AIBU This is so heart breaking! **Thread contains article about Poppi Worthington - title edited by MNHQ**

[Meadowflowers]

How can this man be getting away with this. What a beautiful baby and her life is now over because of that monster!.
I've been in tears this morning reading it. In fact I couldn't finish reading it. What is the system coming to???

i agree with what starmix has said, I do understand that vigilantism is a bad thing because the wrong person could be attacked, I just cannot see this scumbag as even human.

Of course, I wouldnt be able to change that and take away his rights- no matter how much I would like it to be the case but that doesnt mean people cant have the opinion that he isnt deserving of the same treatment as someone who didnt commit these acts.

what he did was absolutely vile, theres no cure for that kind of sickness, people like him will continue along the same path. Given a few years he will not only have a new identity and protection at the taxpayers expense, but also plastic surgery to hide his true identity because his ugly face has been plastered all over the papers.

People like him shouldnt be treated as humans, he proves in his interviews and court hearings that he has absolutely no conscience, I keep thinking about that, I couldnt imagine someone being able to live with themselves having committed an act like that to anyone, let alone their own child, all the while still concerned with saving their own skin. it seems that the human conscience isnt within him .

What are you talking about it’s the law

I didnt say it wasnt the law that he is protected, I feel that he doesnt deserve its protection.
It doesnt make me stupid to believe that he should suffer. partially as a sexual abuse survivor, partially as a parent, i would like him to suffer, not that its something I could personally see to, but in my eyes, if something terrible were to happen to him, well maybe he deserved it.
Thats just my view, I dont really want to argue it, but i dont like that he took the very right from someone to feel safe from being attacked, yet relies on the very same laws to protect his safety, when hes not even going to be punished for what he did.

There are no words.

A creature like this having human rights is beyond sick.

Poppis mother did not have 4 other children removed from her. She had her eldest daughter removed at 4 months old. The rest of her children were living with her and not under any child protection plans. Her mother was in care as a child as was her grandmother. By all reports and extremely complex family. Poppis mother ran away with an older married couple when she was 15 and became pregnant by the married male. Poppies father also had a child with the female of the married couple. An awful, messed up family by any account.

It was suggested that the reason there was no semen found on or in Poppi was a) the extensive anal bleeding “washing” it away and b) her father had had a vasectomy and the forensics weren’t done until 5 days later making it much more difficult to find any trace of semen/sperm.

THE stretcher sheet she was brought in on was noted to have blood and feces on it but was thrown away. The paramedic noted that her bottom was “slimy” but the gloves she used were also thrown away on the ambulance.

The police saw the last nappy she was wearing discarded on the living room floor but allowed a family member to bag it up and throw it out. It was never found.

Human rights are protected by laws. But what is it to be human? There is no definitive definition handed down to us, just a concept made possible by society. Law itself doesn't just enshrine concepts and theories but creates the definition itself. Liberals claim that humans are born equal and have unalienable rights. However no man can be a man outside of society. And it is society that creates the definition of human, and the laws that protect these so called unalienable human rights. On the basis of law itself this "man" cannot be deemed human and therefore I see no reason why he should be granted protection. As something outside of society he should be thrown to the wolves.

Minitheminx.... i think i love you.

You can argue as much as you like that he shouldn't be deemed human, the fact is that he is human and therefore has human rights. If you are going to start saying there are certain people who don't have human rights, where do you draw the line? As soon as you start saying it is acceptable to set vigilante mobs on them, you bring the rest of society down to their levels and set up situations where idiots start hounding paediatricians.

As hungryhippo90 and MiniTheMinx said he isn’t human he’s an evil monster.

The thing is - he is not a monster to look at. He looks no different to any other middle aged man. He is free to live his life, it appalls me, I am revolted by this miscarriage of justice

He’ll probably be granted a new identity at huge cost to tax payers, the majority of whom don’t anally rape their own children and kill them, he’ll be afforded all types of protection, none of which were granted to his vulnerable daughter, fucked up system doesn’t begin to describe it

I said it on the other thread but I’ll repeat it here. The system is supposed to work. We trust in justice and the courts and don’t go vigilante because it isn’t civil. So what do we do in cases like these. There’s no justice here, this child has been failed. Do we just shrug our shoulders and say oh poor child and get on with the day because the system works most of the time? I can’t agree with that, in these thankfully rare situations he should be turned over to the streets. Everyone knows there has been a miscarriage of justice, there is a case for vigilantism here.

He is undoubtedly a monster, but I'm as enraged by police incompetence that led to the evidence that could have convicted him being thrown away as I am by what he is believed to have done.

Had that not happened, he wouldn't be free and getting a new identity.

I hope that the officers involved are hauled over the coals for that.

"Everyone knows there has been a miscarriage of justice"

No we don't. Yes, it seems very likely, but the police fucked up, the forensics which could have secured a conviction weren't done and the objects are no longer available.

I would never want to see vigilantism deemed as OK in any way. Because I believe lynchings are always wrong.

"He’ll probably be granted a new identity at huge cost to tax payers"

On what grounds? He doesn't fit the categories for those given new identities since the 1960s?

Nothing to stop him changing his name himself though.

"If you're not happy with that, consider what happens if the wrong person gets attacked. Angry mobs rarely spend much time checking that they have the right person, one reason why vigilantism needs to be discouraged."

Good point - quick google shows 192.com has over 200 people called Paul Worthington in UK. If you were married to, or related to, one of those wholly innocent and unconnected ones, would you really be calling for the mob to deal with this?

Have you read the court reports? The pathology reports? Sometimes 2+2 does equal 4. A 13 old baby does not have the injuries this baby did for no reason. So we come to the conclusion that somebody did this to the child. If the father was the only person with opportunity to is it then wrong to say that on the balance of probabilities it was him? With no other adult males in the house? That it was likely enough to be him that just sometimes it doesn’t need to be proven beyond all reasonable doubt?

What do you propose in this situation? Lessons will be learned, this time we failed and that’s that?

As for the vigilantes, I don’t propose they should be punished. They are righting the balance.

Yes the law is the law yadda yadda yadda. I woukd not care less if he was attacked in prison, in fact I woukd be pleased. Karma bites yiu in the butt.

Your suggesting that all vigilantism is thickos going after the wrong person and mob justice.

I haven't read any indication he is getting a new identity. Just that he was under police protection as a witness.

"If the father was the only person with opportunity to is it then wrong to say that on the balance of probabilities it was him?"

No, and that is what the Inquest has done. English criminal law however requires proof beyond reasonable doubt.

"With no other adult males in the house?"

I hadn't really though about the possibility that it was not an adult male until this comment. Because of course it is only surmise that the penetrative object was a penis, though the Inquest seems to concluded that only the father had access at the likely time for the anal injury; no conclusions drawn about when the broken bones occurred, or at least none that are specific enough to show whose care Poppi was under at the time.