefully will never get an easy ride in life, or she should not do for what she has done.

But to say- 'It could happen to anyone - its not her fault' ???

Sometimes, I dont get people on here, I really dont.

She knew full well what she was doing.
She should be punished for it to the full extent of the law and be locked up for life.

And it bothers me because the oh so wholesome british public seems to forget about these things very quickly in time, things we should never forget ie: The Bulger Killers, now walking scott free among us again.. and now Maxine Carr free to roam the world.

It sickens me sometimes this country, it really does.

Next we will be forgiving the people who blew up the 52 people in london as well :(

Yes, I'm aware what she was guilty of. But you are twisting it by saying she did it not to cover Huntley's tracks, but because she didn't want him arrested for something she thought he hadn't done and was being fingered for. Yes it sounds stupid, but some people have a way of twisting things, and Huntley managed to warp the facts to make her see the situation in a totally different light to suit his own ends.

When you say He killed the kids, fair enough, but for her to lie about it and cover Huntley, you misunderstand the context of why she lied to the police.

As for: But to say- 'It could happen to anyone - its not her fault' ??? I am referring to the fact that she is receiving treatment in a posh hospital, not her actions in relation to the police investigation. You've quoted me in a misleading way.

I'm not sure how you can justify She should be punished for it to the full extent of the law and be locked up for life. She was indeed punished to the full extent of the law. For perjury. Locking her up for life is a News Of The World "opinions page" type comment directed at people with no intelligence.

How can you compare a perjuror to a suicide bomber and paedophiles? Where's the logic? It's crap.

ANGELUS

21-08-2005, 20:50

Originally posted by Babooshka
When a criminal has served his time, he is no longer a criminal.

No offence to anyone on here ok- please no one take anything said on here personally but imagine this scenario as bad as it seems.

You are a parent who's kid has just been raped by a bloke let back out of prison who is supposedly 'rehabilitated'

What would you do then?

And that is the scenario that a lot of people should answer honestly to be fair- because I know, once they have gone into jail for something like that- they should not come back out of jail breathing again.

tulip

21-08-2005, 20:52

Originally posted by ANGELUS
I agree with you Tulip- you speak complete sense to me!

To prove the point let the government let out the perverts and kid killers and kid rapists shall we- see how safe we are then.

I'm sure we would be safe in our neighbourhoods while they are all out preying on the kids of the nation, because we can trust out 'nice trustworthy police force' to keep them all in check cant we? Of course. Now we are getting somewhere. Why bother even having prisons? If it could happen to anybody, we could save a lot of money by just letting them all wander freely:clap:

ANGELUS

21-08-2005, 20:59

Originally posted by Ant
[B]Yes, I'm aware what she was guilty of. But you are twisting it by saying she did it not to cover Huntley's tracks, but because she didn't want him arrested for something she thought he hadn't done and was being fingered for. Yes it sounds stupid, but some people have a way of twisting things, and Huntley managed to warp the facts to make her see the situation in a totally different light to suit his own ends.

From what I've seen and heard from Maxine Carr, she seemed to me quite an intelligent person, so I dont think when she said she didnt know what was going on.. that she did not know what Ian had done to those poor kids. She is a liar.

When you say

He killed the kids, fair enough, but for her to lie about it and cover Huntley, you misunderstand the context of why she lied to the police.

As for: But to say- 'It could happen to anyone - its not her fault' ??? I am referring to the fact that she is receiving treatment in a posh hospital, not her actions in relation to the police investigation. You've quoted me in a misleading way.

The fact on the matter is mate, she lied about her killer boyfriend and I'm telling you now- on my life- she knew what he had done.. his behaviour would have been weird and he would have told her what he had done before he got caught. Now she is out of prison because she has done her 'time' - now she is relaxing at mine and your expense.. its ****ing disgusting mate. And to say your not bothered in anyway by it-- I am shocked :(

I'm not sure how you can justify She should be punished for it to the full extent of the law and be locked up for life. She was indeed punished to the full extent of the law. For perjury. Locking her up for life is a News Of The World "opinions page" type comment directed at people with no intelligence.

