To think that Denise Fergus should have stayed at home?

[2blessed2bstressed]

I don't understand why she (mum of Jamie Bulger) had to go and sit in court when John Venables was being sentenced for his more recent crime. I will never forget the horror of hearing what happened to her little boy, and I know that she will never get over it - but how can it possibly help her to keep appearing on tv and making statements about what happens now? She seems to feel she has a right to be told all about everything, and while I can sympathise with her opinion to a certain extent I don't know that she does really. I saw her being interviewed when he was arrested earlier in the year and she said she'd had to keep her children off school because of the publicity - but she seems to be generating a lot of it herself.
Please don't think me hard hearted, it's just that I don't get it.

SORRY 2BLESSED I apolgise.

I dont agree with your OP but I made a mistake and thought the other poster was the OP.

Sorry.

and when you answer agentZZ Suda, you might want to define what "aeriated" means?? thanks

Hello all
Further to lots of inbox action and a couple of requests from the OP to delete this thread just to let you know where we are.

We're going to move this thread from AIBU to In the News just now as we think that some of the arguments here are important and valid but that the AIBU slant is causing unnecessary aggro.

We don't of course tolerate personal attacks so do continue to report any that you see.

Thanks

MN Towers

I think The Bulger case was worse for me than any other. Milly Dowler is where we live. Holly and Jessica was bad. Sarah Payne, was bad.

But the Bulger one is totally different for me. In a league of its own unfortunately. Many people at the time could not accept that 10 year olds could do this.

that was in response to Alt's "James Bulger murder will be with this world long after we have gone".

Now that Suda is bored may l take over in response to the 'baying mob' - brilliant !!.
I AGREE WITH SUDA - so there!! l too am sick of seeing the outraged victim circus in the middle of legal debate. What if Mrs F was privy to everything she thinks she should be and she let something slip- any conviction would then be thrown out - who would that serve. l also could relate to 'we are bored now' and agantzigzag-she did mean the royal we - she was using a phrase l believe from Blackadder used by Queenie - or sorry are only you 'baying mob' members allowed to use buzz words/phrases etc !! Also l find it incredible some of you dont know what aeriated means

i dont see braying mob.do see revulsion/why. such events are fortunately v rare but understandably there is a deeply felt pain and need to discuss

to try polarise this as a lot of torch carrying plebs,whilst others remain clam and intellectual is oversimplification.and wrong

l actually dont find it entertaining at all -the clues in 'we're bored now ! Anything but actually - and if l ever discuss with my friends 'how l get my kicks' forgive me but l would be the judge of that - not you. Sorry Agentzigzag but you would definitely not feature in my answer !

hazy52, I agree that the criminal justice system shouldn't be driven by victims families, it has to stay impartial.

But like other posters have said, the victims families have a drive to change the law that other people don't, and if policy makers agree and legislation closes loopholes to try to stop it happening to others, that is fair and democratic.

You sound in your post like you've cast yourself as an outraged victim in the middle of a rational debate. The irony.

Baying mob? Or just other people disagreeing with you?

Please tell me Suda is a mummy and not a daddy -think lm in love !

can't believe this sick thread has been move into the news topic.

madmn52 - thank you- lm a mummy.

Hazy52 - thank you for standing up for me. l dont really see agentZZ 's point about you portraying yourself as an outraged victim your post is lighthearted and not a bit outraged. Also as l cant see any other posts from you or replies to you besides his then l dont understand how he/she can say you just dont like people disagreeing with you ??. Anyway baying mob was my expression not yours and l was only referring to the people who were behaving like one.

Mn i think you have made the right decision moving this to inthenews as it is a topic which seems to have lots of opinions and putting it in AIBU seems somehow inappropriate for something so serious.everyone is entitled to an opinion even if others find it unpalatable which is what makes these debates interesting.A lot of the views considered 'distasteful' here probably only seem so as no one would dare voice them irl but I am sure lots do hold these views.(not me btw but am interested in others views even if I don't agree)

'they are all in the past, we learn and we move on. its not sickening, its not disgusting, its just the truth!'

No, 'we' don't learn at all. It keeps happening. That is the truth, as the Doncaster boys demonstrate. And 'we' move on?

You, maybe, but some don't. And it's disgusting to be scornful of them or assert they should just shut up because 'things have moved on'.

Oh, and her name is Madeleine. Not 'Maddie'. Her parents have made that very, very clear.

They won't 'move on', either. They keep looking.

Like I said, Michael Hamilton and Ian Nichols didn't 'move on'. They kept the pressure up, kept themselves and the cases of their missing daughters in the media. After 17 years, these cases were solved. But these men still continue to appear in the media all the time, and attend every hearing of their daughters' killers. And will hopefully have a bearing on changes in the law for appeal hearings of triple murders who are serving three consecutive life sentences when they're already 64-year-old.

Bet they'd love it if someone told them just to cut it out, the world's moved on since their children were brutally raped and murdered.

'ES, where have I said they should shut up? . where have I said they should move on? where have I said it does not happen, you are seeing things in my post which isn't their!'

When you agree that people like Denise Fergus shouldn't appear in the media anymore to discuss her son's murder, you agree she should stay home. And that means shut up. Because if she's not appearing in the media, then no one much hears her talking about it.

Altinkum, I think the Jamie/James, Maddie/Madeleine comes about because some people, the parents in particular, find it disrespectful not to call their child by their given name.

The media, in shortening their names to nick names, implies an intimacy that isn't there, probably to make it more newsworthy to get the reader more involved in the story.

I think it's just easier to fit ' Maddie' in a headline...

You said: 'by her going to the media etc... is doing nothing for her, or her media view, if a grieving mother hurting beyond belief.'

That means stay home and shut up, Denise.

And guess what? Now Vicky Hamilton and Dinah Nichols have been found, and their murderer convicted, their fathers still apear in the media.

So if you ask such a question of Denise Fergus's continued involvement in the media, well, then, you're asking that of everyone who continues to appear in teh media after their child's or loved one's murderer has been convited.

Um, OK, Alt.

OK.

Whateva.