FabSwingers.com mobile

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

Roy Whiting

Jump to newest
 

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

I can't see one reasonable explanation as to why his sentence has been reduced?

I know he will be in his 80s before hes released but that does'nt mean he won't a be a danger around children

This must feel like a kick in the stomach to the Payne family

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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

Life should be life, its wrong but thats the bloody british justice system for ya

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ouvakMan
over a year ago

clacton on sea


"I can't see one reasonable explanation as to why his sentence has been reduced?

I know he will be in his 80s before hes released but that does'nt mean he won't a be a danger around children

This must feel like a kick in the stomach to the Payne family "

sorry to say but I'm a firm believer of the punishment should meet the crime, ergo you take a life you lose your's.

and with today's scientific know how there's little chance that the wrong person is found guilty, so the do gooders can't shout about miscarriages of justice.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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

I agree, we should reintroduce the death penalty, will free up a lot of space in the prisons

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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

I agree can't understand why this has been reduced !!!

why would they contemplate even letting him appeal in the first place.

he is one of the reasons why we should have a referendum on the death penalty but we will never get one due to the liberal do gooders and the human rights activists

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ickmealloverWoman
over a year ago

a very plush appartment off junt 7 M5

I agree

maybe hanging is not the apropriate way to do it

But I'm all for a lethal injection

Once you take a life you should expect to forfeit yours

The Bradford prostitute killer tried to kill himself with a sock (go figure) give him a lethal injection I say but hes not been found guilty yet

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *harpDressed ManMan
over a year ago

Here occasionally, but mostly somewhere else


"with today's scientific know how there's little chance that the wrong person is found guilty, so the do gooders can't shout about miscarriages of justice."

There's little chance of winning the lottery, but it still happens.

How many innocent people have to be executed to make the death penalty a bad idea?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ugby 123Couple
Forum Mod
over a year ago

O o O oo

The only good thing is he will be still be 81 before being eligible for parole.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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

At the time of his sentencing the Home Secretary had the final say on his tarrif and Blunkett opted for 50 years. Under current guidelines, the maximum set tarrif he could have received was 40 years, but, he could also have been given a whole life term - a sentence that would have been preferred by almost everybody EXCEPT Blunkett it appears.

Whiting can only be released at the express permission of the Home Secretary and only if he meets stringent criteria as to rehabilitation and decreased danger to children. The Home Sec will also take into account the cost of releasing him (new identity, 24 hour protection etc) as there will be an invitable clamour for his whereabouts to be known and I wouldn't be at all surprised if someone takes him out.

Having said all that, it is highly unlikely, given the seriousness of his crime, that he will ever be released bearing in mind that in 30 years time (he's already served 10 years) he will be 80 years old, and that's if he even lives that long.

It's realistic to assume that he will never be a free man and those outraged at the reduction in his sentence are simply feeding the whole hysteria about the man. See it for what it is and take comfort from the fact that he will more than likely die exactly where he is.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ickmealloverWoman
over a year ago

a very plush appartment off junt 7 M5


"The only good thing is he will be still be 81 before being eligible for parole."

thats good news

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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


"The only good thing is he will be still be 81 before being eligible for parole."

Which makes me wonder why on earth was £500,000 spent on all this in the first place using legal aid?

A pointless exercise that has dragged the whole thing up again for the poor family

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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


"I agree can't understand why this has been reduced !!!

why would they contemplate even letting him appeal in the first place.

he is one of the reasons why we should have a referendum on the death penalty but we will never get one due to the liberal do gooders and the human rights activists

"

...or the fact that science is not infallible and innocent people will still be executed.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ickmealloverWoman
over a year ago

a very plush appartment off junt 7 M5


"At the time of his sentencing the Home Secretary had the final say on his tarrif and Blunkett opted for 50 years. Under current guidelines, the maximum set tarrif he could have received was 40 years, but, he could also have been given a whole life term - a sentence that would have been preferred by almost everybody EXCEPT Blunkett it appears.

Whiting can only be released at the express permission of the Home Secretary and only if he meets stringent criteria as to rehabilitation and decreased danger to children. The Home Sec will also take into account the cost of releasing him (new identity, 24 hour protection etc) as there will be an invitable clamour for his whereabouts to be known and I wouldn't be at all surprised if someone takes him out.

Having said all that, it is highly unlikely, given the seriousness of his crime, that he will ever be released bearing in mind that in 30 years time (he's already served 10 years) he will be 80 years old, and that's if he even lives that long.

It's realistic to assume that he will never be a free man and those outraged at the reduction in his sentence are simply feeding the whole hysteria about the man. See it for what it is and take comfort from the fact that he will more than likely die exactly where he is."

he'll reach 80 easily enough

hes fed good food every day

entertained

no reason to suppose he wont live to a ripe old age

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *iamondsmiles.Woman
over a year ago

little house on the praire

My heart bleeds for that poor woman, he daughther was murdered, it caused the split of her marriage and now shes not long had a brain problem yet she fights on regardless. How must she be thinking right now. It would seem like a massive kick in the stomach

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ouvakMan
over a year ago

clacton on sea


"I agree

maybe hanging is not the apropriate way to do it

But I'm all for a lethal injection

Once you take a life you should expect to forfeit yours

The Bradford prostitute killer tried to kill himself with a sock (go figure) give him a lethal injection I say but hes not been found guilty yet"

every one is entitled to the right of trial by jury, but if the person is found guilty why should we the law abiding citizen be expected to keep him in relative luxury while many of us struggle to live below the poverty line, it's about time crime as made to pay for itself in this country, bring back hard labour then many of them wouldn't re-offend,they are there to be punished for their crime so punish them not mollycoddle them

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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


"At the time of his sentencing the Home Secretary had the final say on his tarrif and Blunkett opted for 50 years. Under current guidelines, the maximum set tarrif he could have received was 40 years, but, he could also have been given a whole life term - a sentence that would have been preferred by almost everybody EXCEPT Blunkett it appears.

