Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

Original poster

AIBU to think that if you commit an adult crime you shouldn't receive anonymity

460 replies

Ohbehave1 · 18/10/2016 15:35

After hearing that both of the children involved in the murder of a mother and daughter have been found guilty I think that they if they were adult enough murder someone, and then go and watch films and have sex after that they should be old enough to be named after.

Their crimes were particularly nasty, and as such they should live with the consequences for the rest of their lives. They certainly shouldn't be able to do a few years and then get out with anonymity and start their lives as if nothing ever happened.

OP posts:
JenLindleyShitMom · 19/10/2016 10:33

I think it was concluded that their relationship was such that neither of them would have committed murder without the other. So the boy would never have contemplated murdering those people without the girl's actions. This is why she was found guilty despite not having done the physical act.

dinosaursarebisexual · 19/10/2016 10:35

Hilarious frothing. Blimey.

Elendon · 19/10/2016 10:36

This is a case of he said, she said and the he said winning. He took her down with him. Is my personal view.

TheCompanyOfCats · 19/10/2016 10:37

To those of you that feel that it is ghoulish to want to know the details: I completely understand your perspective, I really do. However, I think that it's natural to want to know the details in a case as extraordinarily awful as this, especially when such big chunks of it don't make sense. People want to make sense of it because we hope that it will help us to make sense of people and of the world. That may sound far fetched but it isn't and is at the root of my own bearing towards the case.

JenLindleyShitMom · 19/10/2016 10:39

elendon the female killer was brutally honest about the events and her own actions. There was no need for him to "bring her down with him" as she told the whole truth to the police.

BastardGoDarkly · 19/10/2016 10:40

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ as it may be identifying.

BlancheBlue · 19/10/2016 10:41

Elendon - okay fine, but as I said, unless you sat through the entire court proceedings and listened to the judges summing up then you and none of us don't have the entire picture and the jury listened to the evidence and found her guilty.

No sure why you are going on about "he, said, she said" - the boy involved was not put trial as he pleaded guilty to murder so no defence was made by him that "my girlfriend begged me to do it". Shocking sexism by you to think that all such crimes are automatically the man/boy's fault

BlancheBlue · 19/10/2016 10:45

bastard As they would have been vigorously assessed by psychiatrists and the court determined they were not mentally ill at the time of the act and hence trial could proceed. Criminal justice system works on assessments and appropriate evidence - many people claim diminished responsibility and it is rejected just as some who commit crimes are unaware of mental illness and are assessed as having serious MH issues.

Elendon · 19/10/2016 10:45

I hope the judge does lift anonymity on sentencing because I think it will give the young woman involved leave to appeal.

BlancheBlue · 19/10/2016 10:46

Well Elendon I hope you aren't called for jury service anytime soon

butterfliesandzebras · 19/10/2016 10:47

This is a case of he said, she said and the he said winning. He took her down with him. Is my personal view.

I'm sorry, but have you actually read the reports of what she said? According to her statements she repeatedly told him she wanted him to do it, she supported him doing it - actually came and checked he was ok during one of the murders, etc, and she said she would have done the killing herself but couldn't bring herself to.

No one is saying that he is not guilty (he obviously is). But he hasn't blamed her, she has been found also guilty based on her own admitted involvement.

Elendon · 19/10/2016 10:47

As you said, you have no idea, Blanche, but I think the penny will drop when you learn of the full circumstances.

This is an appalling case, no doubt about it. But the reporting has been skewered for a reason.

Elendon · 19/10/2016 10:49

Oh yes, the guilty verdict so he is not put on trial. I wonder why that is?

Elendon · 19/10/2016 10:52

I was once called for Jury service and was told it was a murder trial and would take weeks, if not months. Thankfully I got off as I was sitting my finals at University during the time of the trial. This was in Ireland, and I'd just been living there for three years!

All those sitting on juries have their own prejudices. It's a known fact.

BlancheBlue · 19/10/2016 10:52

Elendon - I trust the criminal justice system alot more than someone on MN with strange views. I'm not sure if you honestly think you are being a strong feminist or something but you sound deluded.

JenLindleyShitMom · 19/10/2016 10:53

It wasn't a guilty verdict, it was a guilty plea! Why? Because he admitted it.

ayeokthen · 19/10/2016 10:54

Bastard I'm glad you find my point of view funny, it absolutely confirms the point I was trying to make.

BlancheBlue · 19/10/2016 10:55

Elendon - are you being deliberately obtuse or thick? Anyone who pleads guilty is not put on trial - they have pleaded guilty ffs. Unless the court via assessments etc believe that someone is saying they are guilty and not for MH or other reasons.

The girl pleaded not guilty, stood trial, made her defence and was found to be guilty by the Jury.

Elendon · 19/10/2016 11:07

There is no need for insults Blanche, I'm not deluded, obtuse or thick. What is clear is that there is much more to this. It's not about sexism or blaming.

It's an horrendous case. One that will reverberate throughout the legal system for some time.

He was found guilty by dent of his admission. She pleaded not guilty and therefore had to put up a defence. She admitted to manslaughter on the grounds of diminished responsibility. She understands (or does she?) her part in this double murder. I'm not resolving her on her part, just that I cannot understand why she should be seen as an equal in this murder, when it was him who drove the knife into two people's throats.

MyWineTime · 19/10/2016 11:09

Why the fuck are you googling them and checking their Facebook. What is wrong with you people. This isn't entertainment.
Yes this^^
I haven't heard a single argument from anyone who believes they don't deserve anonymity who doesn't sound like this.

The killers have gone through the justice system and will be sentenced. That is where my concern for them ends. What happens to them after is unimportant.
Do you really want to live in a country where vigilante justice is rife? We have to be better. We have to treat our criminals better than they have treated their victims, because otherwise we become them.
What do we then do to the vigilante who kills them?

Maudlinmaud · 19/10/2016 11:12

MyWineTime I certainly do not believe in vigilante justice. That is not what I was saying.

BlancheBlue · 19/10/2016 11:12

I person urging and assisting someone to murder is also culpable of murder. This is nothing new so why the faux outrage?

JenLindleyShitMom · 19/10/2016 11:17

I'm not sure what you aren't understanding elendon without the girl the murders would never have happened. Hazel Stewart was also convicted of double murder despite not having done the actual killing. All her appeals to have the convictions overturned have failed.

Elendon · 19/10/2016 11:22

The person who was urged into murder can always walk away and go to the police and voice their concerns that this person is unhinged.

But, given the full details of this case, which I cannot comment on because of anonymity, this would never have happened.