She was punished for lying.. thats true.. would you rather have her walking among us though, knowing what she has done mate- honestly- or would you rather see her in the clink?
Maybe she will shack up with another kid killer and give him/her an alibi for murdering a few more kids- what would you say then? And why do we still class people in this country for what papers they read? I read the sun, star, mirror and news of the world.. and?? Does this make me inferior to the rest of the human race??

How can you compare a perjuror to a suicide bomber and aedophiles? Where's the logic? It's crap.

People are saying- she has done her time, let her go on and have a normal life. This sickens me. She will go among us knowing that she has 'beaten' the system in a way and now she is free back into society with the rest of us.
Oh yeah! Thats punishment alright.

You cant compare a liar to a bomber or peadophile, you are very right there.. but helping a kid killer cover his tracks for me- she might have well killed those 2 kids herself..

Help scum = you are scum!

roughy101

21-08-2005, 21:00

Originally posted by Babooshka
Angelus, she has been punished to the full extent of the law that was passed against her. That punishment has since ended. It is not up to us to decide that further punishment is necessary, nor do we have to the right to ensure that said punishment will be delivered. This British public do not forget the atrocities that have occurred. We do, however, adhere to our justice system and behave in a fashion that is right and proper. When a criminal has served his time, he is no longer a criminal. WHY WONT PEOPLE LISTEN THIS POST IS NOT ABOUT HER SENTECE IT IS ABOUT HER GETTIN PREFERENTIALtreatment at the taxpayers expense .:rant: :rant:

Babooshka

21-08-2005, 21:02

Why the sarcasm? Why make statements about the pointlessness of prisons all together? I don't believe anyone on here has mentioned that as being a good idea yet.

If I was the parent of a child who was raped I would expect that rapist to serve the sentence that was passed by the Court. Nothing more. I do not pass sentence. Justice would have been done. I seek nothing more than that. I certainly do not seek revenge. No one died and left me in charge of all punishment.

ANGELUS

21-08-2005, 21:03

Originally posted by roughy101
WHY WONT PEOPLE LISTEN THIS POST IS NOT ABOUT HER SENTECE IT IS ABOUT HER GETTIN PREFERENTIALtreatment at the taxpayers expense .:rant: :rant:

Agreed- it sickens me as well mate!
She shouldnt have treatment and let us lot pay for it.. thats my point.

Let her pay for it herself.. why should I, you and everyone else pay for her mistakes?

Let her crack up herself- its her own fault.
Good riddance :(

Babooshka

21-08-2005, 21:04

Roughy..you will see that was a response to the post Angelus made..therefore, it is relevant to this discussion. I believe I answered to his post and not the one about the treatment.

ANGELUS

21-08-2005, 21:04

Originally posted by Babooshka
Why the sarcasm? Why make statements about the pointlessness of prisons all together? I don't believe anyone on here has mentioned that as being a good idea yet.

If I was the parent of a child who was raped I would expect that rapist to serve the sentence that was passed by the Court. Nothing more. I do not pass sentence. Justice would have been done. I seek nothing more than that. I certainly do not seek revenge. No one died and left me in charge of all punishment.

Would you not want that person who raped your flesh and blood to suffer as you would suffer?

He would be off- in a prison- paid for by your wages!

You are paying for your childs rapist- thats my point.
Does it not sicken you?

Like I said before- no offence to anyone and your goodself!
:)

Phanerothyme

21-08-2005, 21:05

Originally posted by roughy101
WHY WONT PEOPLE LISTEN THIS POST IS NOT ABOUT HER SENTECE IT IS ABOUT HER GETTIN PREFERENTIALtreatment at the taxpayers expense .:rant: :rant:

Sorry, I'll go and get my flaming torch, pitchfork and inbred cousin and we can get on with it.

ANGELUS

21-08-2005, 21:06

Originally posted by Phanerothyme
Sorry, I'll go and get my flaming torch, pitchfork and inbred cousin and we can get on with it.

Hell yes!
:)

I dont think we need to go that far just yet though- but good idea.

tulip

21-08-2005, 21:08

Originally posted by Babooshka
Why the sarcasm? Why make statements about the pointlessness of prisons all together? I don't believe anyone on here has mentioned that as being a good idea yet.