Whiting can only be released at the express permission of the Home Secretary and only if he meets stringent criteria as to rehabilitation and decreased danger to children. The Home Sec will also take into account the cost of releasing him (new identity, 24 hour protection etc) as there will be an invitable clamour for his whereabouts to be known and I wouldn't be at all surprised if someone takes him out.

Having said all that, it is highly unlikely, given the seriousness of his crime, that he will ever be released bearing in mind that in 30 years time (he's already served 10 years) he will be 80 years old, and that's if he even lives that long.

It's realistic to assume that he will never be a free man and those outraged at the reduction in his sentence are simply feeding the whole hysteria about the man. See it for what it is and take comfort from the fact that he will more than likely die exactly where he is.

he'll reach 80 easily enough

hes fed good food every day

entertained

no reason to suppose he wont live to a ripe old age"

You think?? Nonces (prison slang for sex offenders) are the lowest form of human life in prison and they are considered a trophy if a lag manages to harm or even kill one of them. He'll be a target inside all of his natural life which is why Section 43 offenders are segregated for their own good. But, it isn't uncommon for guards to deliberately permit security to lapse, or even turn a blind eye altogether. Huntley has been attacked on several occasions, and seriously hurt in the process too. This couldn't happen if he was guarded closely 24/7/365, could it.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ickmealloverWoman
over a year ago

a very plush appartment off junt 7 M5


"At the time of his sentencing the Home Secretary had the final say on his tarrif and Blunkett opted for 50 years. Under current guidelines, the maximum set tarrif he could have received was 40 years, but, he could also have been given a whole life term - a sentence that would have been preferred by almost everybody EXCEPT Blunkett it appears.

Whiting can only be released at the express permission of the Home Secretary and only if he meets stringent criteria as to rehabilitation and decreased danger to children. The Home Sec will also take into account the cost of releasing him (new identity, 24 hour protection etc) as there will be an invitable clamour for his whereabouts to be known and I wouldn't be at all surprised if someone takes him out.

Having said all that, it is highly unlikely, given the seriousness of his crime, that he will ever be released bearing in mind that in 30 years time (he's already served 10 years) he will be 80 years old, and that's if he even lives that long.

It's realistic to assume that he will never be a free man and those outraged at the reduction in his sentence are simply feeding the whole hysteria about the man. See it for what it is and take comfort from the fact that he will more than likely die exactly where he is.

he'll reach 80 easily enough

hes fed good food every day

entertained

no reason to suppose he wont live to a ripe old age

You think?? Nonces (prison slang for sex offenders) are the lowest form of human life in prison and they are considered a trophy if a lag manages to harm or even kill one of them. He'll be a target inside all of his natural life which is why Section 43 offenders are segregated for their own good. But, it isn't uncommon for guards to deliberately permit security to lapse, or even turn a blind eye altogether. Huntley has been attacked on several occasions, and seriously hurt in the process too. This couldn't happen if he was guarded closely 24/7/365, could it. "

Your always an expert

But in fact you just read the press like the rest of us

I hope they kick his ass and more than once

You have children

hope your not defending him

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ouvakMan
over a year ago

clacton on sea


"I agree can't understand why this has been reduced !!!

why would they contemplate even letting him appeal in the first place.

he is one of the reasons why we should have a referendum on the death penalty but we will never get one due to the liberal do gooders and the human rights activists

...or the fact that science is not infallible and innocent people will still be executed. "
genealogy and dna is almost 100% fool proof only 1 in 104million chance of dna results from two different people being matched, think those odd's are good enough to allow the law to justly take a life for a life

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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

They can shit piss and spit in his food everyday and they probably do

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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


"

every one is entitled to the right of trial by jury, but if the person is found guilty why should we the law abiding citizen be expected to keep him in relative luxury while many of us struggle to live below the poverty line, it's about time crime as made to pay for itself in this country, bring back hard labour then many of them wouldn't re-offend,they are there to be punished for their crime so punish them not mollycoddle them "

Hard labour was abolished for good reason. It's barbaric and tantamount to slavery, and we, as a society, need to raise ourselves above scum like Huntley and Whiting and smile satisfactorily as we climb into our nice warm beds at night and cuddle up to our nearest and dearest for some human warmth & comfort and know that Whiting, Huntely et al will never again experience this. How frustratingly maddening do you think that must be for them. What glee

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ickmealloverWoman
over a year ago

a very plush appartment off junt 7 M5


"

every one is entitled to the right of trial by jury, but if the person is found guilty why should we the law abiding citizen be expected to keep him in relative luxury while many of us struggle to live below the poverty line, it's about time crime as made to pay for itself in this country, bring back hard labour then many of them wouldn't re-offend,they are there to be punished for their crime so punish them not mollycoddle them

Hard labour was abolished for good reason. It's barbaric and tantamount to slavery, and we, as a society, need to raise ourselves above scum like Huntley and Whiting and smile satisfactorily as we climb into our nice warm beds at night and cuddle up to our nearest and dearest for some human warmth & comfort and know that Whiting, Huntely et al will never again experience this. How frustratingly maddening do you think that must be for them. What glee "

maybe they never had someone to cuddle up to in the first place

Huntleys gf did not live with him

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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


