Southport - reporting restrictions

[mids2019]

So the attacker in Southport was a child (17) so will be not be reported on due to reporting restrictions. Due to proximity of the alleged attacked to adulthood and the severity of the crimes do you think in this case it is in the public interest to release at least some details of the alleged killer? Not releasing details fuels speculation that at a public level may not be helpful in my.opinion.

In addition I would think there may be a high chance the attacker had a severe mental illness so after the Nottingham attacks will the debate about personal responsibility for actions during psychosis be raised again?

@MaidOfAle It's not offensive at all to reference mental health with suspected murderers. People who kill often have mental health issues, that is not at all the same as saying that people who have mental health issues are more likely to kill!

You have now set DP off trying to name 3! 😂

I love MN for this - thank you 😂

Apparently there are many more.

Your poor DP.

Describing a seventeen year old as a "child" is an odd one. Until a couple of years ago, you could be married at sixteen!

If you disagree with the law, I suggest you write to your MP explaining how and why it should be changed.

No one wants to see rioting again but justice must be done in public. I hope we can hear the details of the case when it goes to trial

Did people say the same the same thing about the Roma rioting in Leeds or is it just condemned because it’s not a ‘minority group’ protesting?

I don't think the Roma who were rioting were targeting another group of people with violence on the basis of their ethnicity or religion were they?

You got to be kidding me! 😂😂
Please please I beg you, name a few. Just a few.

Sincerely,

A white Eastern European.

Depends if you deem social services to be a religious or ethnic group I guess.

Wasn’t former Yugoslavia wars about that? Kazakhstan, the Balkan areas?
Turkey, of course.

I’m sure there’s a former soviet country where people are ethnically pale skinned, freckles, red hair, and Muslim. I can’t remember which one, though. Maybe Kazakhstan.

Kazakhstan and Turkey aren't in Eastern Europe though.
They're in Asia.

He will be 18 when he's sentenced (more than likely), and a whole life order can be handed down in special cases

https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/youth-justice-board-for-england-and-wales/about

The priorities for rehabilitating youth offenders for their own good and to learn from mistakes may not wash with some in this case.

No, it mustn't.

There are laws in place for a reason. If the judge thinks it's appropriate to do so, he will be named when he is sentenced.

People only care because the rumours floating around on social media paint him as an immigrant. If he was white nobody would care.

Do you actually care about how it will be applied in this case, or do you want to whip people up?

Yes, the overarching goal of the youth justice system is to rehabilitate. However, in appropriate cases there are other options available.

He hasn't been tried or sentenced yet.

This sudden fascination with our justice system is a transparent attempt to whip up anger.

Let the police and the CPS get on with their jobs.

OK so the judge would have to consider a sentence length of 12 years or over with a child offender. I just feel the legal system is correct but this is going to leave a bad taste in people's mouths. Mainly because 17 is an age where adulthood can be assumed by a lot of the public.

After extensive googling I can’t find out if someone charged as a minor but tried as an adult still gets anonymity or sentencing based on their age at the time.

Since he is apparently on the cusp of 18 perhaps some leeway is possible. I understand that gangs get under 12s to commit a lot of the low-level criminal stuff so they can’t be charged. But in this case the crime is so hideous that I think justice would not be seen to have been done if he is shown leniency based on being s few weeks short of adulthood.

Likewise the “mental health” issue. Of course he’s not of sound mind! But the public cannot get the idea (which I think they do currently have) that it is -literally - a get out of jail free card.

I'm not buying it either. He went out of his way to do this.

Maybe wait until his trial
What is your rush here? He's been caught, he's in prison.

Where did I say that I'm in a rush?