If I was the parent of a child who was raped I would expect that rapist to serve the sentence that was passed by the Court. Nothing more. I do not pass sentence. Justice would have been done. I seek nothing more than that. I certainly do not seek revenge. No one died and left me in charge of all punishment. If you were the parent of a child who was raped then you would want to kill the rapist!But you're not you are not are you? THAT'S WHY THE SARCASM.

Is anyone reading the posts here?

roughy101

21-08-2005, 21:08

Originally posted by Babooshka
Why the sarcasm? Why make statements about the pointlessness of prisons all together? I don't believe anyone on here has mentioned that as being a good idea yet.

If I was the parent of a child who was raped I would expect that rapist to serve the sentence that was passed by the Court. Nothing more. I do not pass sentence. Justice would have been done. I seek nothing more than that. I certainly do not seek revenge. No one died and left me in charge of all punishment. god forbid if a child of yours was raped and given a 3 month sentence you say you would be happy, you are barking mad,i think you should get a life and for gods sake i hope your not a parent.

:rant: :rant:

Babooshka

21-08-2005, 21:09

No. The prison is the punishment. As a tax payer I am happy to make my contribution to the prison system. That is where I, personally, feel a criminal should be...as long as they are a criminal that is. I also believe that different crimes merit different punishments...and just because it might be 'personal' does not give me any more right to seek a harsher justice or revenge.

Tony

21-08-2005, 21:13

Mod:

Less of the insults please.

ANGELUS

21-08-2005, 21:15

Originally posted by Babooshka
No. The prison is the punishment. As a tax payer I am happy to make my contribution to the prison system. That is where I, personally, feel a criminal should be...as long as they are a criminal that is. I also believe that different crimes merit different punishments...and just because it might be 'personal' does not give me any more right to seek a harsher justice or revenge.

I agree with what you are saying.
The punishment should fit the crime.

The problem for me being, god forbid, Maxine Carr does shack up with another Ian Huntley wannabee.. I just dont want to take a chance on that happening.

I think the most serious crimes for me, involve those of hurting, killing or god forbid sexual assaults of kids.. they are the lowest of the low.. and if you talk to any prisoner, I know a few who have come out, they will tell you, prisoners hate kid killers/rapists/pervs in particular more than anything.

And right they are too.

But its your opinion though.. and we all have differing opinions on here such is the sheffield forum :)

ANGELUS

21-08-2005, 21:15

Originally posted by Tony
Mod:

Less of the insults please.

I dont think anyone is insulting anyone Tony, I certainly hope I'm not!

Ant

21-08-2005, 21:17

From what I've seen and heard from Maxine Carr, she seemed to me quite an intelligent person, so I dont think when she said she didnt know what was going on.. that she did not know what Ian had done to those poor kids. She is a liar.

Even the most intelligent people can be fooled. And yes, she is a liar she was convicted for it. I don't think however, that she was aware of what he had done to those poor kids.

The fact on the matter is mate, she lied about her killer boyfriend and I'm telling you now- on my life- she knew what he had done

On your life? Really? You must have some solid evidence to back that up with, seeing as you've staked your life on it.

his behaviour would have been weird and he would have told her what he had done before he got caught. Now she is out of prison because she has done her 'time' - now she is relaxing at mine and your expense.. its ****ing disgusting mate. And to say your not bothered in anyway by it-- I am shocked

Yes, his behaviour would have been weird. But he would have twisted this to make it look like he was terrified that the police were trying to nail him, almost as soon as the kids went missing. Stress can cause debilitating mental illness I can't imaging she's "relaxing" in the clinic, but if it's at my expense, she's perfectly entitled to it. No I'm not bothered by that at all.

She was punished for lying.. thats true.. would you rather have her walking among us though, knowing what she has done mate- honestly- or would you rather see her in the clink?

I can't repeat myself enough. She stupidly protected her boyfriend for something she thought he was innocent of, and being framed for. She has served her time in the clink for that. Now she is entitled to walk freely wherever she wishes.

Maybe she will shack up with another kid killer and give him/her an alibi for murdering a few more kids- what would you say then? And why do we still class people in this country for what papers they read? I read the sun, star, mirror and news of the world.. and?? Does this make me inferior to the rest of the human race??