"I agree

maybe hanging is not the apropriate way to do it

But I'm all for a lethal injection

Once you take a life you should expect to forfeit yours

The Bradford prostitute killer tried to kill himself with a sock (go figure) give him a lethal injection I say but hes not been found guilty yet

every one is entitled to the right of trial by jury, but if the person is found guilty why should we the law abiding citizen be expected to keep him in relative luxury while many of us struggle to live below the poverty line, it's about time crime as made to pay for itself in this country, bring back hard labour then many of them wouldn't re-offend,they are there to be punished for their crime so punish them not mollycoddle them "

I totally agree I believe a life for a life...as for lethal injection is too quick.....I say bring back hanging

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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


"I agree can't understand why this has been reduced !!!

why would they contemplate even letting him appeal in the first place.

he is one of the reasons why we should have a referendum on the death penalty but we will never get one due to the liberal do gooders and the human rights activists

...or the fact that science is not infallible and innocent people will still be executed. "

never said that science was infallible,

however this was a clear cut case as far as I am aware and the guy should have been put down like the animal he is.

Science is progressing at a terrific speed and with dna sampling and other methods coming on line soon it should be almost impossible to execute an innocent person.

there is no right or wrong way here but we need a deterrent beacause society is getting worse and nothing deems to be putting these people off.

Prison is to soft nowadays !!!

Sentences are to lenient thse days as well,

You get caught carrying a gun or a knife you should get 20 years straight away.

this is just my opinion I know lots of people will not agree but something needs to be done and someone needs to take a stand.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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

Sigh...what a surprise everyone baying for the death penalty!

There's a new series starting on the Crime and Discovery channel called Bad Forensics, highlighting cases where forensics have been wrong!

Don't get me wrong, I think our sentencing is far too lenient: life should mean life not 10 years, and this man's sentence shouldn't be reduced!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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


"

Your always an expert

But in fact you just read the press like the rest of us

I hope they kick his ass and more than once

You have children

hope your not defending him

"

Why the hostility? Of course I'm not defending him, but I certainly don't advocate the death penalty as I believe we are decent folk and should rise above this eye for an eye nonsense. We have a system that works and even though we can't filter out these pervs and murderers before they commit their crimes we CAN deal with them effectively once they are caught. Whiting will be on licence - if he ever gets out - for the rest of his life and just like one of the Bulger killers recently - one slip up and he's back inside for good.

I know what I know as I have a close relative who served time in jail and he saw first hand what happens to nonces inside.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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

If vets can put down sick animals, then why cant doctors put down sick people???? Monsters like this Whiting and Huntley dont deserve to breathe fresh air, so for me, it would be a stun gun to the temples and bye bye!!!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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

[Removed by poster at 10/06/10 09:43:47]

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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


"

every one is entitled to the right of trial by jury, but if the person is found guilty why should we the law abiding citizen be expected to keep him in relative luxury while many of us struggle to live below the poverty line, it's about time crime as made to pay for itself in this country, bring back hard labour then many of them wouldn't re-offend,they are there to be punished for their crime so punish them not mollycoddle them

Hard labour was abolished for good reason. It's barbaric and tantamount to slavery, and we, as a society, need to raise ourselves above scum like Huntley and Whiting and smile satisfactorily as we climb into our nice warm beds at night and cuddle up to our nearest and dearest for some human warmth & comfort and know that Whiting, Huntely et al will never again experience this. How frustratingly maddening do you think that must be for them. What glee

maybe they never had someone to cuddle up to in the first place

Huntleys gf did not live with him"

Maybe you should chack your facts eh?

Carr DID live with Huntley.

http://www.courtnewsuk.co.uk/c_famous_crime_cases/

a_ian_huntley_and_maxine_carr/crime_vaults/

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ickmealloverWoman
over a year ago

a very plush appartment off junt 7 M5


"[Removed by poster at 10/06/10 09:43:47]"

I'm not hostile

But hes an animal who deliberately killed an innocent child

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ouvakMan
over a year ago

clacton on sea


"

every one is entitled to the right of trial by jury, but if the person is found guilty why should we the law abiding citizen be expected to keep him in relative luxury while many of us struggle to live below the poverty line, it's about time crime as made to pay for itself in this country, bring back hard labour then many of them wouldn't re-offend,they are there to be punished for their crime so punish them not mollycoddle them

Hard labour was abolished for good reason. It's barbaric and tantamount to slavery, and we, as a society, need to raise ourselves above scum like Huntley and Whiting and smile satisfactorily as we climb into our nice warm beds at night and cuddle up to our nearest and dearest for some human warmth & comfort and know that Whiting, Huntely et al will never again experience this. How frustratingly maddening do you think that must be for them. What glee "

but they are still warm, fed well, and have possibly better medical care than you or i get, prison isn't punishment for many it's a holiday at OUR expense, prison's and prisoner's should be run on a self financing basis not funded from public money as it currently is, think what the money thats spent giving the criminal a warm safe place to live is costing us and what that money could do for those less fortunate in the real world

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ickmealloverWoman
over a year ago

a very plush appartment off junt 7 M5


"

every one is entitled to the right of trial by jury, but if the person is found guilty why should we the law abiding citizen be expected to keep him in relative luxury while many of us struggle to live below the poverty line, it's about time crime as made to pay for itself in this country, bring back hard labour then many of them wouldn't re-offend,they are there to be punished for their crime so punish them not mollycoddle them

Hard labour was abolished for good reason. It's barbaric and tantamount to slavery, and we, as a society, need to raise ourselves above scum like Huntley and Whiting and smile satisfactorily as we climb into our nice warm beds at night and cuddle up to our nearest and dearest for some human warmth & comfort and know that Whiting, Huntely et al will never again experience this. How frustratingly maddening do you think that must be for them. What glee

maybe they never had someone to cuddle up to in the first place

Huntleys gf did not live with him

Maybe you should chack your facts eh?

