quote:

Originally posted by ~Orchid~:

quote:

Originally posted by Mentalist:
This is sickening, and if there is any justice in the world she will never see the light of day again if she is guilty.

The problem is, if this woman is convicted and it is considered a first offence the chances are she will get a very light sentence. This I find terrible, believe me the children are facing a life sentence one way or another and so should she.

Some male Paedophiles get light sentences as well.

This is what get's my blood boiling. People like Sidney Cooke who get out after nine years after being convicted of the rape and manslaughter of a young boy, despite having a record as long as your arm for sexual attacks on children.

quote:

Originally posted by *Pesky-Pixie*:

quote:

Originally posted by Ennis Del Beadle:
Good luck to them getting an impartial jury that hasn't heard about the case and formed opinions from the media.

I was thinking about that today.

This has happened quite close to where I live so set me thinking about lots of 'what ifs'.

If I was called for jury duty (never been called yet!) I was wondering what I would do as I would find it extremely difficult to be impartial in this case.

Would they get an out of the area jury then or something....it can be a very close knit community down here. Many people would have had either direct contact or indirect contact with the nursery and/or the parents.

It does make you think though doesn't it? As a mum of 3 myself if I was called for jury service and it was a case of child abuse, would my feeling of disgust and anger sway my judgement of the facts of the case.

I have been called for jury service twice and once for coroners court, but was excused all 3 times due to child caring responsibilities. I hope I could be impartial, but......

quote:

Originally posted by Daniel J*:

quote:

Originally posted by Joods:

quote:

Originally posted by Daniel J*:
Bear in mind that the woman has only been charged at this point and not tried and convicted.

That's a minor detail. Police have all the evidence they need to ensure she's convicted and punished.

Oh well. Then why bother with the trouble and expense of a trial.

I'm not even going to try and dignify your question.

quote:

Originally posted by Joods:


I'm not even going to try and dignify your question.

You won't win Joods

quote:

Originally posted by Mazzystar:

quote:

Originally posted by *Pesky-Pixie*:

quote:

Originally posted by Ennis Del Beadle:
CRB checks are only useful if the person has any convictions. If they have been at this kind of thing for years but never been caught, you cannot blame the CRB check.
We are changing over from CRB's soon anyway to a new system, I have to go to a meeting about it soon to see how we are going to be affected in social care.

Yeah, I know the CRB checks are only useful if the person has a record, it's the fact that they are the only checks available and as a parent you are told that if someone is CRB checked your child is safe that bothers me.

Us parents aren't allowed on school trips to help out, as we haven't been CRB checked, but this woman was allowed as much access to children as she wanted!

Parents can come on a trip at our school,but they would have a member of staff with them.We like to have them with us if we have to divide into groups so we can have two adults with a group(for H and S reasons)

aye my OH tends to go on school trips with my son due to his needs, he has a CRB check as he was a taxi driver...but i think you meant to have them with every job change? mind you this isn't a job just the occassional school trip which the school used to ask him (beg him lol) to come on. normally though it's just him and our son together, not a grp of kids (though they all seem to flock to him )

quote:

Originally posted by Ennis Del Beadle:



It does make you think though doesn't it? As a mum of 3 myself if I was called for jury service and it was a case of child abuse, would my feeling of disgust and anger sway my judgement of the facts of the case.

I have been called for jury service twice and once for coroners court, but was excused all 3 times due to child caring responsibilities. I hope I could be impartial, but......

I think everyone hopes they would be impartial - it would be incredibly hard though.

quote:

Originally posted by Joods:

quote:

Originally posted by Daniel J*:

quote:

Originally posted by Joods:

quote:

Originally posted by Daniel J*:
Bear in mind that the woman has only been charged at this point and not tried and convicted.

That's a minor detail. Police have all the evidence they need to ensure she's convicted and punished.

Oh well. Then why bother with the trouble and expense of a trial.

