The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
Do you think he or his bint of a girlfriend are guilty? Why? What punishment should he receive if he is guilty (in graphic detail)? Could you give a crap?
hey, it's the only 'interesting' thing in the news at the moment.
What proportion of the british public do you suppose are paedophiles? How can we combat/cure this mental disorder without endless stints in correctional facilities? Are we going the right way about dealing with them? What is to stop them reoffending upon release?
A few questions to chew on - surely a subject that EVERYONE has strong feelings about.
hey, it's the only 'interesting' thing in the news at the moment.
What proportion of the british public do you suppose are paedophiles? How can we combat/cure this mental disorder without endless stints in correctional facilities? Are we going the right way about dealing with them? What is to stop them reoffending upon release?
A few questions to chew on - surely a subject that EVERYONE has strong feelings about.
Page:
Mr Snuggly wrote:
> Placards will be written saying things like 'Rot in Hell' and 'Myra Mk II'.
Strange how I actually called her that by accident yesterday. Was talking about her and was quite suprised!
> Placards will be written saying things like 'Rot in Hell' and 'Myra Mk II'.
Strange how I actually called her that by accident yesterday. Was talking about her and was quite suprised!
Ah but there were no past convictions. There were 9 previous investigations which came to nothing and one charge, which was dropped.
Yes the school should have investigated him more thoroughly. However, as I already mentioned, with the police having no records of him due to the disjoined way in which data is kept as well as it having been deleted, it would have been difficult to investigate him. That is unless of course people start using Google on job applicants.
Yes the school should have investigated him more thoroughly. However, as I already mentioned, with the police having no records of him due to the disjoined way in which data is kept as well as it having been deleted, it would have been difficult to investigate him. That is unless of course people start using Google on job applicants.
Mr Snuggly wrote:
> Carr, however, is a different matter.
> I don't believe she had any involvement in the
> abduction/murder/disposal/cover-up of the two girls (she was in
> Grimsby at the time) and only lied to cover for her partner after he
> was apparently falsely accused in a similar case four years
> previously.
She had involvement by lying for him, didn't she?
His past convictions were shocking. You wonder how he managed to be a caretaker at a school with his past. But then a policeman said something about how it was "their mistake".. I thought, just like a parent would do to a babysitter, that the interviewer or whoever it is that does it would ask to see some sort of past record. Wonder if they even did that.
> Carr, however, is a different matter.
> I don't believe she had any involvement in the
> abduction/murder/disposal/cover-up of the two girls (she was in
> Grimsby at the time) and only lied to cover for her partner after he
> was apparently falsely accused in a similar case four years
> previously.
She had involvement by lying for him, didn't she?
His past convictions were shocking. You wonder how he managed to be a caretaker at a school with his past. But then a policeman said something about how it was "their mistake".. I thought, just like a parent would do to a babysitter, that the interviewer or whoever it is that does it would ask to see some sort of past record. Wonder if they even did that.
Two things are guaranteed in this affair:
1) The tabloids tomorrow will be full of 'Why did this happen?' and 'Never again' stories. Which is probably fair enough, but you know how righteous the red tops like to be over these matters.
2) Upon Maxine Carr's release, possibly next year, stupid, ill-educated and ignorant morons will gather outside the prison/courthouse and pelt her vehicle with eggs etc. Placards will be written saying things like 'Rot in Hell' and 'Myra Mk II'. Even though she has probably been quite rightly cleared of assistance to murder. This is the nature of idiocy.
I think they've got the sentencing just about right, although I would like to know how long a life sentence is (30 yrs, 15 on good behaviour, right?). Huntley was the guiltiest man I ever saw and never had a leg to stand on. Carr, however, is a different matter. I don't believe she had any involvement in the abduction/murder/disposal/cover-up of the two girls (she was in Grimsby at the time) and only lied to cover for her partner after he was apparently falsely accused in a similar case four years previously. People do stupid things when they think they're in love. It looks like when she found out that Huntley had done the dirty, she admitted to the police that she had provided a false alibi, although this in no way excuses her abhorrent behaviour and incredible gall in the face of such horrible deeds. I'd say 3 and a half years is about right.
The one thing that really bothers me about this whole case is how it's been presented in the media. Without focusing on the fact that this sort of thing happens all the time (call me cynical but I'm sure you could call up a list of dozens of schoolgirls gone missing over the past few years which the tabloids haven't touched), what gets me is the details the media have been allowed to divulge.
After every day in court, the proceedings were acted out on the news by those ratty little 3D renderings. Every word spoken in court was made public and was national news for several days (not sure if court transcripts are normally made available to the public, but even so, the manner in which they were presented as headline news is sickeningly heartless). After they were both sent down, TV jumped on the case and ran stories about Huntley's past convictions, showed videos of Huntley and Carr in questioning, played recordings of Carr breaking down and sobbing - we'll be seeing much of this over the next week/month/year.
I don't know about you, but I didn't need to know any of this. Sure, I could have turned the TV off (I'll agree, it was fascinating stuff), but I could have lived quite happily knowing that two guilty people were rightfully convicted and sent to jail without knowing all the grisly details. I don't need to see the football shirts the girls were wearing in that bin. I don't need to see videos of a broken woman sobbing her heart out because the man she loved is a paedophile and murderer. I don't need to see crappy 3D animations of what happened, and how. The question shouldn't be 'can we show all this stuff?', it should be 'should we?'
Anyway, it seems that justice has been served for now, and at least the girls' parents will have at least some peace of mind. I hope for a major enquiry into just how you can let a man with Huntley's past work as a caretaker at a junior school at the very least (and the school should also take a fair proportion of the blame for not checking out his history properly). At the very least, some proper guidelines will be layed out to perhaps prevent this from happening again any time soon, although it's sad that this is perhaps the only positive thing to take from such a case.