Carr DID live with Huntley.

http://www.courtnewsuk.co.uk/c_famous_crime_cases/

a_ian_huntley_and_maxine_carr/crime_vaults/"

my memory isn't all it was

but you again are correct

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *at with MikeCouple
over a year ago

Solihull

So, we should kill people to prove that killing is wrong? Hmmmmm K

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ouvakMan
over a year ago

clacton on sea


"So, we should kill people to prove that killing is wrong? Hmmmmm K"

lets see how your attitude would change if some one killed one of your nearest and dearest

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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


"

but they are still warm, fed well, and have possibly better medical care than you or i get, prison isn't punishment for many it's a holiday at OUR expense, prison's and prisoner's should be run on a self financing basis not funded from public money as it currently is, think what the money thats spent giving the criminal a warm safe place to live is costing us and what that money could do for those less fortunate in the real world "

Should we bring back squalid, fetid, rancid gaols, feed them gruel and allow them to become diseased and under nourished leading to outbreaks of diptheria etc etc that will leak into mainstream society from the people who work in jails and those that visit relatives currently serving time in them?

That's why we introduced humane prisons. I would be very pissed off if a serious disease caught from someone who visited a prisoner who passed it into society then infected me with it.

No, I'm more than comfortable with a system that confines someone to a 6'x6' box for 23 hours per day for dozens of years on end. That works for me. Imagine living like that with no end in sight. That's all they have to look forward to and it feels fookin great to know they are feeling it right now, this very minute, as you are reading this in total freedom.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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

I don't believe in the death penalty either

too many innocents executed in the past for me to ever support it

I do believe that the justice system is wrong when someone that has shown no remorse for his crime is allowed to appeal and end up getting his sentence reduced leaving the victims family having to relive the whole thing again and wondering what the hell had gone wrong in this world to allow it to happen

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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


"I don't believe in the death penalty either

too many innocents executed in the past for me to ever support it

I do believe that the justice system is wrong when someone that has shown no remorse for his crime is allowed to appeal and end up getting his sentence reduced leaving the victims family having to relive the whole thing again and wondering what the hell had gone wrong in this world to allow it to happen"

I agree with you on that too honey. The appeals process a separate issue to the death penalty and I think it needs addressing. 10 years into a 40 year kick is no way long enough for a first appeal. 75% in should be the benchmark and not at all if they've never confessed to their crimes or shown any remorse at all for what they've done. But remorse can be faked so to use it as a yardstick leaves the parole system open to ridicule and manipulation.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ugby 123Couple
Forum Mod
over a year ago

O o O oo


"I don't believe in the death penalty either

too many innocents executed in the past for me to ever support it

I do believe that the justice system is wrong when someone that has shown no remorse for his crime is allowed to appeal and end up getting his sentence reduced leaving the victims family having to relive the whole thing again and wondering what the hell had gone wrong in this world to allow it to happen"

As you said up there, the fact he got legal aid to do it is sick too.

I do often wonder though, is the solicitor happy trying to get it reduced or is it just the amount of money he is going to get and he doesn't care .

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ickmealloverWoman
over a year ago

a very plush appartment off junt 7 M5

The solicitor is just after his wages

mores the pity

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *abioMan
over a year ago

Newcastle and Gateshead


"I can't see one reasonable explanation as to why his sentence has been reduced?

I know he will be in his 80s before hes released but that does'nt mean he won't a be a danger around children

This must feel like a kick in the stomach to the Payne family "

I can see partly the decision behind it....

at the time the judge did say that he should never be released.... and followed the rules at the time, however at that point the person who had the last say was a politician... the home secretary.... and that is what they are saying was unfair.... that it should have been judical....

so it was blunkett who set a minimum of 50 years..

if it makes you feel any better ian huntley term was a judical recommendation... and his is the same...

he should never be released...minimum 40 years before parole.....

and just because he may be paroled who says he will ever be release

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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

Is this that piece of sh*t that killed that little girl? I heard on the news yesterday his sentence is being cut, what the fecking hell for string him up by his bits

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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

just as a matter of interest

how many people have been executed in this country that have since been proven to be innocent !!!!!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ickmealloverWoman
over a year ago

a very plush appartment off junt 7 M5


"just as a matter of interest

how many people have been executed in this country that have since been proven to be innocent !!!!!"

interesting point

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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

For one Derick bentley

There are lists of people that have beed wrongfuly imprisoned in this country

Now if the death penalty was still in force they would all have been wrongfuly executed for no reason

Which is why I would never support the death penalty

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ouvakMan
over a year ago

clacton on sea


"just as a matter of interest

how many people have been executed in this country that have since been proven to be innocent !!!!!"

one does come to mind, and for the life of me i can't think of his name, other than to say he was the fella hanged for supposedly say " let them have it" or shooting a copper, when in fact it was his partner in crime who did both the things for which he was sentenced and hanged

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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

The safest place for him would be inside and the cheapest as i am sure he will need police protection if released and what will that cost.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ickmealloverWoman
over a year ago

a very plush appartment off junt 7 M5


"For one Derick bentley

There are lists of people that have beed wrongfuly imprisoned in this country

Now if the death penalty was still in force they would all have been wrongfuly executed for no reason

Which is why I would never support the death penalty"

Derek Bently did confess but in this day and age forensics would discount his confession

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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


"For one Derick bentley

There are lists of people that have beed wrongfuly imprisoned in this country

Now if the death penalty was still in force they would all have been wrongfuly executed for no reason

Which is why I would never support the death penalty"

Off the top of my head the Birmingham 6 comes to mind for wrongful imprisonment

16 years inside for something that they were all set up for as the need for an arrest and for scapegoats was more important than the truth

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *abioMan
over a year ago

Newcastle and Gateshead


"just as a matter of interest

how many people have been executed in this country that have since been proven to be innocent !!!!!"

I wish i could find the thread where people were talking about the death penalty.. I'll try to find it.... and this was one of the points that I brought up with a whole ton of names....

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ickmealloverWoman
over a year ago

a very plush appartment off junt 7 M5


"For one Derick bentley

There are lists of people that have beed wrongfuly imprisoned in this country

Now if the death penalty was still in force they would all have been wrongfuly executed for no reason

Which is why I would never support the death penalty

Off the top of my head the Birmingham 6 comes to mind for wrongful imprisonment

16 years inside for something that they were all set up for as the need for an arrest and for scapegoats was more important than the truth"

but that was then

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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


"For one Derick bentley

There are lists of people that have beed wrongfuly imprisoned in this country

Now if the death penalty was still in force they would all have been wrongfuly executed for no reason

Which is why I would never support the death penalty

Derek Bently did confess but in this day and age forensics would discount his confession"

Under what conditions did he confess though? he was mentally impaired

A policeman was shot and killed and they needed someone to pay for it,he was pardoned in the end,bit late though as he was dead

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *abioMan
over a year ago

Newcastle and Gateshead

here is the thread.....

http://www.fabswingers.com/forum/lounge/23927

it does make for fascinating reading......

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ouvakMan
over a year ago

clacton on sea


"For one Derick bentley

There are lists of people that have beed wrongfuly imprisoned in this country

Now if the death penalty was still in force they would all have been wrongfuly executed for no reason

Which is why I would never support the death penalty"

but with the progress in scientific process's for establishing the identity of the guilty party in the carrying out of a crime, there are now going to be none if any reason to believe a person wasn't guilty of the crime, and I'll bet it costs far more to keep a prisoner in prison than it does a man on the dole ???? and the man in prison has a better standard of living than most of those on the dole

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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

correct me if I am wrong here but weren't the Birmingham six set up by the nasty rozzer's !!!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ickmealloverWoman
over a year ago

a very plush appartment off junt 7 M5


"For one Derick bentley

There are lists of people that have beed wrongfuly imprisoned in this country

Now if the death penalty was still in force they would all have been wrongfuly executed for no reason

Which is why I would never support the death penalty

Derek Bently did confess but in this day and age forensics would discount his confession

Under what conditions did he confess though? he was mentally impaired

A policeman was shot and killed and they needed someone to pay for it,he was pardoned in the end,bit late though as he was dead"

thst was then

things change

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ickmealloverWoman
over a year ago

a very plush appartment off junt 7 M5


"For one Derick bentley

There are lists of people that have beed wrongfuly imprisoned in this country

Now if the death penalty was still in force they would all have been wrongfuly executed for no reason

Which is why I would never support the death penalty

but with the progress in scientific process's for establishing the identity of the guilty party in the carrying out of a crime, there are now going to be none if any reason to believe a person wasn't guilty of the crime, and I'll bet it costs far more to keep a prisoner in prison than it does a man on the dole ???? and the man in prison has a better standard of living than most of those on the dole "

I agreee with you there

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *abioMan
over a year ago

Newcastle and Gateshead


"correct me if I am wrong here but weren't the Birmingham six set up by the nasty rozzer's !!!"

birmingham 6....

guildford 4....

Barry George

Stephen Downing

Stefan Kiszko

Micheal Shirley

Sean Hodgson

all miscarrigaes of justice... all would have been executed...

oooops....

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ouvakMan
over a year ago

clacton on sea


"correct me if I am wrong here but weren't the Birmingham six set up by the nasty rozzer's !!!"

but didn't forensic science come to their defence in the end?

my argument is based in the here and now, not in our past mistakes, today science has progressed in leaps and bounds and it's possible to be 99.99% certain that the accused is indeed guilty of the charge

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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


"correct me if I am wrong here but weren't the Birmingham six set up by the nasty rozzer's !!!

birmingham 6....

guildford 4....

Barry George

Stephen Downing

Stefan Kiszko

Micheal Shirley

Sean Hodgson

all miscarrigaes of justice... all would have been executed...

oooops.... "

take ya point and yes it's true !!!!

but with today's technology and hopefully honest police would these miscarriages of justice happen now !!!

I don't know but it's a thought.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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


"correct me if I am wrong here but weren't the Birmingham six set up by the nasty rozzer's !!!

birmingham 6....

guildford 4....

Barry George

Stephen Downing

Stefan Kiszko

Micheal Shirley

Sean Hodgson

all miscarrigaes of justice... all would have been executed...

oooops.... "

But its ok they may have pardoned later a few years later and their families could have been at peace with the knowledge that they were innocent all along,a posthumous pardon is nothing to be sniffed at after all it must make all the difference

Thanks _abio,I could'nt be arsed to google

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *abioMan
over a year ago

Newcastle and Gateshead


"correct me if I am wrong here but weren't the Birmingham six set up by the nasty rozzer's !!!

but didn't forensic science come to their defence in the end?

my argument is based in the here and now, not in our past mistakes, today science has progressed in leaps and bounds and it's possible to be 99.99% certain that the accused is indeed guilty of the charge "

in whenever I see this quoted... I always say look at the Derek Evans case....

he was tried in 1966..... and convicted of the murder of his wife.... his DNA would have been everywhere.....

except it wasn't him who killed her.... it was the lodger..... and they only ended up catching him, after he went on to kill another 2 women......

dna is not infallible... that has been proven.....

