Dr Afzal   12 #1 Posted April 7, 2016 From BBC news Two 15-year-old girls have been given life sentences with minimum terms of 15 years for the torture and murder of a vulnerable woman.  Angela Wrightson, 39, was found semi-naked in her living room in Hartlepool with more than 100 injuries - including 80 to her face - in December 2014.  The girls, then aged 13 and 14 at the time, used weapons including a shovel, a TV and computer printer. --- So, these two thugs will be out of prison in 15 years. I’ve just watched a guy on news at ten saying that none of the other EU countries would have sentenced children to such a sentence. My question for him would have been: Why the selective comparison. Yes we are in Europe, why not compare the sentence to all world countries?  It would have been more beneficial to the thugs to have received a damn good thrashing first, then been given 5 years not 15, and saved the tax paying public a load of money. That, would have been a soft sentence to some countries. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
The Joker   10 #2 Posted April 7, 2016 It would have been more beneficial to the thugs to have received a damn good thrashing first.  Did you even see the BBC same news report as the rest of us?  That's exactly what their parents were doing.  The kids were known to Police and social services due to their "chaotic" upbringings.  Do you have any better ideas?  Should we deport the kids and their parents instead? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
RonJeremy   10 #3 Posted April 7, 2016 There are no winners in this. Those two girls were wrong, very wrong. But they were never going to have a hope with awful parents and useless social services. So very sad. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Dr Afzal   12 #4 Posted April 8, 2016 There are no winners in this. Those two girls were wrong, very wrong. But they were never going to have a hope with awful parents and useless social services. So very sad.  History just repeating itself there with social services, Baby P and all the others, RMBC SS  Yes, they were very wrong. Children can be extremely cruel. Can`t help thinking about Venables and the killing of toddler James Bulger. That child would have been about 23 years old now. He may even have had a family of his own. Like you say Ron, very sad.  It makes me wonder about the vile crimes Hindley and Brady got up to in their youth that were never discovered. It seems odd that they only began the murders in their adult life. Didn`t one of them used to torture animals when they were growing up? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Lex Luthor   10 #5 Posted April 8, 2016 It is my understanding that both girls were 'in care' at the time of the horrific crime.  I've read today that girl 'A' has severe mental health issues and has tried to take her own life 4 times during the trial, and once on court premises.  http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/apr/07/angela-wrightson-girls-tortured-alcoholic-hartlepool-life-sentences  Some young people never have much of a chance in life. I wonder in cases such as this, if in some circumstances, the parents should also face trial? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Stoned   10 #6 Posted April 8, 2016 It is my understanding that both girls were 'in care' at the time of the horrific crime. I've read today that girl 'A' has severe mental health issues and has tried to take her own life 4 times during the trial, and once on court premises.  http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/apr/07/angela-wrightson-girls-tortured-alcoholic-hartlepool-life-sentences  Some young people never have much of a chance in life. I wonder in cases such as this, if in some circumstances, the parents should also face trial?  If you own a dog and it bites someone you face the courts. It should be the same with your kids, they break the law the parents also have to answer for it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
LeMaquis   10 #7 Posted April 8, 2016 So, these two thugs will be out of prison in 15 years.  It would have been more beneficial to the thugs to have received a damn good thrashing first, then been given 5 years not 15, and saved the tax paying public a load of money.  Their minimum sentences are 15 years. That doesn't mean they'll be out in 15 years.  And after complaining they'll be out in 15 years your answer is to put them back out on the streets in 5 years. Brilliant.  ---------- Post added 08-04-2016 at 08:43 ----------  ....James Bulger. That child would have been about 23 years old now.  He would have been 26 now. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
willman   10 #8 Posted April 8, 2016 We should think ourselves lucky - anywhere else in the EU they probably wouldn't have even been charged and tried.  They would have been "helped" as a victim of society. What that means i've no idea as it could mean incarceration in some form of facility or other. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
LeMaquis   10 #9 Posted April 8, 2016 If you own a dog and it bites someone you face the courts. It should be the same with your kids, they break the law the parents also have to answer for it.  You're missing the point that they were in care. Dogs by the way aren't answerable to the justice system. They don't get sentenced to however long in a category B kennel, for example. Owners would have to be prosecuted instead. Not difficult to understand. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
the_bloke   17 #10 Posted April 8, 2016 It is my understanding that both girls were 'in care' at the time of the horrific crime. I've read today that girl 'A' has severe mental health issues and has tried to take her own life 4 times during the trial, and once on court premises.  http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/apr/07/angela-wrightson-girls-tortured-alcoholic-hartlepool-life-sentences  Some young people never have much of a chance in life. I wonder in cases such as this, if in some circumstances, the parents should also face trial?  If you want to see what sort of life these girls were destined for had they not been going to prison, then read about the sad futile existence of the woman they killed. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Stoned   10 #11 Posted April 8, 2016 You're missing the point that they were in care. Dogs by the way aren't answerable to the justice system. They don't get sentenced to however long in a category B kennel, for example. Owners would have to be prosecuted instead. .  No I get the point but my comparison was a poor one i have to admit.  ---------- Post added 08-04-2016 at 08:56 ----------  Not difficult to understand.  Dont fall off that high horse you are on mate Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Ms Macbeth   75 #12 Posted April 8, 2016 There are no winners in this. Those two girls were wrong, very wrong. But they were never going to have a hope with awful parents and useless social services. So very sad.  Sums it up for me. Creating a child is about the biggest responsibility that humans have, yet some treat their own children dreadfully. Social services get slated but they're damned whatever they do.  If those two girls had been removed from their 'parents' at birth, and brought up in decent, loving homes like the majority of parents try to provide, who knows how they'd have grown up. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...