Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
 | Back to forum list |
| Back to The Lounge |
| Jump to newest |  |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The killers of Briana Ghey have been named following on from their conviction. Absolutely the right thing to do, well done to the judge for lifting the reporting restrictions. " I agree  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I am sure that a pletherer of liberal human rights arseholes will demand public funds to fight this decision " Too late for that, their identity along with their photo has been published. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I thought they were both under 18 still? I read some of the stuff about that case and ..what a vile pair. "They are. The judge ruled that their identity could be released. Their victim and her family have never been allowed the protection of anonymity | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The killers of Briana Ghey have been named following on from their conviction. Absolutely the right thing to do, well done to the judge for lifting the reporting restrictions. " Good news  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I don't see any reason for them to be named. Justice can take place in the court without any of us needing to know who these total strangers are. Naming them just encourages a lynch mob attitude. " They could have been named in a couple of years after turning 18 and then that would launch a fresh interest in the case anyway. They might as well be named now. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I am sure that a pletherer of liberal human rights arseholes will demand public funds to fight this decision " You’d be absolutely wrong on that one | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I don't see any reason for them to be named. Justice can take place in the court without any of us needing to know who these total strangers are. Naming them just encourages a lynch mob attitude. " Why not? Briannas family didn't have the luxury of anonymity, so why should these two vile excuses for human beings be allowed it.  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The killers of Briana Ghey have been named following on from their conviction. Absolutely the right thing to do, well done to the judge for lifting the reporting restrictions. " | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I don't see any reason for them to be named. Justice can take place in the court without any of us needing to know who these total strangers are. Naming them just encourages a lynch mob attitude. " I see no point either Tina. To the parent's of Briannah yes... to the nation no. All the ghoulish people who watch real murder cases on t.v. can make them infamous and have their names written in history if they wish and watch in morbid delight and say .... I remember this ! They should fade as unknowns into the institutions that house such people until their deaths. Briannah should be remembered for all that is beautiful about her and not as the girl murdered in Cheshire. So no .. there is nothing to be gained by naming the young murderers. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I don't see any reason for them to be named. Justice can take place in the court without any of us needing to know who these total strangers are. Naming them just encourages a lynch mob attitude. Why not? Briannas family didn't have the luxury of anonymity, so why should these two vile excuses for human beings be allowed it. "Anonymity isn't always a luxury - it can serve in other ways. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I don't see any reason for them to be named. Justice can take place in the court without any of us needing to know who these total strangers are. Naming them just encourages a lynch mob attitude. Why not? Briannas family didn't have the luxury of anonymity, so why should these two vile excuses for human beings be allowed it. " | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Genuine question... ...so now we know their names...what now??" Likely people harass the families digging for information about what could have led to the killing. People get unhappier as their biases are either confirmed or not while the families suffer endless scrutiny in everything Most people move on but some continue holding grudges for years to come. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Genuine question... ...so now we know their names...what now?? Likely people harass the families digging for information about what could have led to the killing. People get unhappier as their biases are either confirmed or not while the families suffer endless scrutiny in everything Most people move on but some continue holding grudges for years to come. " ...so, in terms of usefulness or benefit to anyone (including the public who apparently "have a right to know"), nothing positive?? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The trial should have been adjourned till they were 18 and then tried and sentenced as adults , life long no parole because what they did was premeditated murder " The trial couldn’t be delayed just because of their age. They were tried in adult court rather than a youth court, same as the Bulger killers, due to the nature of the crime. Their anonymity would only have lasted until they were 18 anyway. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The killers of Briana Ghey have been named following on from their conviction. Absolutely the right thing to do, well done to the judge for lifting the reporting restrictions. " Just seen the story. Not sure how they only got 20 years though. Fuckers. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Genuine question... ...so now we know their names...what now??" What happens when any murderer is identified? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Genuine question... ...so now we know their names...what now??" Netflix series | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Genuine question... ...so now we know their names...what now?? What happens when any murderer is identified? " I honestly don't know, other than my and other people's lives go on...but that's kind of my point? I remember the names of many killers, etc. over the years, but I'm struggling to find any reason why it's so important for people to know... | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Genuine question... ...so now we know their names...what now?? What happens when any murderer is identified? I honestly don't know, other than my and other people's lives go on...but that's kind of my point? I remember the names of many killers, etc. over the years, but I'm struggling to find any reason why it's so important for people to know..." I think different people have different reasons for wanting to know or thinking criminals should be named after they've been convicted. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The trial should have been adjourned till they were 18 and then tried and sentenced as adults , life long no parole because what they did was premeditated murder The trial couldn’t be delayed just because of their age. They were tried in adult court rather than a youth court, same as the Bulger killers, due to the nature of the crime. Their anonymity would only have lasted until they were 18 anyway. " Thank you for making it clear on that one | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I'm struggling to find any reason why it's so important for people to know..." Do you think the names of people like Adolf Hitler and Idi Amin should be deleted from history books ? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The killers of Briana Ghey have been named following on from their conviction. Absolutely the right thing to do, well done to the judge for lifting the reporting restrictions. Just seen the story. Not sure how they only got 20 years though. Fuckers. " 20 and 22 years as a minimum. Will only be released if the parole board believe they are not a threat to the public. If ever released they are no licence for the rest of their lives. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The killers of Briana Ghey have been named following on from their conviction. Absolutely the right thing to do, well done to the judge for lifting the reporting restrictions. Just seen the story. Not sure how they only got 20 years though. Fuckers. 20 and 22 years as a minimum. Will only be released if the parole board believe they are not a threat to the public. If ever released they are no licence for the rest of their lives. " Sure. But still means they could be out in 20 years. Semantics really. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I'm struggling to find any reason why it's so important for people to know... Do you think the names of people like Adolf Hitler and Idi Amin should be deleted from history books ?" No, I don't...and as you're applying that argument, has it prevented others from doing similar to them (invasion, genocide, etc?)? No. We know the names of James Bulger's killers - did that stop these two and others since then from committing similarly horrific murders? Again, no. It seems to me (and I'm more than happy to be corrected or given a credible point of view) that the interest in naming is a prurient one at best. It sells papers and some "quality" clickbait, and provides an opportunity for the hard-of-thinking to go and abuse their families in some sort of ill-considered "guilt by association" activity, but after the dust settles, how many of us will remember long-term, and to what end? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"If it's not important to name killers who could be released in future,however long that may be,then it's not important to name paedo's,so that when they move into your neighbourhood parents and kids won't be aware of the risk." I'm not trying to be difficult, but I knew I was missing something, so this post helped to a degree...having said that, they're not gonna be out for at least 20 years, are they? Anyhoo, appreciate the POV!! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"If it's not important to name killers who could be released in future,however long that may be,then it's not important to name paedo's,so that when they move into your neighbourhood parents and kids won't be aware of the risk. I'm not trying to be difficult, but I knew I was missing something, so this post helped to a degree...having said that, they're not gonna be out for at least 20 years, are they? Anyhoo, appreciate the POV!! " I know you weren't being difficult.Naming John Worboys (black cab rapist) brought many other victims forward (convictions for crimes against 12 women,over 100 suspected),naming him again prior to release put every woman in the country on alert.I know these two killers haven't done anyone else unknown to the Cops,but they will be released someday and the cleverest psychiatrist/rehabilitation specialist in the world can't say they are no longer a danger.Twenty years inside is a long time to learn how to say the right thing and play the system. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"If it's not important to name killers who could be released in future,however long that may be,then it's not important to name paedo's,so that when they move into your neighbourhood parents and kids won't be aware of the risk. I'm not trying to be difficult, but I knew I was missing something, so this post helped to a degree...having said that, they're not gonna be out for at least 20 years, are they? Anyhoo, appreciate the POV!! I know you weren't being difficult.Naming John Worboys (black cab rapist) brought many other victims forward (convictions for crimes against 12 women,over 100 suspected),naming him again prior to release put every woman in the country on alert.I know these two killers haven't done anyone else unknown to the Cops,but they will be released someday and the cleverest psychiatrist/rehabilitation specialist in the world can't say they are no longer a danger.Twenty years inside is a long time to learn how to say the right thing and play the system."Thank you - sometimes, it's all too easy for people to just fire off a knee-jerk response, but I had to ask, as I just couldn't see any upsides...and I'm talking about similar murders, not crime across the board, where of course in other scenarios the "need to know" is all too obvious. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The killers of Briana Ghey have been named following on from their conviction. Absolutely the right thing to do, well done to the judge for lifting the reporting restrictions. Just seen the story. Not sure how they only got 20 years though. Fuckers. 20 and 22 years as a minimum. Will only be released if the parole board believe they are not a threat to the public. If ever released they are no licence for the rest of their lives. Sure. But still means they could be out in 20 years. Semantics really. " I doubt they will be out after just the minimum. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The Father of Brianna has come out and says he now doesn’t want their names to be known. As they would be permanently linked to his daughter memory. Brianna families empathy and compassion towards the killers family is a tribute to how Brianna was raised. Hopefully those two are forgotten but Brianna and her family give hope to the goodness in people even when we would understand if they took an opposite view. I agree with Brianna mother, all of the families have lost children and are suffering over this vile act. So whatever Brianna family views are, I will respectfully agree with them. "I’m torn and had never thought of it like this until I listened to a debate on LBC about this exact case and the host was asking people to name the victims of a number of high profile killers and people really struggled. I thought that was really powerful. Long may Brianna live on in our memories. I’d hate for the focus to shift towards these two god awful beings and away from how much work we have to do to make trans people feel safe, protected and valued | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The Father of Brianna has come out and says he now doesn’t want their names to be known. As they would be permanently linked to his daughter memory. Brianna families empathy and compassion towards the killers family is a tribute to how Brianna was raised. Hopefully those two are forgotten but Brianna and her family give hope to the goodness in people even when we would understand if they took an opposite view. I agree with Brianna mother, all of the families have lost children and are suffering over this vile act. So whatever Brianna family views are, I will respectfully agree with them.
I’m torn and had never thought of it like this until I listened to a debate on LBC about this exact case and the host was asking people to name the victims of a number of high profile killers and people really struggled. I thought that was really powerful.
Long may Brianna live on in our memories. I’d hate for the focus to shift towards these two god awful beings and away from how much work we have to do to make trans people feel safe, protected and valued
"I think I heard the same debate and it was something that struck me also. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I don't see any reason for them to be named. Justice can take place in the court without any of us needing to know who these total strangers are. Naming them just encourages a lynch mob attitude. " As the mother of Jamie Bulger said in an interview recently why should everyone be told half a story. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I really don’t see the point of revealing their identities, other than satiating the desire of the same people who don’t think trans people should have rights. What needs to happen is for everyone who thinks trans women aren’t women and trans me aren’t men, to take their share of responsibility for what happened. Children do not learn to hate in isolation." As a trans woman . They were obsessed with violence/ killing and already had attempted to harm a few people previously as has been revealed. (Not trans ). They are not right in the head . Some people are just wired differently . They deemed Brianna easy target as one had befriended her already to gain trust . The names needed to be known as they will be released back into the wild during their 30s. They are dangerous and public has a right to know what worthless animals are living amongst them. Though the odds of them getting wrecked in prison is high so they may not get out at all | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"If it's not important to name killers who could be released in future,however long that may be,then it's not important to name paedo's,so that when they move into your neighbourhood parents and kids won't be aware of the risk." I totally agree with this! Silence and being anonymous somehow feels like their behaviour is being covered up! While I am not condoning poor behaviour towards the families of the murderers, I also don't see why the poor family of Brianna should be the only ones to suffer the media attention! Yes there is always a sick knock on effect of evil people becoming infamous. But having their name in the public domain also means the public can be vigilant. Let's face it, one of James Bulger killers has been in and out of prison due to being a paedophile! At some point these two are going to be released. Is there any chance they will be rehabilitated? Sadly I think its highly unlikely, going by the terrible things they did! If the public being made aware of who they are means they can't silently plan another murder, then that's a good thing! They lost their right to be viewed as 'just children' when they committed such an awful crime! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I think it's important that the judge did choose to release their identities, and waive their anonimity. It's been deemed as in the public interest, and to hopefully provide a future deterent to others that they have. It's the legal standpoint that the case has been deemed that significant, and the murder that abhorrent that the decision was made. " Somebody above made the point... I paraphrase.. "so we know their names now, so what?"... The public interest is one of those ubiquitous phrases that means anything and everything and at the same time nothing. We have become accustomed to "needing" to know everything about everything and everybody. Would it be sufficient to say "the perpetrators were found guilty and sentenced to.. Xx years"? I'm not suggesting any way that the murderers be afford any privelage for their benefit. They deserve none. But more the point that culturally we just demand to know stuff that doesn't really enrich our own lives, in any way. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I really don’t see the point of revealing their identities, other than satiating the desire of the same people who don’t think trans people should have rights. What needs to happen is for everyone who thinks trans women aren’t women and trans me aren’t men, to take their share of responsibility for what happened. Children do not learn to hate in isolation." I think you need to go read up more on this case, and not turn it into a 'trans' argument! They drew up a 'kill list' sadly Brianna was just a vulnerable person they befriended! The court and police have said it wasn't a specific hate crime against trans. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I am sure that a plethora of liberal human rights arseholes will demand public funds to fight this decision " Yeah; they never think about the loss of human rights of the deceased do they? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I think it's important that the judge did choose to release their identities, and waive their anonimity. It's been deemed as in the public interest, and to hopefully provide a future deterent to others that they have. It's the legal standpoint that the case has been deemed that significant, and the murder that abhorrent that the decision was made. Somebody above made the point... I paraphrase.. "so we know their names now, so what?"... The public interest is one of those ubiquitous phrases that means anything and everything and at the same time nothing. We have become accustomed to "needing" to know everything about everything and everybody. Would it be sufficient to say "the perpetrators were found guilty and sentenced to.. Xx years"? I'm not suggesting any way that the murderers be afford any privelage for their benefit. They deserve none. But more the point that culturally we just demand to know stuff that doesn't really enrich our own lives, in any way. " No, the point isn't that the names were released because Joe Public are a bunch of nosey parkers. It was because a judge considered it to be an important enough decision to waive their anonimity below the age of 18. There is a reason that only happens in cases like this. And it's not because it'll bump up the medias revenue. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I don't see any reason for them to be named. Justice can take place in the court without any of us needing to know who these total strangers are. Naming them just encourages a lynch mob attitude. " To put off the next vile killers of the future, perhaps? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I really don’t see the point of revealing their identities, other than satiating the desire of the same people who don’t think trans people should have rights. What needs to happen is for everyone who thinks trans women aren’t women and trans me aren’t men, to take their share of responsibility for what happened. Children do not learn to hate in isolation. I think you need to go read up more on this case, and not turn it into a 'trans' argument! They drew up a 'kill list' sadly Brianna was just a vulnerable person they befriended! The court and police have said it wasn't a specific hate crime against trans. " Just like James Bulger, a venerable child, brutalised by two young monsters. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Shouldn't fellow prisoners have the right to know who they are and what they did ?" Why? I'm curious. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Shouldn't fellow prisoners have the right to know who they are and what they did ? Why? I'm curious." So I could be wary if I was given a job alongside one of them in the kitchen, chopping onions | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I don't think they should ever be freed" Same here. Plus have their names taken away too and just give them a number. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I think it's important that the judge did choose to release their identities, and waive their anonimity. It's been deemed as in the public interest, and to hopefully provide a future deterent to others that they have. It's the legal standpoint that the case has been deemed that significant, and the murder that abhorrent that the decision was made. Somebody above made the point... I paraphrase.. "so we know their names now, so what?"