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ickmealloverWoman
over a year ago

a very plush appartment off junt 7 M5


"correct me if I am wrong here but weren't the Birmingham six set up by the nasty rozzer's !!!

but didn't forensic science come to their defence in the end?

my argument is based in the here and now, not in our past mistakes, today science has progressed in leaps and bounds and it's possible to be 99.99% certain that the accused is indeed guilty of the charge "

I agree

less likely to happen today

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ouvakMan
over a year ago

clacton on sea


"correct me if I am wrong here but weren't the Birmingham six set up by the nasty rozzer's !!!

birmingham 6....

guildford 4....

Barry George

Stephen Downing

Stefan Kiszko

Micheal Shirley

Sean Hodgson

all miscarrigaes of justice... all would have been executed...

oooops.... "

again i say that with today's technology those miscarriage's of justice would be less likely to occur, and we are talking of people here who have committed crimes in our very very recent history, in a time when science was and is able to be sure that the right person is in the frame

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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

You would hope that it would'nt happen today

I would'nt believe that for a minute though

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ickmealloverWoman
over a year ago

a very plush appartment off junt 7 M5


"You would hope that it would'nt happen today

I would'nt believe that for a minute though"

thing is who hangs around with criminals?

I dont

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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


"You would hope that it would'nt happen today

I would'nt believe that for a minute though

thing is who hangs around with criminals?

I dont"

what a strange thing to say

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *prite128Woman
over a year ago

maidstone


"At the time of his sentencing the Home Secretary had the final say on his tarrif and Blunkett opted for 50 years. Under current guidelines, the maximum set tarrif he could have received was 40 years, but, he could also have been given a whole life term - a sentence that would have been preferred by almost everybody EXCEPT Blunkett it appears.

Whiting can only be released at the express permission of the Home Secretary and only if he meets stringent criteria as to rehabilitation and decreased danger to children. The Home Sec will also take into account the cost of releasing him (new identity, 24 hour protection etc) as there will be an invitable clamour for his whereabouts to be known and I wouldn't be at all surprised if someone takes him out.

Having said all that, it is highly unlikely, given the seriousness of his crime, that he will ever be released bearing in mind that in 30 years time (he's already served 10 years) he will be 80 years old, and that's if he even lives that long.

It's realistic to assume that he will never be a free man and those outraged at the reduction in his sentence are simply feeding the whole hysteria about the man. See it for what it is and take comfort from the fact that he will more than likely die exactly where he is.

he'll reach 80 easily enough

hes fed good food every day

entertained

no reason to suppose he wont live to a ripe old age

You think?? Nonces (prison slang for sex offenders) are the lowest form of human life in prison and they are considered a trophy if a lag manages to harm or even kill one of them. He'll be a target inside all of his natural life which is why Section 43 offenders are segregated for their own good. But, it isn't uncommon for guards to deliberately permit security to lapse, or even turn a blind eye altogether. Huntley has been attacked on several occasions, and seriously hurt in the process too. This couldn't happen if he was guarded closely 24/7/365, could it. "

you're dead right there wishy ... prison is not a nice place for those convicted of this type of crime and even segregation doesnt always protect from physical harm .

I often have a wry smile at people who think prison is a soft option ...sure they are fed, warm, have things to do ..but if you've ever been into a Cat A prison and experienced the atmosphere, the culture ( official and unofficial ) and the way it makes me feel just to get back ouside .... all the play stations in the world will never convince me its an easy place to be.

before someone jumps on me - im not saying it should be , just challenging the premis that it is

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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

there are no arguments that the crimes of some are horrendous..and even that is an understatement.

The issue is raised by what sort of punishment should be delivered.

It is clear that we have become soft..and it shows in the level of crimes and the lack of regard these sorts have when considering their actions.

If you commit a crime that causes death or suffering to another i.e. rape, murder, child abuse etc...then by commiting those crimes you have ostensibly resigned from the human race.

That being the case you should forfeit your right to the comforts that the rest of us enjoy.

You should have only the very basics of needs catered for. Basic washing, eating and shelter facilities.

You commited a crime and should be punished and you should NOT be living your life in a standard comparable to any free member of society.

We should treat them in a similar way to the chain gangs in the USA. Pink jumpsuits, back breaking work and if they dont like it...tough shit.

I do believe in the death penalty as you cannot and nor should you waste yout time and effort paying to rehabilitate those who have signed their own release from the human race, people who will alwayas behave in this manner and quite simply will not chanage.

These dregs live and breath whilst the victims of these crime are laid to rest and the families serve a life sentance of grief. These animals are secure in the knowledge they have a warm bed, hot meal and free education.

These dregs of society should never see the light of day and indeed deserve to have their life ended as they serve no use to continue to breath, they are a drain on our already stretched resources.

We would not hesistate to destroy an animal if it attacked a human and considering this is now 2010..and not the 1910 we are in a position to be sure beyond all doubt if that person is guilty or not.

Whilst i realise that this issue results in strong feelings from those for and against the death penalty..tough..we are too soft and we see the effects day in and day out.

vol

xx

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ouvakMan
over a year ago

clacton on sea


"correct me if I am wrong here but weren't the Birmingham six set up by the nasty rozzer's !!!

but didn't forensic science come to their defence in the end?

my argument is based in the here and now, not in our past mistakes, today science has progressed in leaps and bounds and it's possible to be 99.99% certain that the accused is indeed guilty of the charge

in whenever I see this quoted... I always say look at the Derek Evans case....

he was tried in 1966..... and convicted of the murder of his wife.... his DNA would have been everywhere.....

except it wasn't him who killed her.... it was the lodger..... and they only ended up catching him, after he went on to kill another 2 women......

dna is not infallible... that has been proven....."

1966 in the science world that's like prehistoric compared to the present day,

in 1966 England won the world cup lol ,and the Berlin wall was still in place, and everyone believed in free love and the the beatles were the best thing since sliced bread, times have a changed and so has the way in which things are done these days, we no longer rely on 12 good men and true to decide if a person is guilty in the way in which we did in the past, today it's not his/her guilt thats on trial but the reason for why he/she committed the crime

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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

a point to consider...

i read yesterday of a mother who has cancer. She cannot get treatment as its considered too expensive. Her husband and children will never have the joy of seeing her face as they go through life.

So...if that animal had been eradicated, then the £500k he used for appeal would still be in the government purse...

that money could have been used to save a life and provide a future for many...

i know exactly what I would choose.

So as those who oppose the death penalty sleep well in their beds..give a thought to the mother dying as a monster pisses OUR money up against a wall simply to further twist the knife and drain every last drop of pleasure from his crimes....

vol

xx

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ickmealloverWoman
over a year ago

a very plush appartment off junt 7 M5


"there are no arguments that the crimes of some are horrendous..and even that is an understatement.

The issue is raised by what sort of punishment should be delivered.

It is clear that we have become soft..and it shows in the level of crimes and the lack of regard these sorts have when considering their actions.

If you commit a crime that causes death or suffering to another i.e. rape, murder, child abuse etc...then by commiting those crimes you have ostensibly resigned from the human race.

That being the case you should forfeit your right to the comforts that the rest of us enjoy.

You should have only the very basics of needs catered for. Basic washing, eating and shelter facilities.

You commited a crime and should be punished and you should NOT be living your life in a standard comparable to any free member of society.

We should treat them in a similar way to the chain gangs in the USA. Pink jumpsuits, back breaking work and if they dont like it...tough shit.

I do believe in the death penalty as you cannot and nor should you waste yout time and effort paying to rehabilitate those who have signed their own release from the human race, people who will alwayas behave in this manner and quite simply will not chanage.

These dregs live and breath whilst the victims of these crime are laid to rest and the families serve a life sentance of grief. These animals are secure in the knowledge they have a warm bed, hot meal and free education.

These dregs of society should never see the light of day and indeed deserve to have their life ended as they serve no use to continue to breath, they are a drain on our already stretched resources.

We would not hesistate to destroy an animal if it attacked a human and considering this is now 2010..and not the 1910 we are in a position to be sure beyond all doubt if that person is guilty or not.

Whilst i realise that this issue results in strong feelings from those for and against the death penalty..tough..we are too soft and we see the effects day in and day out.

vol

xx"

you are right inyour views

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *abioMan
over a year ago

Newcastle and Gateshead


"So, we should kill people to prove that killing is wrong? Hmmmmm K

lets see how your attitude would change if some one killed one of your nearest and dearest "

people use that argument.... so I'll let you into my life a bit...

I knew Stephen Lawrence and yes I still know the parents....

we all "know" who did it,

in fact I think half of east and south east london know who did it!...

they can't get them... and yes it is frustrating.... I would love to see justice done for someone that I considered to be a friend...

would i want an eye for an eye.... no! i would love to see them absolutely rot in jail and never see the light of day!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ouvakMan
over a year ago

clacton on sea


"So, we should kill people to prove that killing is wrong? Hmmmmm K

lets see how your attitude would change if some one killed one of your nearest and dearest

people use that argument.... so I'll let you into my life a bit...

I knew Stephen Lawrence and yes I still know the parents....

we all "know" who did it,

in fact I think half of east and south east london know who did it!...

they can't get them... and yes it is frustrating.... I would love to see justice done for someone that I considered to be a friend...

would i want an eye for an eye.... no! i would love to see them absolutely rot in jail and never see the light of day!

"

ROT being the operative word here i think, but they don't ROT they live in relative comfort with all their needs catered for by you and me the tax paying public for whom they had little regard for in the first place when they committed said crime, so sorry _abio but i stand by " if you do the crime you pay the price for it"

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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


"I agree, we should reintroduce the death penalty, will free up a lot of space in the prisons "

and a lot of money from keeping them in prison.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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

I have the perfect punitive solution for proven non-humans such as Roy Whiting.

I call it "non-interventional incarceration". Basically, when phorensic science has proved beyond doubt that the individual is guilty (and this is perfectly possible with modern DNA techniques) they are sentenced to a sentence of 6 months. They would be locked in a cell, no lights, no heat, no bed, no toilet, no food and no drink. In other words, no intervention from anybody. After 6 months, open the door and jet-wash out what's left inside. No cost, no waste, no execution - end of problem. Their last moments can be filmed and shown to violent offenders as a warning of what will happen to them if they decide to dis-associate themselves from the human race in future.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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

Well I must be missing something!

If the death penalty is such a deterrent and everyone seems to have at least a GED or equivalent in forensic science why are murders in countries with it still carried out?

Make no mistake if someone is intent on killing they will, what we need is ensure when they are sentenced to life it means just that! If they find Jesus, good for them, he forgives society doesn't.

I have no qualms with having a tv, seeing what is happening in the world, people enjoying themselves, having to follow rules.

Hell on earth, some may even take a leaf out of Harold Shipman's book!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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


"Whilst i realise that this issue results in strong feelings from those for and against the death penalty..tough..we are too soft and we see the effects day in and day out.

vol

xx"

So, anyone who has differing opinions to you .. it's just a case of .... tough?

No debating, or understanding of someone else's thoughts... just .. tough?

Hardly a case for defending capital punishment. Tough.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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


"correct me if I am wrong here but weren't the Birmingham six set up by the nasty rozzer's !!!

birmingham 6....

guildford 4....