Why on earth would she do that? Do you honestly think she'll deliberately set out to befriend a child killer to lie for because it gives her some sense of purpose in life? Er - no. I can't quite see that happening. As for the newspapers, I judge them on their content. The News of the World's editorials are witless rants with no logic, aimed at people with no reasoning skills or intelligence. Anyone who buys into that are fools.

WHY WONT PEOPLE LISTEN THIS POST IS NOT ABOUT HER SENTECE IT IS ABOUT HER GETTIN PREFERENTIALtreatment at the taxpayers expense .

I am developing a headache. Quieten it down, fella. The thread has expanded - as they do - to cover the wider issues, giving us better insight into your initial post. Threads merged anyway. :hihi:

roughy101

21-08-2005, 21:17

Originally posted by ANGELUS
I dont think anyone is insulting anyone Tony, I certainly hope I'm not! tony ???can you explain please:(

Ant

21-08-2005, 21:20

Why are people going on about child rapists walking the streets after 3 months? Who exactly is this child rapist that's being talked about?

tulip

21-08-2005, 21:22

Originally posted by ANGELUS
I dont think anyone is insulting anyone Tony, I certainly hope I'm not! Your not.
You made a good point there Angelus, Maxine Carr didn't kill those kids but what about Mira Hindley? She didn't kill the kids either,, I realise M. Carrs crimes were nowhere need as bad as Hindleys but that is not how Hindley portrayed it. She said Brady brain washed her, she was in love and she wanted to be forgiven - THANK GOD NO-ONE BELIEVED HER!

roughy101

21-08-2005, 21:23

Babooshka

21-08-2005, 21:24

I may want to kill the rapist Tulip but if I did then that would make me a murderer. Also, how on earth do you know that I am not the parent of a child who has been raped? Because I share a different opinion to you? Do we all have to be of your vengeful opinion in order for it to be valid?

Roughy, erm when did I ever say that I would be happy if a criminal who raped my child got a 3 month sentence? Oh, did you just DECIDE I would be of that opinion? Thank you also for your opinion that I am not fit to be a parent and that I should get a life. I will take that on board!

Angelus, I know you feel that you don't want to take a chance on something happening again, but you can not punish people for crimes they have not yet committed.

redrobbo

21-08-2005, 21:25

Originally posted by ANGELUS

I'm telling you now- on my life- she knew what he had done.. his behaviour would have been weird and he would have told her what he had done before he got caught.

Why were you not called to give evidence in her trial as you are so clear about knowing "she knew what he had done"? You did at least give a statement to the police of your knowledge of events didn't you Angelus?

I am sure you cannot be mind reading Angelus, or just making conjecture, as you stated you know this to be true "on my life", but I cannot understand why your expert knowledge was not called upon at the trial. I mean, if you know this to be fact, but you failed to give evidence to the court, aren't you culpable in maxine carr getting a shorter sentence?

Oh, and I wonder if you can help me out with this post -

Originally posted by ANGELUS

Lets also say a minutes silence, for the killers of the people dead in the Trade Center bombings, the Bulger Killers, Princess Dianas & Jill Dando's killer as well-- all convicted- by they havent done anything also..

..... all I want to know is the name of Princess Diana's killer, and what the sentence was. I just want to get all your facts right.

I look forward to your helpful reply to my queries. Thanks.

Red

Ant

21-08-2005, 21:25

Maxine Carr didn't kill those kids but what about Mira Hindley? She didn't kill the kids either,, I realise M. Carrs crimes were nowhere need as bad as Hindleys but that is not how Hindley portrayed it. She said Brady brain washed her, she was in love and she wanted to be forgiven - THANK GOD NO-ONE BELIEVED HER!

One is a child killer one is a misguided perjuror. Just a bit of a difference. One was a killer who said "he made me do it", the other was a misguided idiot who said "he was with me".

tulip

21-08-2005, 21:27

Originally posted by Babooshka
I may want to kill the rapist Tulip but if I did then that would make me a murderer. Also, how on earth do you know that I am not the parent of a child who has been raped? Because I share a different opinion to you? Do we all have to be of your vengeful opinion in order for it to be valid?

