To lie for a DP being investigated by police

[lboogy]

Entirely hypocritical and inspired by the recent post about Ian Huntley wanting a sex change.

I was always torn by the vitriol towards his partner Maxine who lied to the police for him. At the time I thought if I felt the police were trying to stitch up my DP and I was convinced he was innocent I might just lie to protect him. I might even do it for a child if I felt they were innocent.

What say you?

I would lie for a dp or my non existent dc. And I have zero sympathy for anyone who does. Especially if it was to do with the disappearance of 2 young girls. That mother above deserves an award for proper parenting. You raise them the best you can and if they fuck upon that scale you hand them over to the police to face the consequences

unswerving loyalty, fgs. Bloody keyboard!

No of course not. I find it really weird that what happened with Maxine Carr has essentially been whitewashed and we’re supposed to think she lied in good faith, believing Huntley was innocent, and that she lied about that repeatedly in court. I’ve never really understood why she wasn’t done for perjury.

She was accused of two crimes, I can’t remember exactly what they were, but one was more serious than the other. To find her guilty of the more serious charge the jury would have had to believe that she knew there was a possibility Huntley could have been involved.

Carr went on the stand and gave an Oscar winning performance claiming that she had no inkling he could have been involved, was absolutely disgusted by what he’d done and would never have knowingly covered up for that sort of crime. The jury believed her, she was only convicted of the lesser crime and got a short sentence.

The problem is, she was probably lying. The judge had refused to allow evidence to be heard that Carr was aware of multiple accusations against Huntley that he had raped or sexually attacked underage girls. She had even provided a false alibi to police regarding the rape of an underage girl, it collapsed the case.

Basically she knew full well he’d done it, she helped him cover it up and she got away with it.

No I wouldn't, but I am not in an abusive relationship, terrified of the consequences of telling the truth.

I think people are quick to judge MC based on their own personal circumstances. The truth is, no one will ever know if she knew. She may have believed he was innocent, or he was guilty but would get away with it. If that had happened and she told the truth, she would probably be dead too.

Not even for a speeding fine.

I think it's pretty fucked up to start a thread on a parenting site turning the murder of two little girls into some sort of hypothetical philosophical question.

I'm glad perjury is a crime and think it should be far more heavily punished because such lies undermine the justice system, an essential component of stable society.

I wouldn’t lie for my spouse. Not just because it is wrong, but because a lie could actually lead the police to believe he was guilty while actually innocent. It’s a short-sighted strategy.

No.

Regardless of the crime hypothetically, if there was a situation where I absolutely knew for a fact that they hadn’t done it (not because I know their personality or felt like I’d know if they did it but actually for a fact knew they hadn’t) but I couldn’t prove it then maybe.

But I can’t think of a scenario where that could happen because for me to absolutely know it for a fact, I must have some kind of proof (or a genuine alibi to give them etc.) and then I wouldn’t need to lie. So hypothetically yes, but in all remotely realistic situations no.

Oh actually I can think of a scenario, if I knew they hadn’t robbed the bank because actually I had robbed the bank then yes, but in that case lying to the police would be the least of my problems..