Barry George

Stephen Downing

Stefan Kiszko

Micheal Shirley

Sean Hodgson

all miscarrigaes of justice... all would have been executed...

oooops....

again i say that with today's technology those miscarriage's of justice would be less likely to occur, and we are talking of people here who have committed crimes in our very very recent history, in a time when science was and is able to be sure that the right person is in the frame "

** MISCARRIAGES OF JUSTICE LESS LIKELY TO OCCUR**

Still a possibility though. There is no 100% guarantee that science is 100% correct. That leaves a chance, however slim, that an innocent person could be put to death. And that is why capital punishment should never be reinstated.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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


"I have the perfect punitive solution for proven non-humans such as Roy Whiting.

I call it "non-interventional incarceration". Basically, when phorensic science has proved beyond doubt that the individual is guilty (and this is perfectly possible with modern DNA techniques) they are sentenced to a sentence of 6 months. They would be locked in a cell, no lights, no heat, no bed, no toilet, no food and no drink. In other words, no intervention from anybody. After 6 months, open the door and jet-wash out what's left inside. No cost, no waste, no execution - end of problem. Their last moments can be filmed and shown to violent offenders as a warning of what will happen to them if they decide to dis-associate themselves from the human race in future."

and who would you inflict this odious task of clearing out such hellholes to? A law abiding citizen? Another lag perhaps? Automated process even?

How far do we cheapen human life in our desire for blood revenge for a life taken?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ouvakMan
over a year ago

clacton on sea


"correct me if I am wrong here but weren't the Birmingham six set up by the nasty rozzer's !!!

birmingham 6....

guildford 4....

Barry George

Stephen Downing

Stefan Kiszko

Micheal Shirley

Sean Hodgson

all miscarrigaes of justice... all would have been executed...

oooops....

again i say that with today's technology those miscarriage's of justice would be less likely to occur, and we are talking of people here who have committed crimes in our very very recent history, in a time when science was and is able to be sure that the right person is in the frame

** MISCARRIAGES OF JUSTICE LESS LIKELY TO OCCUR**

Still a possibility though. There is no 100% guarantee that science is 100% correct. That leaves a chance, however slim, that an innocent person could be put to death. And that is why capital punishment should never be reinstated."

LETS SEE HOW YOU REACT

when this happens to one of you or your's, one of your children are sexually attacked, mutilated or murdered.

i'll bet you'll sing from a different song sheet then.

i've been there i've had a very close relative killed by a person. and although i was bought up to forgive and forget, there are somethings you just don't forgive nor forget, and believe me if this person is ever released i'd willingly swing(hang) for him he took a 18month olds life(22years ago on the 26th of june) and will probably walk free in the next few years.my family her parents and her husbands parents have had to live with this senseless waste of a human life all this time, she would have probably have been a wife and mother herself by this time in her life had it not been taken away so soon.

22years our family have had to pay for his upkeep his education,his TV,video games and when and if he's released we will still have to pay the price of allowing the scum to live a "normal" life,

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *harpDressed ManMan
over a year ago

Here occasionally, but mostly somewhere else


"So, we should kill people to prove that killing is wrong? Hmmmmm K

lets see how your attitude would change if some one killed one of your nearest and dearest "

Let's see how your attitude would change if someone wrongly convicted one of your nearest and dearest.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *harpDressed ManMan
over a year ago

Here occasionally, but mostly somewhere else


" again i say that with today's technology those miscarriage's of justice would be less likely to occur"

Since "less likely" is not the same as "utterly impossible", I'll continue to prefer to avoid the barbarism of killing innocent people.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *harpDressed ManMan
over a year ago

Here occasionally, but mostly somewhere else

How about (since neither "side" seems particularly likely to be persuaded )...

A voluntary death penalty?

ie, those who have been found guilty may apply for execution. This would then be considered by a judge - are they fit to choose, could there possibly be a successful appeal, etc?

After that, they get what we all want.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 
 

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


" LETS SEE HOW YOU REACT

when this happens to one of you or your's, one of your children are sexually attacked, mutilated or murdered.

i'll bet you'll sing from a different song sheet then.

i've been there i've had a very close relative killed by a person. and although i was bought up to forgive and forget, there are somethings you just don't forgive nor forget, and believe me if this person is ever released i'd willingly swing(hang) for him he took a 18month olds life(22years ago on the 26th of june) and will probably walk free in the next few years.my family her parents and her husbands parents have had to live with this senseless waste of a human life all this time, she would have probably have been a wife and mother herself by this time in her life had it not been taken away so soon.

22years our family have had to pay for his upkeep his education,his TV,video games and when and if he's released we will still have to pay the price of allowing the scum to live a "normal" life, "

Please don't think that I don't feel outrage and horror whenever someone is murdered, particularly children. I feel the same sense of anger that every other decent human being feels but I also feel that if one innocent life is lost through capital punishment then that is one innocent life too many. Humour me for a second please and transfer all the rage you feel about your loss to the family of someone wrongly executed, imagine the sense of loss and outrage that they must also feel. You will know more than most what I'm talking about here and although in your situation it's cut and dried about the man's guilt, it isn't always so absolute in other cases, and because of that we cannot determine who should die and who should not given the evidence that convicted them. Evidence can be flawed, inconclusive or even tainted so which murderer do we kill and which do we reprieve based upon the evidence?

It has to clear cut and absolutely irrefutable before we go back down the road of executing people in this country.

But I most certainly do feel outrage... at Whiting, Huntley and that mad bastard who slaughtered 12 innocent people only last week in Cumbria, but, even had he not killed himself, I would still not advocate the death penalty for him (no doubt about his guilt there at all) for the simple fact that if we have to have capital punishment at all that it has to be applied across the board, and in some cases it isn't as clear cut.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
Post new Message to Thread
back to top