I'm not even going to try and dignify your question.

It's a fair point. If you've assessed the case in detail, found it rock solid, and can't think of a reasonable defence then you're away I guess. The rest of us ought to have the respect for the principles of justice from our positions of relative ignorance of the case.

So, you're with the CPS then?

quote:

Originally posted by Daniel J*:

quote:

Originally posted by Joods:

quote:

Originally posted by Daniel J*:

quote:

Originally posted by Joods:

quote:

Originally posted by Daniel J*:
Bear in mind that the woman has only been charged at this point and not tried and convicted.

That's a minor detail. Police have all the evidence they need to ensure she's convicted and punished.

Oh well. Then why bother with the trouble and expense of a trial.

I'm not even going to try and dignify your question.

It's a fair point. If you've assessed the case in detail, found it rock solid, and can't think of a reasonable defence then you're away I guess. The rest of us ought to have the respect for the principles of justice from our positions of relative ignorance of the case.

So, you're with the CPS then?

Close but no cigar.

quote:

Originally posted by Liverpoollass:

quote:

Originally posted by Joods:
I'm not even going to try and dignify your question.

You won't win Joods

Yep. Principles and logically-sound arguments win every time.

quote:

Originally posted by Joods:

quote:

So, you're with the CPS then?

Close but no cigar.

Not at all close, I'll bet.

quote:

Originally posted by Liverpoollass:

quote:

Originally posted by ~Orchid~:


Some male Paedophiles get light sentences as well.

Pitiful light sentences and let out time and time again to do continue their abuse. Which is why they should be locked up and the key thrown away.

Not a resident of the UK "Liverpool L but couldn't agree more".

pictures in paper today showing a bag of potties being taken away......probably been in some of the pics with the poor kids on

quote:

Originally posted by Hollygolightly:

quote:

Originally posted by Liverpoollass:

quote:

Originally posted by ~Orchid~:


Some male Paedophiles get light sentences as well.

Pitiful light sentences and let out time and time again to do continue their abuse. Which is why they should be locked up and the key thrown away.

Not a resident of the UK "Liverpool L but couldn't agree more".

The protection of children should be paramount when letting these monsters out onto the street, back into society. Alas, it doesn't seem to be. It seems the rights of the offenders are more important. You cannot take the chance of letting them out to abuse again.

It really is something to think about, the trial issue i mean.

Is this a sign of our times now or was it just never reported in years gone by?

I remember a few years ago, walking down town with my mother, there was a little girl about 3 yrs old, crying her eye's out at the edge of the kerb. It was a busy road and people were just walking on by not paying much attention. This old man was standing watching her and as we reached the scene he grabbed my mothers arm and told her that the wee girl had been there crying for about 10 minutes and he was afraid she might run into the road but he was scared to approach her incase people thought he was a paedo and she was crying because of him.

Its terrible that us parents are afraid to allow our children now to enjoy the treats ie: school trips, brownie and guides campings and sunday school outings, that we all enjoyed.

I just cant get my head round how those poor parents and children must be feeling, it's just every parents worsed nightmare.

Personally, I think it has got worse, especially with the event of computers and internet. These monsters can download child porn and "abuse" without even having to leave the comfort of their armchair. Of course, child abuse has happened in years gone by, but I do feel it is more prevalent now.

I haven't trawled all through this thread (sorry) ................i was under the impression that this woman has pornographic/child images down loaded onto her PC. I heard that there was no evidence of the kids at nursery being involved in the downloads.

Of course it's shocking/horrible/unthinkable but ..............we really shouldn't be jumping the gun here should we? For one thing ............she may have a PC with shared access.

Until anything is proven - we shouldn't be too hasty in our condemnation - should we?

Maybe I've missed something.

quote:

Originally posted by Bethni:
It really is something to think about, the trial issue i mean.

Is this a sign of our times now or was it just never reported in years gone by?