I think it’s a really interesting conversation, and I’ve also had thoughts about mitigating circumstances on her part, as in the fact that she was in an abusive relationship. The thing is, you can be in an abusive relationship and also be an immoral piece of shit who compulsively lies and puts on a good show. Her mum was jailed for witness intimidation, I realise she isn’t personally responsible for her mum, but all the small details add up. A neighbour (that her mum then threatened to have killed), gave evidence to say that Maxine was seen within 48 hours of the murders sobbing over the open boot of his car. He later admitted that he had used his car to move their bodies. Phone calls between them match up with times of action on his part, which is no proof, but is again a small thing that adds onto him possibly sharing what he’d done with her. What we can be sure of though is that she absolutely was not there with him on that day/evening/weekend, and so cannot be demonised on the same level as him really. We can suspect that she knew, well I mean that I do, but there really was no proof. When you look at IH history of abuse and coercion, lists of accusations of sex with a minor, well known to various social services, I think another 3-4 accusations of rape, indecent assault of a minor, plus his determination to lie about not intending to kill them. As MC lived with someone like that, we can also possibly assume that it was very frightening to her, the idea of not lying and then facing the consequences. I remember her saying something along the lines of him having been ‘stitched up’ or ‘done over’ previously by the police. He had obviously convinced her that the most recent episode of him being accused of rape was some kind of frame up, and then the idea of her mistrust of the police sounds more plausible. Maybe she believed that the police had tried to convict him of a crime he didn’t commit before. I don’t know how long after the actual trial it was that he admitted to his parents that he did in fact have intention to murder Jessica, but his previous shows of heartfelt remorse and confusion about how it had happened by accident were clearly bullshit. He still won’t say what really happened to Holly. That was obvious that he was lying anyway, but the point is he clearly uses manipulation to get what he wants. He has apologised to the parents, said he thinks of them, feels remorse etc etc and yet absolutely will not tell the truth. So MC was either in a relationship with a psychopathic paedophile, and was aware and in on it. Or was another one of his victims. Either way, the ripple effects of everything that happened are almost too much to comprehend. The pain caused and all of the lying and deception is such an insult to those poor families. Just to add also, the social workers who failed to record his name in various linked cases, and the police who failed to pursue rape charges multiple times because the VICTIM usually a child, didn’t want to, and just letting him carry on, plus the politicians and people who have social services and police force working on pathetic budgets and lacking resources to see cases through - perhaps they should all be bloody hounded and vilified. He shouldn’t have been in Soham at all, he should have been locked up once the threat to young girls was established to the extent that it was. Oh, and the place he worked should have vetted him! Those lovely sweet girls though, I get choked up just thinking about that picture of them in the clothes that they were killed in. Poor little lambs, just so innocent and full of life. If various people had done their jobs then they’d still be alive today.

I'm sure Maxine didn't think he was innocent. He used to beat her up, there were multiple witnesses to this, he also kept being accused of violent crimes and that's why they moved house so much.

mitigating circumstances on her part, as in the fact that she was in an abusive relationship.

This isn’t what she argued in court though. Her defence was that she genuinely believed he hadn’t done it. When the case finished and it came out that she was aware of multiple allegations against him and had provided him with alibis before. If she’d really been remorseful, and remember she was out of Huntley’s influence during the trial, surely she would have told the truth for the sake of their parents, but she didn’t.

We can suspect that she knew, well I mean that I do, but there really was no proof.

I disagree with that. The fact she was aware of his sexual interest in young girls and tendency to violence and rape - I think that is proof. I don’t think that any reasonable person could know that about their partner and genuinely believe they weren’t involved when they were the last person to see two murdered girls. She even admitted she knew they’d been in the house with him.

And she did lie, she was convicted for giving him a false alibi.

So MC was either in a relationship with a psychopathic paedophile, and was aware and in on it. Or was another one of his victims.

One of the other things I remember about the trial was that after the murders, police surveillance of Maxine Carr showed that her primary concern was not losing the house tied to Huntley’s job. She cleaned the house and destroyed evidence which means that the girls parents will never know how they died. She cleaned it so well that there wasn’t a single fingerprint left in that house. There was quite a lot of evidence that indicated that Maxine was instrumental in the cover up, she didn’t have a passive role. She approached the media and gave interviews waving that card she said they’d given her around. That interview was just completely horrendous with hindsight. Most of it was Carr whinging about not having been taken on to a permanent role once her temporary contract ran out. Those were her concerns, her job, the house, her lifestyle.

I’m not sure absolving her of blame and pointing the finger at professionals instead is fair. In fact it’s quite distasteful.

I don’t think DV can justify the lengths she went to, to cover up. And remember, when there had been an opportunity to jail him and the victim did want to press charges, Carr gave him an alibi. Her actions directly led to him being free to kill those girls.

There isn’t any evidence she was coerced. All the evidence points to a very, very willing accomplice in the cover up.

No I agree that she knew, that’s always been my feeling, given the evidence. Unfortunately all the things that point to it aren’t considered solid evidence, is what I mean. People did fail the vulnerable people that he came into contact with and abused up until that point, and I don’t think it’s distasteful to say that if things were seen through and justice was carried out years beefier, then he may not have been free to then kill those girls. I also don’t really like or agree with media witch hunts and scapegoating against SS or police etc particularly when they’re stretched to their limits and have to deal with only the worst of the worst to get through their caseloads. But there’s no doubt that his extensive history was never pieced together by any relevant departments, and he slipped through the net. Re MC I also very much noted during the trial that she was at pains to show herself independent of him, not at all coerced etc but then I wondered if she was advised to do that to make it less likely for her to be seen as an accomplice. He’s always called her an awful liar since, but has always maintained that she didn’t know... honestly I don’t think we’ll ever get to the bottom of it. The both of them are hard to feel confident about on any level. I suppose what I’m trying to say is that while I personally think she helped/knew, I can also see the other potential side of it, that I’m biased without realising, that she was hoodwinked and manipulated and coerced... these are possibilities. Not ones that fit for me really, but I can’t say I know for sure, I really can’t be sure and say categorically. Plus I thought she’d only known about one (most recent) rape charge, and that’s why I thought it could be considered that she believed him that he was framed or something. I know of women that believe anything their vile partners tell them. It’s possible that she believed him, foolish as that would have been of her. Just trying to be vaguely objective here and not go with gut feeling about her.

No. Absolutely not.

I know one person who lied during a murder investigation and didn’t get found out. He hadn’t done it but the circumstances looked very very dodgy for him. They found out who did do it and got full confessions. His was very rare circumstances though. I can’t imagine many people would find themselves in that situation

I meant to say, I can understand why he lied. If he had been honest it would have looked really dodgy for him. The kind of thing where people say it’s too much of a coincidence

I don’t think it’s distasteful to say that if things were seen through and justice was carried out years beefier, then he may not have been free to then kill those girls.

It’s fine to say that on its own and I agree. But to put it alongside Carr and say they are more guilty than her and she is a victim? Just no.

The professionals involved may have been stupid, incompetent, lax or lazy. But there has never been any suggestion that they deliberately mislead people or deliberately covered up what he’d been up to. Carr did. She actively made a decision to cover up for him.

No i wouldn't lie for them innocent or guilty.

Having been on the other side and have to listen in court as to how the guilty person and his family and GF tried to cover up what happened to my family member it disgusted me what lengths people go to to protect a murderer and knowing the heartache it causes a family I couldn't do it no matter what I thought. Truth always.

@DGRossetti

Mrs Christie was brought up in the time of always obey your husband, you are his keeper blah blah, it will have been instilled in her from a very very young age she wouldn’t have even known to do any different. Defintley not okay though!

To answer the op no, I wouldn’t lie for him. I wouldn’t lie for him about anything because I fucking hate liars

Apologies to anyone who may be offended by the question. I don't actually know too much about Ian Huntley. I was fairly young at the time of the case so I only vaguely remember what happened

The broader point is if you knew in your heart your child or Dp was innocent. Would you lie to protect them. Remember that bloke in Bristol who was accused by the media of murdering that young girl and he was innocent but apparently he was really weird so that made him a murder or Barry George accused of Jill Dando's murder.

People can be fitted up for crimes they didn't commit (Huntley) aside . The police aren't always the good guys and families cooperate only to see innocent people sent to prison.

At the time I thought if I felt the police were trying to stitch up my DP and I was convinced he was innocent I might just lie to protect him

Perhaps not so much for a bloke, but for other relatives (i.e., my late mum), if I:
a) genuinely believed they were innocent
b) were in danger of being "stitched up"
c) I had good reason to believe they were innocent

then I couldn't promise that I wouldn't lie. As for "knowing in your heart", well, you can't "know" that - not really.

I am skeptical about whether MC did have good reason to believe that Huntley wasn't involved - but then again, how much did she know about previous allegations?

There are miscarriages of justice but that does not make it ok to lie. If you lie in court it’s perjury and you can be imprisoned for up to seven years.

Knowing in your heart is just a feeling, not a certainty.

If I thought dh was being stitched up for something/a miscarriage of justice was likely then yes I’d lie for him, whatever the crime.

For something like Huntleys crime I would be 100% certain dh was not involved so would have no moral wobbles about lying.

I wouldn't lie, but I am not naive enough to think that innocent people are never found guilty.