My feed
Premium

Please
or
to access all these features

MNHQ have commented on this thread

News

15 year old girl has been found guilty of murder

126 replies

Soubriquet · 18/10/2016 12:56

In my town this happened

Liz Edwards and her daughter Katie was found murdered by a boy and girl aged 14 at the time

The boy admitted murder. The girl didn't. She admitted to manslaughter instead, despite all the evidence it was her idea.

Today she's been found guilty. Good. She's just as bad as he is. I hope the justice system gives them a good jail sentence

please remember that as they are underage it is illegal to name them. If you do know who they are (as I know it's quite common knowledge at least around here) you cannot identify them at all!

OP posts:
Soubriquet · 18/10/2016 13:02
OP posts:
Smartleatherbag · 18/10/2016 13:04

Oh my goodness, what on earth was the motive?

Soubriquet · 18/10/2016 13:05

can't really say that without giving away identity...

OP posts:
SouthWestmom · 18/10/2016 13:23

Bloody hell.
Absolutely terrifying.

Soubriquet · 18/10/2016 13:26

Very terrifying

I've been reading all the articles and they have been printing all the grizzly details. It was awful to read

How does the anonyminity law work?

Why did the James Bulger murderers got named where others don't?

OP posts:
cosmicglittergirl · 18/10/2016 13:38

That is chilling.

Sparklesilverglitter · 18/10/2016 13:41

I think I read this on the radio, Bloody awful!

I hope they spend a very long time in prison but I do also wonder how fucked up two children have to be to commit murder

SouthWestmom · 18/10/2016 13:44

It's a bit like the two girls in Australia who killed one of their mothers. The guy says it wouldn't have happened if they hadn't met.

Soubriquet · 18/10/2016 13:46

It's scary what youths will do when supported by each other

OP posts:
ImperialBlether · 18/10/2016 13:54

Soubriquet, I've sent you a PM.

Millionreasons · 18/10/2016 13:55

Yes I have been wondering what on earth the motive was.

ArmfulOfRoses · 18/10/2016 13:56

I live very close to you op, it's just awful.
So many lives ruined.

Arfarfanarf · 18/10/2016 14:02

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

bibbitybobbityyhat · 18/10/2016 14:03

I had a thread about this case last week. I had some questions about the legalities - how can the identity of the accused be prevented from leaking on to social media in this day and age?, when will the media ban on naming them be lifted if ever? etc.

I can only assume someone with only half a braincell actually did name them on my thread ... as it was deleted! I didn't see all of it, I was working at the time.

Fucking twits! If you are reading this - whoever got my thread deleted - try engaging your brain first before posting Angry.

Soubriquet · 18/10/2016 14:09

It's a lot harder than it used to be and I don't get how it works

Why do 10 year olds get named but others don't?

OP posts:
Gingernaut · 18/10/2016 14:14

The judge in the case has to specifically lift reporting restrictions.

It's done on a case by case basis and there has to be "in the public interest".

bibbitybobbityyhat · 18/10/2016 14:15

With Thomson and Venables, maybe they were named after they were found guilty? I can't remember although it was within my adult lifetime.

Or perhaps the law has changed since then?

I think there is a discussion to be had about these questions.

Soubriquet · 18/10/2016 14:19

It's certainly something to think about

With social media so rife it's almost impossible to keep things quiet

Within the day, we all knew who they were and why. Wouldn't have known that if it wasn't for social media

OP posts:
BertrandRussell · 18/10/2016 14:19

"I've been reading all the articles and they have been printing all the grizzly details. It was awful to read"

There's an easy solution to that.........

Soubriquet · 18/10/2016 14:21

It's easy solution yes but it's right on my door step. How can I ignore something like that?

OP posts:
Gingernaut · 18/10/2016 14:22

Without trying to get this thread pulled, Thompson and Venables attacked a stranger.

Reporting restrictions tend to be lifted if the defendants/convicted are a danger to others.

Reporting restrictions aren't lifted in cases of incest, for example, where identifying the attacker identifies the victim.

The attack was specifically targetted, suggesting the defendants/convicted are not a threat to the wider community at large.

hmcAsWas · 18/10/2016 14:23

What Bertrand said

rainbowstardrops · 18/10/2016 14:24

Absolutely heartbreaking Sad

TheWoodlander · 18/10/2016 14:24

I googled this, because I read the case and couldn't imagine the motive, whether it was a random killing, or what.

It's a horrifying case - and I'm glad she's guilty of murder, because it's clear she was the instigator - but for her it wouldn't have happened.

AFAIK, I think as a blanket rule children and victims of sexual offences remain anonymous - and anyone whose identity would give away the identity of those who are granted anonymity. But it is for the judge to decide in each case.

Soubriquet · 18/10/2016 14:26

Ah that makes sense Gingernaut

OP posts:
Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.