I remember a few years ago, walking down town with my mother, there was a little girl about 3 yrs old, crying her eye's out at the edge of the kerb. It was a busy road and people were just walking on by not paying much attention. This old man was standing watching her and as we reached the scene he grabbed my mothers arm and told her that the wee girl had been there crying for about 10 minutes and he was afraid she might run into the road but he was scared to approach her incase people thought he was a paedo and she was crying because of him.

Its terrible that us parents are afraid to allow our children now to enjoy the treats ie: school trips, brownie and guides campings and sunday school outings, that we all enjoyed.

I just cant get my head round how those poor parents and children must be feeling, it's just every parents worsed nightmare.

Child abuse and murder is not a modern problem, it is just reported upon more due to mass media and the whole idea that nothing is a taboo and shouldn't be discussed (and rightly so!)

quote:

Originally posted by Soozy woo:
I haven't trawled all through this thread (sorry) ................i was under the impression that this woman has pornographic/child images down loaded onto her PC. I heard that there was no evidence of the kids at nursery being involved in the downloads.

Of course it's shocking/horrible/unthinkable but ..............we really shouldn't be jumping the gun here should we? For one thing ............she may have a PC with shared access.

Until anything is proven - we shouldn't be too hasty in our condemnation - should we?

Maybe I've missed something.

Some of the images are reported to have been taken from inside of the nursery where she worked.

quote:

Originally posted by Liverpoollass:

quote:

Originally posted by Soozy woo:
I haven't trawled all through this thread (sorry) ................i was under the impression that this woman has pornographic/child images down loaded onto her PC. I heard that there was no evidence of the kids at nursery being involved in the downloads.

Of course it's shocking/horrible/unthinkable but ..............we really shouldn't be jumping the gun here should we? For one thing ............she may have a PC with shared access.

Until anything is proven - we shouldn't be too hasty in our condemnation - should we?

Maybe I've missed something.

Some of the images are reported to have been taken from inside of the nursery where she worked.

Ahhhhh .....that puts a whole different light on it then. I haven't seen the news today - last night they were saying something quite different.

Child abuse and murder is not a modern problem, it is just reported upon more due to mass media and the whole idea that nothing is a taboo and shouldn't be discussed (and rightly so!)[/QUOTE]



Absolutely. Look at all the children from the past coming forward from orphanges and former members of the Catholic churches where abuse was rife but was covered up and never reported.

quote:

Originally posted by Soozy woo:


Ahhhhh .....that puts a whole different light on it then. I haven't seen the news today - last night they were saying something quite different.

I think some of the children can be identified, but others cannot. Must be dreadful to be a mother with a child at the nursery, not knowing.

The internet has certainly made this a more prevalent thing. I also don't think it's helped that certain elements of the media, fashion and entertainment industries are promoting female sexuality in a way that makes it increasingly child like. Most young women now strive to have a body that makes them look pre-pubescent. Look at how Britney Spears was promoted as a schoolgirl temptress. It's not sending out the right messages to anyone.

quote:

Originally posted by Soozy woo:
I haven't trawled all through this thread (sorry) ................i was under the impression that this woman has pornographic/child images down loaded onto her PC. I heard that there was no evidence of the kids at nursery being involved in the downloads.

Of course it's shocking/horrible/unthinkable but ..............we really shouldn't be jumping the gun here should we? For one thing ............she may have a PC with shared access.

Until anything is proven - we shouldn't be too hasty in our condemnation - should we?

Maybe I've missed something.

Luckily Joods is very close to the case, so we can take their word for the woman's guilt.

I bang on to people about unsecured wireless access when cases like this come up. I bet there are people here now using wireless who do not use WPA-encryption, hidden network ID, and MAC access lists.

If my internet is down, which it is occasionally, then I just use my neighbour's unsecured wireless network. I could be downloading illegal porn, or abusing copyright on music/films, or whatever, and it'd all be on his IP address logged and stored with his name and address at his ISP.