... The public interest is one of those ubiquitous phrases that means anything and everything and at the same time nothing. We have become accustomed to "needing" to know everything about everything and everybody. Would it be sufficient to say "the perpetrators were found guilty and sentenced to.. Xx years"? I'm not suggesting any way that the murderers be afford any privelage for their benefit. They deserve none. But more the point that culturally we just demand to know stuff that doesn't really enrich our own lives, in any way. No, the point isn't that the names were released because Joe Public are a bunch of nosey parkers. It was because a judge considered it to be an important enough decision to waive their anonimity below the age of 18. There is a reason that only happens in cases like this. And it's not because it'll bump up the medias revenue. " OK. So what are going to do differently now you know their names? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I think it's important that the judge did choose to release their identities, and waive their anonimity. It's been deemed as in the public interest, and to hopefully provide a future deterent to others that they have. It's the legal standpoint that the case has been deemed that significant, and the murder that abhorrent that the decision was made. Somebody above made the point... I paraphrase.. "so we know their names now, so what?"... The public interest is one of those ubiquitous phrases that means anything and everything and at the same time nothing. We have become accustomed to "needing" to know everything about everything and everybody. Would it be sufficient to say "the perpetrators were found guilty and sentenced to.. Xx years"? I'm not suggesting any way that the murderers be afford any privelage for their benefit. They deserve none. But more the point that culturally we just demand to know stuff that doesn't really enrich our own lives, in any way. No, the point isn't that the names were released because Joe Public are a bunch of nosey parkers. It was because a judge considered it to be an important enough decision to waive their anonimity below the age of 18. There is a reason that only happens in cases like this. And it's not because it'll bump up the medias revenue. OK. So what are going to do differently now you know their names? " And what would go differently if we didn't? You said you didn't feel that murderers should be afforded any privelage for their own benefit? So, would it be better if someone under 18, convicted of murder had their records sealed because legally they are still considered a child in the eyes of the law? Or, would it be better that we didn't get any information about anyone pertaining to any crime they committed? It'd make employing someone requiring an enhanced DBS a bit difficult, no? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Or, would it be better that we didn't get any information about anyone pertaining to any crime they committed? It'd make employing someone requiring an enhanced DBS a bit difficult, no? " Ian Huntley got an enhanced DBS by changing his name | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The killers of Briana Ghey have been named following on from their conviction. Absolutely the right thing to do, well done to the judge for lifting the reporting restrictions. " They were names some months ago, I had a podcast in my ears (they walk amongst us) about this one. Just so wrong and evil. It was all purely down to jealousy, a huge waste of a beautiful life. Heart goes out to the family as every single media spike will relive the trauma of it all. So sad | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Being back capital punishment." I agree | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Or, would it be better that we didn't get any information about anyone pertaining to any crime they committed? It'd make employing someone requiring an enhanced DBS a bit difficult, no? Ian Huntley got an enhanced DBS by changing his name" There were changes put in place off the back of that I believe? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I think it's important that the judge did choose to release their identities, and waive their anonimity. It's been deemed as in the public interest, and to hopefully provide a future deterent to others that they have. It's the legal standpoint that the case has been deemed that significant, and the murder that abhorrent that the decision was made. Somebody above made the point... I paraphrase.. "so we know their names now, so what?"... The public interest is one of those ubiquitous phrases that means anything and everything and at the same time nothing. We have become accustomed to "needing" to know everything about everything and everybody. Would it be sufficient to say "the perpetrators were found guilty and sentenced to.. Xx years"? I'm not suggesting any way that the murderers be afford any privelage for their benefit. They deserve none. But more the point that culturally we just demand to know stuff that doesn't really enrich our own lives, in any way. No, the point isn't that the names were released because Joe Public are a bunch of nosey parkers. It was because a judge considered it to be an important enough decision to waive their anonimity below the age of 18. There is a reason that only happens in cases like this. And it's not because it'll bump up the medias revenue. OK. So what are going to do differently now you know their names? And what would go differently if we didn't? You said you didn't feel that murderers should be afforded any privelage for their own benefit? So, would it be better if someone under 18, convicted of murder had their records sealed because legally they are still considered a child in the eyes of the law? Or, would it be better that we didn't get any information about anyone pertaining to any crime they committed? It'd make employing someone requiring an enhanced DBS a bit difficult, no? " You didn't answer the question. What's different in your life now you know their names? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The killers of Briana Ghey have been named following on from their conviction. Absolutely the right thing to do, well done to the judge for lifting the reporting restrictions. Just seen the story. Not sure how they only got 20 years though. Fuckers. " They got life with a minimum term of 20 and 22 years. They can apply for parole then but it's by no means guaranteed. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I think it's important that the judge did choose to release their identities, and waive their anonimity. It's been deemed as in the public interest, and to hopefully provide a future deterent to others that they have. It's the legal standpoint that the case has been deemed that significant, and the murder that abhorrent that the decision was made. Somebody above made the point... I paraphrase.. "so we know their names now, so what?"... The public interest is one of those ubiquitous phrases that means anything and everything and at the same time nothing. We have become accustomed to "needing" to know everything about everything and everybody. Would it be sufficient to say "the perpetrators were found guilty and sentenced to.. Xx years"? I'm not suggesting any way that the murderers be afford any privelage for their benefit. They deserve none. But more the point that culturally we just demand to know stuff that doesn't really enrich our own lives, in any way. No, the point isn't that the names were released because Joe Public are a bunch of nosey parkers. It was because a judge considered it to be an important enough decision to waive their anonimity below the age of 18. There is a reason that only happens in cases like this. And it's not because it'll bump up the medias revenue. OK. So what are going to do differently now you know their names? And what would go differently if we didn't? You said you didn't feel that murderers should be afforded any privelage for their own benefit? So, would it be better if someone under 18, convicted of murder had their records sealed because legally they are still considered a child in the eyes of the law? Or, would it be better that we didn't get any information about anyone pertaining to any crime they committed? It'd make employing someone requiring an enhanced DBS a bit difficult, no? You didn't answer the question. What's different in your life now you know their names? " To mine personally absolutely nothing. I do agree with the judges standpoint that releasing information is generally done so to try and deter future similar atrocities for occurring though. You stated that your point regarding people using the phrase in the public interest. Personally I feel that things are often in the public interest. For example the informally know Sarah's Law, and Clare's Law. Clare's Law stats - March 2022 show: 22,435 people used "Right to Ask" to enquire about a new partner's record. In 8,383 of those cases Police had information deemed important to pass on. In 7,283 cases Police proactively approached men and women to tell them about their partner's past. This is all information that was believed to be in the public interest. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Being back capital punishment. I agree" Derek Bentley, Barry George, Lee Clegg, Stefano Kiszco, Bridgewater Four, McGuire Seven, Birmingham Six, Guildford Four, Ice Cream murderers, Winston Silcott etc etc.... | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I really don’t see the point of revealing their identities, other than satiating the desire of the same people who don’t think trans people should have rights. What needs to happen is for everyone who thinks trans women aren’t women and trans me aren’t men, to take their share of responsibility for what happened. Children do not learn to hate in isolation. I think you need to go read up more on this case, and not turn it into a 'trans' argument! They drew up a 'kill list' sadly Brianna was just a vulnerable person they befriended! The court and police have said it wasn't a specific hate crime against trans. " Interesting, because the judge said that transphobia was a motive ‘ In messages to Jenkinson found by police, the judge said Ratcliffe had shown “hostility” towards Ghey’s transgender status, referring to her as “it” and wondering if she would “scream like a man or a girl” when stabbed’ “We applied to the Judge for an increase in the defendants’ sentences because we believed this killing was a hate crime, motivated in part by hostility towards Brianna because she was transgender. We are pleased that the court has agreed that this was a motive.” - Nicole Wyn Williams, Crown Prosecution Service. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Being back capital punishment. I agree Derek Bentley, Barry George, Lee Clegg, Stefano Kiszco, Bridgewater Four, McGuire Seven, Birmingham Six, Guildford Four, Ice Cream murderers, Winston Silcott etc etc.... " | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Being back capital punishment. I agree" Yes, because it’s so easy to bring those who were wrongly executed back to life. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Post new Message to Thread |
| back to top |  |