Roughy, erm when did I ever say that I would be happy if a criminal who raped my child got a 3 month sentence? Oh, did you just DECIDE I would be of that opinion? Thank you also for your opinion that I am not fit to be a parent and that I should get a life. I will take that on board!

Angelus, I know you feel that you don't want to take a chance on something happening again, but you can not punish people for crimes they have not yet committed. To be honest, I would be totally shocked by your attitude if you were the parent of a child who'd been raped. I'm not vengeful!

Tony

21-08-2005, 21:30

Mod:

Originally posted by Tony
Mod:

Less of the insults please.

Back on topic please.

Babooshka

21-08-2005, 21:30

Well then Tulip...maybe you would be shocked. You don't know who is writing on these pages, nor who has experienced the things about which we write.

Also, is not wanting to murder the rapist of your child a vengeful attitude? In the eyes of the law it is not justice that is for certain.

roughy101

21-08-2005, 21:32

Originally posted by Tony
Mod:

Back on topic please. tony what is your problem evarytime a good thread gets going you have pulled it spoiled it. who was insulting who

ANGELUS

21-08-2005, 21:38

Originally posted by Ant
[B]Even the most intelligent people can be fooled. And yes, she is a liar she was convicted for it. I don't think however, that she was aware of what he had done to those poor kids.

I would quite happily stake my life on it :)
Quite happily. My missus- can tell if I have done ANYTHING wrong, just by looking at me- call it a womans intuition or whatever- I can be acting perfectly normal.. and she will know summats up, my mam is the same and so are a lot of women who I know- women are very complex, and they know when have done summat wrong fella- trust me.
She knew- or he confessed to her what he had done.

On your life? Really? You must have some solid evidence to back that up with, seeing as you've staked your life on it.

Yes, his behaviour would have been weird. But he would have twisted this to make it look like he was terrified that the police were trying to nail him, almost as soon as the kids went missing. Stress can cause debilitating mental illness I can't imaging she's "relaxing" in the clinic, but if it's at my expense, she's perfectly entitled to it. No I'm not bothered by that at all.

I have no evidence, but I'm telling you now- she knew what he had done.. and I would love to find out from either her or him, and ask them if he had told maxine that he killed them kids.
And in fact- I'll put money on it as well.

The police had enough evidence to convict him after checking out his home in detail.. he lied all the way through and she did as well mate.. simple as.. and to say she's stressed.. sorry.. her own doing- I have no remorse for them, and to say I and yourself are paying for her 'relaxation' is taking the proverbial pish! I'd be bothered mate- knowing that you are paying for her holiday to get stress free :)

I can't repeat myself enough. She stupidly protected her boyfriend for something she thought he was innocent of, and being framed for. She has served her time in the clink for that. Now she is entitled to walk freely wherever she wishes.

Stupidly protecting her boyfriend, mmm, I can think of 2 other women who were helping or protecting their man so to speak- Rose West and Myra Hindley... hmm they protected kids and their men well did they not :( No excuses.
It sickens me that she is walking around mate it really does.

Why on earth would she do that? Do you honestly think she'll deliberately set out to befriend a child killer to lie for because it gives her some sense of purpose in life? Er - no. I can't quite see that happening. As for the newspapers, I judge them on their content. The News of the World's editorials are witless rants with no logic, aimed at people with no reasoning skills or intelligence. Anyone who buys into that are fools.

If the woman is in a state like is being reported, any other nutter can take her under his/her wing and they might, I'm not saying they will - fall in love- hence weirdo and weirdo mark2.
I sincerely hope you are right mate- I really do.
Like I said before- she should not be given the chance.

Back to this newspaper debate as well:

People in the UK should STOP regarding News Of The World, Sun, Mirror, Daily Mail readers as inferior.

I am proud to say I read these papers- I dont like papers like the times, the guardian etc.. because quite frankly they bore the arse off me.. they are for people who think they are middle/upper class.. who look down on working class folk like myself.

I am proud to be working class- I dont pretend to be something I know I'm not- other people shouldnt be ashamed to do the same also.. just because people read the more intelligent papers, does not make them smarter than the average person you know. :)

roughy101

21-08-2005, 21:43

Originally posted by redrobbo
Why were you not called to give evidence in her trial as you are so clear about knowing "she knew what he had done"? You did at least give a statement to the police of your knowledge of events didn't you Angel maxine carr getting a shorter sentence?

Oh, and I wonder if you can help me out with this post -

..... all I want to know is the name of Princess Diana's killer, and what the sentence was. I just want to get all your facts right.

I look forward to your helpful reply to my queries. Thanks.

Red how come everytime you answer a post it gets pulled :suspect: :suspect: :suspect:

Babooshka

21-08-2005, 21:44

Is not calling Guardian readers as thinking they are upper/middle class, looking down on the working class a bit of a prejudice and somewhat of misinformed opinion? Who has professed to be smarter here today? Who is pretending to be something they are not ? (Or have I missed something?)

I am also glad to know our justice system is based on more than 'intuition'. Good solid evidence wins every time!

depoix

21-08-2005, 21:45

Originally posted by Babooshka
[ When a criminal has served his time, he is no longer a criminal. [/B] why do the police keep their records then?

if they have done their time they are free to rejoin society,but they, the police understand that there is a good chance of them re offending,hence they save their records

roughy101

21-08-2005, 21:45

Originally posted by roughy101
tony what is your problem evarytime a good thread gets going you have pulled it spoiled it. who was insulting who tony can you please tell me who was insulting who:o

Babooshka

21-08-2005, 21:45

Maybe your posts are a bordering on the insulting roughy101..who knows.

Tony

21-08-2005, 21:51

Mod:

Roughy101, YOU are the individual in question.

I put a general note in the thread in the hope that you would take the hint, but you obviously didn't. We often try to do use this more subtle method rather than naming and shaming, or banning.

Now, once again, back on topic please rather than disrupting the thread.

roughy101

21-08-2005, 21:53

please tell me what posts are insulting,if you read the posts, the ??? have been asked numerous times tonight,not only by me but other forumers and not answered. if i come over that way i apologies,all i ask is you read the posts,but then again you cant because they have been pulled:thumbsup:

Tony

21-08-2005, 21:59

Here... (http://www.sheffieldforum.co.uk/showthread.php?postid=557122#post557122)

Originally posted by roughy101
you are barking mad,i think you should get a life and for gods sake i hope your not a parent.

Short ban now in place. Some people can't get the hint. :roll:

redrobbo

21-08-2005, 22:00

Originally posted by roughy101
how come everytime you answer a post it gets pulled :suspect: :suspect: :suspect:

roughy101 - I've checked the two posts by ANGELUS that I quoted, and they have not been pulled. Scroll back a couple of pages and you will find them. :thumbsup:

Red

Phanerothyme

21-08-2005, 22:00

perhaps Tony was on about insulting our intelligence.

Originally posted by ANGELUS
I have no evidence, but I'm telling you now- she knew what he had doneRemind me to object to your presence in the jury, won't you?

People in the UK should STOP regarding News Of The World, Sun, Mirror, Daily Mail readers as inferior.
Why? They plainly are. Especially the news of the screws. But the fact that you omit the Daily Express is telling. Too lah-di-dah for you?

I am proud to be working class- I dont pretend to be something I know I'm not- other people shouldnt be ashamed to do the same also.. just because people read the more intelligent papers, does not make them smarter than the average person you know. :)
No just better informed, generally.

Babooshka

21-08-2005, 22:00

Originally posted by roughy101
god forbid if a child of yours was raped and given a 3 month sentence you say you would be happy, you are barking mad,i think you should get a life and for gods sake i hope your not a parent.

:rant: :rant:

Maybe this example will help you ?

Ant

21-08-2005, 22:01

Originally posted by ANGELUS

People in the UK should STOP regarding News Of The World, Sun, Mirror, Daily Mail readers as inferior.

I am proud to say I read these papers- I dont like papers like the times, the guardian etc.. because quite frankly they bore the arse off me.. they are for people who think they are middle/upper class.. who look down on working class folk like myself.

I am proud to be working class- I dont pretend to be something I know I'm not- other people shouldnt be ashamed to do the same also.. just because people read the more intelligent papers, does not make them smarter than the average person you know. :) [/B]

I'll try to keep this vaguely on-topic:

The Sun, the News of the World and the Daily Star are utterly inferior to the likes of the Guardian, Times and Independant. There's a vast chasm of difference you could shove a red giant through without it warming the sides up.

I do like to pickup a Mirror to catch up with with the Big Brother house (it's a vice), and occassionally pick up my mate's Daily Star to view the tits (I'm a man). I don't regard Sun readers themselves as inferior - it has sport and easily digested news coverage. And photos of minor soap stars dogging in the Forest of Dean.

But their editorials are shiiite beyond belief.
THE SUN SAYS: HANG 'EM HIGH AND LET 'EM BURN!
Soham liar Carr today had the nerve to enter her local chip shop and ask a horrified british chippie girl for some pickled eggs. JUST WHO THE HELL DOES SHE THINK SHE IS? These pickled egg excursions have being going on under police protection for three months now, funded by tax-payers money - good people, such as you and me. But now THE SUN SAYS NO!

Alright, a bit of exageration, but it's hardly intelligent well-thought out journalism, is it? It's the Sun. 'Nuff said. A Sun reader is a Sun reader when they buy into it. ANGELUS SAYS NO! Know what I mean mate? Surely you don't buy into all that garbage? :hihi:

ANGELUS

21-08-2005, 22:18

Depends what the garbage is Ant :)

The Sun is basically, The Guardian with more pictures and adverts but without all the snobs writing letters in to complain about the UK and how crap our government really is.. sorry but its true.

Its just the same story covered in a different angle- thats all that appears to me.

The Sun says it speaks for the people of the UK.. maybe it does go overboard.. but it does represent more of the people of the UK than any 'posh' paper does.

And its cheaper too :)

Phanerothyme
God help maxine carr if she ever re-offends and I am in the jury believe me :) Thats all I'll say on that.

The papers are not too 'laa-di-daa' as you call it- I find them boring and tedious- the content does not interest me one bit in the stock market and I dont want to know what the government has cocked up in.. I really dont care.

I dont care which person has died and I sure as hell dont want to read a page obituary about someone I dont relate or care about in the slightest- and to be honest do you or ant know or are even bothered about them in the slightest as well?

And why do they make you better informed?
Please, tell me - whats so special about those papers that you dont get in other papers in the UK.

Im sure you are going to tell me, its the journalism are you not?

Pray- do tell :)

Ant

21-08-2005, 22:22

Im sure you are going to tell me, its the journalism are you not?

It's the journalism. Thay have a technique called Not Making Things Up.

I dont care which person has died and I sure as hell dont want to read a page obituary about someone I dont relate or care about in the slightest- and to be honest do you or ant know or are even bothered about them in the slightest as well?

You've got me on that one. I have no interest whatsoever in the obituary pages.

ANGELUS

21-08-2005, 22:26

Originally posted by Ant
[B]It's the journalism. Thay have a technique called Not Making Things Up.

Have they reported about the police lying to us about the brazilian guy they shot dead when they shouldnt have killed him?

Or did they go along with the fact that he was a suicide bomber then, like most of every other paper in the UK.. before learning they had been lied to??

We are going a bit of topic with this.. sorry everyone reading in!
:)

Ant

21-08-2005, 22:30

Yeah, we're well off topic. We'll leave it there.

Babooshka

21-08-2005, 22:36

IF Maxine Carr EVER re-offends and you are on the jury...your opinion will be one of 12, and the Judge will pass the sentence.

redrobbo

21-08-2005, 22:37

Originally posted by ANGELUS
Have they reported about the police lying to us about the brazilian guy they shot dead when they shouldnt have killed him?

Or did they go along with the fact that he was a suicide bomber then, like most of every other paper in the UK.. before learning they had been lied to??

We are going a bit of topic with this.. sorry everyone reading in!
:)

Front page spread in The Guardian, Leader article, and on successive days, interviews and more news articles.

As for the Obits - it's fabulous reading about people I've never heard of. They did a whole page on Mo Mowlam. The Guardian are doing an obit on everyone of the victims of the London bombings. Brings tears to your eyes reading of the lives so tragically wasted.

Now back on subject: Angelus - you've not answered my questions mate. Still waiting to know who killed Princess Diana and what the sentence was.