It'd be his address the police raid if his ISP dobs him in and his PCs, phones, etc taken away. It'd also be his name that gets leaked to the papers too while he's being interviewed.

quote:

Originally posted by Queen of the High Teas:
The internet has certainly made this a more prevalent thing. I also don't think it's helped that certain elements of the media, fashion and entertainment industries are promoting female sexuality in a way that makes it increasingly child like. Most young women now strive to have a body that makes them look pre-pubescent. Look at how Britney Spears was promoted as a schoolgirl temptress. It's not sending out the right messages to anyone.

Absolutely agree with you. More and more children are not being allowed to be children. Mothers that let their children wear bras, make-up and enter these pageants. Call me old fashioned, but I just don't agree with it. Children should be children, they have plenty of time to be grown-up up later. Who knows how many sickos are out there and where they are.

quote:

Originally posted by Daniel J*:

quote:

Originally posted by Soozy woo:
I haven't trawled all through this thread (sorry) ................i was under the impression that this woman has pornographic/child images down loaded onto her PC. I heard that there was no evidence of the kids at nursery being involved in the downloads.

Of course it's shocking/horrible/unthinkable but ..............we really shouldn't be jumping the gun here should we? For one thing ............she may have a PC with shared access.

Until anything is proven - we shouldn't be too hasty in our condemnation - should we?

Maybe I've missed something.

Luckily Joods is very close to the case, so we can take their word for the woman's guilt.

I bang on to people about unsecured wireless access when cases like this come up. I bet there are people here now using wireless who do not use WPA-encryption, hidden network ID, and MAC access lists.

If my internet is down, which it is occasionally, then I just use my neighbour's unsecured wireless network. I could be downloading illegal porn, or abusing copyright on music/films, or whatever, and it'd all be on his IP address logged and stored with his name and address at his ISP.

It'd be his address the police raid if his ISP dobs him in and his PCs, phones, etc taken away. It'd also be his name that gets leaked to the papers too while he's being interviewed.

According to the police at the press conference there were photographs taken at the nursery that were taken on her personal mobile phone.

quote:

Originally posted by Queen of the High Teas:
According to the police at the press conference there were photographs taken at the nursery that were taken on her personal mobile phone.

I know. I was just talking generally there. If the police take your PCs away for investigation then I don't think they don't do it subtly. Your whole neighbour knows, if past reported cases are typical. And as we can see from here, people very readily assume guilt.

quote:

Originally posted by Queen of the High Teas:

quote:

Originally posted by Daniel J*:

quote:

Originally posted by Soozy woo:
I haven't trawled all through this thread (sorry) ................i was under the impression that this woman has pornographic/child images down loaded onto her PC. I heard that there was no evidence of the kids at nursery being involved in the downloads.

Of course it's shocking/horrible/unthinkable but ..............we really shouldn't be jumping the gun here should we? For one thing ............she may have a PC with shared access.

Until anything is proven - we shouldn't be too hasty in our condemnation - should we?

Maybe I've missed something.

Luckily Joods is very close to the case, so we can take their word for the woman's guilt.

I bang on to people about unsecured wireless access when cases like this come up. I bet there are people here now using wireless who do not use WPA-encryption, hidden network ID, and MAC access lists.

If my internet is down, which it is occasionally, then I just use my neighbour's unsecured wireless network. I could be downloading illegal porn, or abusing copyright on music/films, or whatever, and it'd all be on his IP address logged and stored with his name and address at his ISP.

It'd be his address the police raid if his ISP dobs him in and his PCs, phones, etc taken away. It'd also be his name that gets leaked to the papers too while he's being interviewed.

According to the police at the press conference there were photographs taken at the nursery that were taken on her personal mobile phone.

OH, Jesus Mary and Joseph, this kind of thing freaks me out. I'm sure someone will defeand them but, God Almigty, would'nt like to earn my living defeanding the likes of them.

quote:

Originally posted by Ennis Del Beadle:
*Has worked out that is on most peoples ignored lists, even when being insightful and not taking the piss*

Me to Can I just add .. or repeat if its been said... for once, hopefully, no children have been murdered, and that is something.

quote:

Originally posted by The Singing Ringing Tree:

quote:

Originally posted by Ennis Del Beadle:
*Has worked out that is on most peoples ignored lists, even when being insightful and not taking the piss*

Me to Can I just add .. or repeat if its been said... for once, hopefully, no children have been murdered, and that is something.

OMG its on ITY news now and its horrendous !!

quote:

Originally posted by Daniel J*:

quote:

Originally posted by Queen of the High Teas:
According to the police at the press conference there were photographs taken at the nursery that were taken on her personal mobile phone.

I know. I was just talking generally there. If the police take your PCs away for investigation then I don't think they don't do it subtly. Your whole neighbour knows, if past reported cases are typical. And as we can see from here, people very readily assume guilt.

you are right there daniel, funny how the police returning the same equipment isnt given equal publicity if nothing at all is found, the persons life is still ruined just by the allegations.

based on what the police have said (with regards to her phone having images taken inside the nursery) it would seem to be an open and shut case however the police really arent going to say "we've no idea" and even if they did once the press get hold of it then they make it into a huge story which will without doubt make it almost impossible for this woman to get a fair trial.

oh and the numbers of children abused by non family members or close relatives is still tiny and from records shows that its barely changed for at least the last 50 years, your child is far safer in the park with strangers than at a family dinner party, its just that we have more media nowdays who fight amongst themselves to publish ever more lurid scare stories.

you may not want to hear that but its true, that isnt to say i dont agree with everyone else if they are guilty they should lock them up and melt down the key so it can never be used again but although the thought of someone harming a child makes me feel ill i once saw someone publish an article that we could in fact be putting children in more danger if we gave the sick bastards life because it was like going back to the old days of "you might as well get hung for a sheep instead of a lamb" in that at present someone who rapes or injures a child will get a shorter sentence than someone who kills a child but if both were the same it might lead to more children being killed after all either way the perpetrator would get life.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Big Brothers Big Scam:
QUOTE]
oh and the numbers of children abused by non family members or close relatives is still tiny and from records shows that its barely changed for at least the last 50 years

????, just wondering where you've got that from...do you mean by people that they don't know i.e. strangers, rather than just family/relatives?

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Queen of the High Teas:
I think it's safe to assume that 99% of sexual predators are men

Quennie, agree with what you've said re the unfair perception of women 'involved' as being seen as worse than men e.g. Maxine Carr etc. BUT recent research suggests that it is not safe to assume the above....far more women than we previously knew about are sexually abusive in their own right, not just as 'accomplices' etc

quote:

Originally posted by Supercalifragilistic:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Big Brothers Big Scam:
QUOTE]
oh and the numbers of children abused by non family members or close relatives is still tiny and from records shows that its barely changed for at least the last 50 years

????, just wondering where you've got that from...do you mean by people that they don't know i.e. strangers, rather than just family/relatives?

yes, in most cases of child abuse (all types) by far the largest number of reported cases are situations where the abuser is a member of the childs extended family but in cases like that its extremely rare its reported in the press in order to protect he childs identity wheras if the abuse is carried out by someone like a teacher or scoutmaster or even more rarely a stranger then in the press the gloves are off and as a result people gain the impression that children are far more at risk away from home than they actually are.

that isnt to say that in all cases (but especially for those in a position of trust) there shouldnt be heavier sentences.

oh and i got it from a newspaper article years ago but it was repeated recently by esther rantzen (sp?) from childline.

quote:

Originally posted by Big Brothers Big Scam:

quote:

Originally posted by Supercalifragilistic:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Big Brothers Big Scam:
QUOTE]
oh and the numbers of children abused by non family members or close relatives is still tiny and from records shows that its barely changed for at least the last 50 years

????, just wondering where you've got that from...do you mean by people that they don't know i.e. strangers, rather than just family/relatives?

yes, in most cases of child abuse (all types) by far the largest number of reported cases are situations where the abuser is a member of the childs extended family but in cases like that its extremely rare its reported in the press in order to protect he childs identity wheras if the abuse is carried out by someone like a teacher or scoutmaster or even more rarely a stranger then in the press the gloves are off and as a result people gain the impression that children are far more at risk away from home than they actually are.

that isnt to say that in all cases (but especially for those in a position of trust) there shouldnt be heavier sentences.

oh and i got it from a newspaper article years ago but it was repeated recently by esther rantzen (sp?) from childline.

Oooo, too tired to go into the inas and outs of this now..however,briefly, the stats re reported abuse by people who work with children have only started to be collected in the last two years, (other than in schools where they started to be collected in 2004,) and , like intra-familial abuse only a v v tiny proportion go to criminal trial and are therefore reported in the press... and there are still no central stats collected re abuse outside of the 'family'/people working with children, so no-idea where the newspaper/Esther get their figures from

yes, i'm off to bed now too but i'm sure we can discuss more tomorrow.

i think it might have been based on convictions in court (which are on public record).

goodnight all.

quote:

Originally posted by Supercalifragilistic:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Queen of the High Teas:
I think it's safe to assume that 99% of sexual predators are men

Quennie, agree with what you've said re the unfair perception of women 'involved' as being seen as worse than men e.g. Maxine Carr etc. BUT recent research suggests that it is not safe to assume the above....far more women than we previously knew about are sexually abusive in their own right, not just as 'accomplices' etc

Sorry, my terminology was a little flippant, what I should have said was that the vast majority of sexual predators are men. I know that there are women out there who do take a more active role in abuse but I believe that they are still in a significant minority.

quote:

Originally posted by Big Brothers Big Scam:

you may not want to hear that but its true, that isnt to say i dont agree with everyone else if they are guilty they should lock them up and melt down the key so it can never be used again but although the thought of someone harming a child makes me feel ill i once saw someone publish an article that we could in fact be putting children in more danger if we gave the sick bastards life because it was like going back to the old days of "you might as well get hung for a sheep instead of a lamb" in that at present someone who rapes or injures a child will get a shorter sentence than someone who kills a child but if both were the same it might lead to more children being killed after all either way the perpetrator would get life.

I understand totally what you are say in respect of that. What is the answer though? Children need to be protected and it is far better/safer to have these monsters locked up and off the street where they cannot harm any child. Chemical castration doesn't seem to work and neither does rehabilitation. Supervising them when they are released is a no-brainer, imo. We have to lock them up and never let them out.

quote:

Originally posted by Liverpoollass:

quote:

Originally posted by Big Brothers Big Scam:

you may not want to hear that but its true, that isnt to say i dont agree with everyone else if they are guilty they should lock them up and melt down the key so it can never be used again but although the thought of someone harming a child makes me feel ill i once saw someone publish an article that we could in fact be putting children in more danger if we gave the sick bastards life because it was like going back to the old days of "you might as well get hung for a sheep instead of a lamb" in that at present someone who rapes or injures a child will get a shorter sentence than someone who kills a child but if both were the same it might lead to more children being killed after all either way the perpetrator would get life.

I understand totally what you are say in respect of that. What is the answer though? Children need to be protected and it is far better/safer to have these monsters locked up and off the street where they cannot harm any child. Chemical castration doesn't seem to work and neither does rehabilitation. Supervising them when they are released is a no-boner, imo. We have to lock them up and never let them out.

Did you mean to say no-boner?! That seems a little inappropriate.

quote:

Originally posted by Queen of the High Teas:

Did you mean to say no-boner?! That seems a little inappropriate.

I meant no-brainer