Expect to see the story on front pages again next year when Carr is released, along with retarded Daily Star headlines like 'Hang Her' and the like.
1) The tabloids tomorrow will be full of 'Why did this happen?' and 'Never again' stories. Which is probably fair enough, but you know how righteous the red tops like to be over these matters.
2) Upon Maxine Carr's release, possibly next year, stupid, ill-educated and ignorant morons will gather outside the prison/courthouse and pelt her vehicle with eggs etc. Placards will be written saying things like 'Rot in Hell' and 'Myra Mk II'. Even though she has probably been quite rightly cleared of assistance to murder. This is the nature of idiocy.
I think they've got the sentencing just about right, although I would like to know how long a life sentence is (30 yrs, 15 on good behaviour, right?). Huntley was the guiltiest man I ever saw and never had a leg to stand on. Carr, however, is a different matter. I don't believe she had any involvement in the abduction/murder/disposal/cover-up of the two girls (she was in Grimsby at the time) and only lied to cover for her partner after he was apparently falsely accused in a similar case four years previously. People do stupid things when they think they're in love. It looks like when she found out that Huntley had done the dirty, she admitted to the police that she had provided a false alibi, although this in no way excuses her abhorrent behaviour and incredible gall in the face of such horrible deeds. I'd say 3 and a half years is about right.
The one thing that really bothers me about this whole case is how it's been presented in the media. Without focusing on the fact that this sort of thing happens all the time (call me cynical but I'm sure you could call up a list of dozens of schoolgirls gone missing over the past few years which the tabloids haven't touched), what gets me is the details the media have been allowed to divulge.
After every day in court, the proceedings were acted out on the news by those ratty little 3D renderings. Every word spoken in court was made public and was national news for several days (not sure if court transcripts are normally made available to the public, but even so, the manner in which they were presented as headline news is sickeningly heartless). After they were both sent down, TV jumped on the case and ran stories about Huntley's past convictions, showed videos of Huntley and Carr in questioning, played recordings of Carr breaking down and sobbing - we'll be seeing much of this over the next week/month/year.
I don't know about you, but I didn't need to know any of this. Sure, I could have turned the TV off (I'll agree, it was fascinating stuff), but I could have lived quite happily knowing that two guilty people were rightfully convicted and sent to jail without knowing all the grisly details. I don't need to see the football shirts the girls were wearing in that bin. I don't need to see videos of a broken woman sobbing her heart out because the man she loved is a paedophile and murderer. I don't need to see crappy 3D animations of what happened, and how. The question shouldn't be 'can we show all this stuff?', it should be 'should we?'
Anyway, it seems that justice has been served for now, and at least the girls' parents will have at least some peace of mind. I hope for a major enquiry into just how you can let a man with Huntley's past work as a caretaker at a junior school at the very least (and the school should also take a fair proportion of the blame for not checking out his history properly). At the very least, some proper guidelines will be layed out to perhaps prevent this from happening again any time soon, although it's sad that this is perhaps the only positive thing to take from such a case.
Expect to see the story on front pages again next year when Carr is released, along with retarded Daily Star headlines like 'Hang Her' and the like.
One of the things that has been shown up is the police records.
Now I understand that there was confusion with the Data Protection Act, but I think that the police should be able to hold far more details, at least about things like Huntley's previous allegations.
Also time for the police to have a nationwide database rather than individual forces having their own records. IT should be able to help aid the police and make them more efficient. Here it didn't.
Now I understand that there was confusion with the Data Protection Act, but I think that the police should be able to hold far more details, at least about things like Huntley's previous allegations.
Also time for the police to have a nationwide database rather than individual forces having their own records. IT should be able to help aid the police and make them more efficient. Here it didn't.
I'm surprised that Carr got such a short sentence. She distracted the police quite badly in a major murder investigation after 2 horrible murders.
And as for Huntley- rot in jail, boyo. As for his excuses about some 'accidents'- how can you accidentally murder someone on purpose?
And as for Huntley- rot in jail, boyo. As for his excuses about some 'accidents'- how can you accidentally murder someone on purpose?
English_Bloke wrote:
> I think that he is going to get life imprisonment; it’s just a case of
> what for.
>
> I think she will go to prison, but not for a very long time.
Told ya!
> I think that he is going to get life imprisonment; it’s just a case of
> what for.
>
> I think she will go to prison, but not for a very long time.
Told ya!
sentence should be death by mow mow
Huntley was given 2 life sentences.
Carr given 3.5 years of which she has already served 16 months.
What still surprises me is his past and the number of cases that he was the main suspect for. All involving young girls. Fair enough they were never proved but still you would think the police would keep a closer eye on folk like this. Especially under such circumstances.
Carr given 3.5 years of which she has already served 16 months.
What still surprises me is his past and the number of cases that he was the main suspect for. All involving young girls. Fair enough they were never proved but still you would think the police would keep a closer eye on folk like this. Especially under such circumstances.
Ian Huntley has been found guilty on majority verdicts of murdering Holly Wells and Jessica Chapman on Sunday August 4 last year.
His ex-girlfriend Carr, 26, a former classroom assistant in the 10-year-olds' class, was found not guilty on two counts of assisting an offender.
She was found guilty of conspiring with Huntley to pervert the course of justice.
His ex-girlfriend Carr, 26, a former classroom assistant in the 10-year-olds' class, was found not guilty on two counts of assisting an offender.
She was found guilty of conspiring with Huntley to pervert the course of justice.
Page: