Naming convicted killers - Brianna

[Noangelbuthavingfun]

...Ghey case. In favour of or against as it impacts their rehabilitation? I'm in favour of it - if you've committed a heinous crime you sign away all your rights to be protected in my opinion - what comes your way and being ousted is part of your lot.... I'm not talking about self defence type, rather premeditated and horribly evil crimes. But I think this should be a consistent theme and not just when some judges decide to....at the momentvits not consistent practice.
Aibu to think it's right to name and shame?

@TheSnakeCharmer I considered changing my name for this but I wanted to show kids can change.

My son was sectioned at 12 repeatedly. He was found with a kill list and attacked me with a knife. This arrest and consequent section led to an extended stay at a forensic unit (three years) another diagnosis (schizophrenia) and intensive rehabilitation.

After his first long stay the psych said he never thought DS would be released. It took work. He resisted. He fought staff, he would be prevented from seeing me, he had to be forcibly injected with meds, he escaped a high forensic unit with others and it made the paper.

Eventually though with love and support and lots of help he turned a corner m. He left the unit (we were only allowed to see him an hour a week( and moved to a more local one. He was given sporadic leave. He rebuilt Trust and we had therapy. He has ended up with a degree and a job.

It doesn't have to be the end. And I Don't think it's what any of the families want. I hope the families find piece and rehabilitation.

Thank you so much for sharing that. It’s amazing to hear that he got the help he needed and, moreover, that it worked.

What is sad is that these children needed, and still need help but they haven’t had it. They have been denied the chance to get well. I’m willing to bet there is a string of teachers right back to when they were very young who knew that something was wrong but they just couldn’t get any help for them.

@MadeOfAllWork It’s not necessarily true that help was sought by anyone. The head of Scarlett’s new school didn’t see any warning signs but kept her isolated in a unit. That doesn’t add up. She didn’t say any red flags presented and the school had sought help. What the previous school did isn’t clear other than organise a managed move because she brought cannabis sweets into school. It looks like Scarlett was naughty but no evidence so far that anyone linked that with MH and her being an extreme danger to others. Again, the enquiry will uncover anything that’s there.

Very true. If previous school had said nothing, something must have become apparent for her to be moved to the inclusion room. That's the point where you'd expect the school to get back to the previous school regarding issues there.. The whole thing is such a tragedy.

From what I’ve read on Sen groups I’m on (ds is autistic but is in special school so no direct experience of secondary ms) kids these days get out in isolation for all sorts. So a kid with adhd that forgets their pencil case might be put in isolation, I don’t think isolation itself means that the school think there is a danger to other pupils necessarily so would following this through it would be reasonable for a child to have been in isolation and the school to say they’d seen no red flags. I’d also read Scarlett was working in the isolation unit some of the time as the new school was not able to deliver her full time table- so this would be another reason she could be in isolation but no red flags

It was said that she was in the inclusion unit to cover subjects not in the new school timetable. I guess.mkvinf in GCSE years means not all subjects align. It was also said her attendance was poor.

I think we will find out that Jenkinson has done a bit more than what has been revealed in court - maybe it's at a lower level but being placed in isolation could mean for the benefit of other children. The exact reasons wouldn't necessarily be recorded in detail.

Very very moving to listen to Brianna's mother on Laura K this morning.

I read she met Brianna because she was also in the inclusion room. Be careful what you say, you have no idea why either of them were there and insinuating being in the inclusion room means that there is something "wrong" with them you are including Brianna in that. Victim blaming?

Brianna was in the inclusion room because of her anxiety. It was reported in the trial.
Scarlett was in there because the new school could not fit in all her subjects into the timetable.

Scarlett was removed from the previous school for poisoning a younger child with cannabis sweets. So she had displayed incredibly worrying behaviour. Apparatus new school wasn’t made aware. It’s also thought she attempted to kill Brianna by poisoning prior to the murder. Brianna was violently sick. This is all recorded in their messages. The inquiry in to the LA will be interesting.

@Grandmasswag Brianna's mother suspects there was an attempt at poisoning. I don’t think they know. I too think the enquiry will reveal more .

No idea where you've got victim blaming out of my post. And I didn't use the word 'wrong' either so maybe you should be careful what you say, not me. I said something must have become apparent.. which pps have now explained was anxiety/timetable issues. Thanks to those pps, I wasn't aware.

It could be that “getting to know” dc in an isolation room is not the best policy. Brianna was vulnerable so was this best practice? Not sure. Scarlett was moved on for a drug violation against another child so had harmed someone else.

She'd Been in trouble for vandalism which wasn't widely reported. An all round lovely young lady not.

Brianna's mother suspects there was an attempt at poisoning. I don’t think they know. I too think the enquiry will reveal more .

According to the evidence given to the court during the trial, Brianna's mother saw Brianna get sick and there were red skin type things in it, which could have been the capsules. Scarlett boasted to Eddie later via Snapchat or WhatsApp about how she had persuaded Brianna to take ibuprofen to get high, and during that conversation Scarlett and Eddie were looking at things online which might be more likely to kill someone, so she could try again to kill Brianna. But they seem to have abandoned that plan at that point.

Briannas mother is such an amazing, brave woman. She's started a charity to start mindfulness in secondary schools..

I just heard on the radio she would be happy to meet Scarlett's parents.

I was replying to someone else who mentioned it on the first page saying that the press wanted the 999 call to be released.

You were saying her being in the inclusion unit indicated something about her becoming apparent, well her victim was in the unit as well and you were jumping to the wrong conclusions. This is what you said, "Very true. If previous school had said nothing, something must have become apparent for her to be moved to the inclusion room." So yes you jumped to the conclusion that being in the inclusion room was become of "something" becoming apparent.

I think you are being disingenuous to say now that you meant something like timetable issues but if that makes you happier crack on.

My point was in reference to the previous poster's comment on lack of communication from the previous school. I actually work in a school so I know that if a new pupil had to be moved to an inclusion class, there may be reason to get in touch with the previous school to discuss, if up to that there had been no suggestion of any difficulties! That is all. There was no comment on Brianna at all, or on being in such a class. You're putting your own v skewed view on my post when I made no such judgement, I was only musing with the pp.

And it was others that said afterwards that it was timetable issues, that I hadn't been aware of as the reason so nothing disingenuous there when those posts were after mine.

So when you said Very true. If previous school had said nothing, something must have become apparent for her to be moved to the inclusion room you weren't insinuating there was something about her behaviour that had alerted the new school that she needed to move to the inclusion unit? Because that is how it comes across to me.

I'm sure I will now be given an explanation of what "something must have become apparent" actually meant. Regardless all this speculation about things people don't know is pretty pointless unlike people actually finding out facts like why she was in the inclusion unit which was nothing exciting or indicative of anything untoward.

The reference to Brianna being in the same unit is if you infer that Jenkinson being moved to the inclusion unit indicated something had to come to light seems unpleasant when Brianna was also in the unit.

I'm surprised that you work in a school but jump to the conclusion that Jenkinson being in the inclusion unit indicates "something has come to light."

Listen, I don't want to derail the thread. All I can tell you is you've got the completely wrong end of the stick and your victim blaming comment was very off. Do you think students are put in an inclusion for no reason? It doesn't mean it's a negative, but there would be an additional need of some sort ime, ranging from little to large and depending on the child. (Others have since posted that anxiety was the reported reason). It is bizarre that you think its offensive to suggest there's a reason for such an allocation. I'm not going to post again on it but I'm quite thrown by your take up of my post.

If the death penalty is an effective deterrent, why are prisons in the USA still full to bursting?