...to think that the police force has absolutely NO business whatsoever deciding that someone is 'pure evil'...

[almostblue]

... much less issuing an official statement to the effect?

I did think it was a bit weird to use these specific words.

they probably have a lot more insight in to the criminals than we do watching the news. i suppose it depends on the crime, the person and various other things, but i think the police are just as entitled to an opinion on the criminals as we are.

I thought that was weird too! Are Sun writers composing W Yorks police statements now?

Yes I heard that too. I agree. Unprofessional and emotive.

oh right , have obvioulsy missed a very specific indcident then

I agree with you, I thought that was odd and I have been thinking about it since.

Totally agree. This irritated me royally.
Of couse, individual officers will form their own judgements and possibly discuss with colleagues in the canteen but should not make these views public, much less official.
Imagine if teachers said this about 16yo pupils? There would be (quite rightly) an outcry.

Lulu it was mentioned in the statement they issued after Karen Matthews was sentenced yeasterday.

She didn't actually kill or torture anyone did she? So I wouldn't say she was evil. Baby P's torturers were evil. The police are not qualified to pronounce this sort of sentence.

"The police are not qualified to pronounce this sort of sentence"

I agree. Not even on those who kill and torture.

Maybe they said it as people may think she is mentally unstable. I do think she must be evil for putting her daughter through this ordeal and telling people that love and care for the child that she was missing.

Could you imagine being told your child was missing all them thoughts running through your head and it turned out the mother was lying to get some cash.

I am sure the police have made such statements before about people.

Did you see the Panorama programme last night. I did and having seen it I can see why they might think that but I have to agree that when I heard it I did think "oh fuck off"

I would recommend a viewing of the Panorama show on BBC IPlayer. The full facts are surprising.

I thought that was the whole thing about the legal process. That it tries a crime rationally and impartially and sentences according to the law without being emotive.

I (personally) like everyone else think it was a despicable thing to do. But that is an emotional reaction to it as someone uninvolved in any way in sentencing the woman.

i see, thank you, so should the police have to be totally impartial and factual at all times?

is that not censorship to an extent?

maybe she is evil, maybe she is mentally unwell . or both?

should the police not be able to pass comment on those they have had in custody, questioned and got to know to some extent?

I did watch it APG and it was shocking.

but th e legal process has finished has it not? she has been found guilty , for pre sentencing reports, surely the judge will take into account what the police think and what was uncovered when she was arrested and questioned?

so because they're police they shouldn't be entitled to an opinion?

There was someone on the radio this morning who said that there was a lot of evidence that was not presented at the trial - I wonder what that was.

The woman drugged her child for two years and then had her kidnapped in order to secure money - and that's the information that's publically available. Wonder what she did to the other children. ? pure evil is about right imo.

lulumama: not in an official capacity, no. Our legal system at least partly depends on them not doing that, actually.

I agree with you Wannabe.

I also think that the woman is pure evil. I hope she spends a long long time in prision.

I'm not actually wondering whether or not this woman is pure evil (although if she is, film writers are seriously going to have to rethink their approach to apocalyptic drama in the future); I'm suggesting that the police force is there to ensure members of society maintain and uphold the law, and it shouldn't stretch its remit beyond this.

What individual police officers may or may not think is another matter entirely.

she has been found guilty. The legal process has concluded - had the police made this statement prior to or during the trial I would say it was inappropriate but as the trial is over I think they should be entitled to their opinions.

It is they after all who spent 24 days looking for Shannon, and let's be frank - a considerable amount of that looking will have involved looking for a body.

It is they who counselled this woman as she cried for her missing child, and it is they who then uncovered the fact that she was behind it all.

I thin they deserve a say.

I heard that on the radio, too, and thought to myself OMG what a crude phrase, still it must be a neighbour or friend of the family who is still feeling pretty raw.

When I realised it was a police officer speaking I was absolutely disgusted. Absolutely not his place to make subjective and emotive comments like that.

But it was the WY police who investigated the crime, who saw all of the evidence, who saw how callous this woman was who spoke to neighbours about her extreme neglect of her children, who read toxicology reports that show Shannon had been ingesting prescription drugs for at least 20 months prior to being "kidnapped" - dihydrocodein, tramadol, temazepam, tricyclic antidepressants. I am not surprised they used the term "evil" to describe her. To call her "pure evil" is somewhat dramatic and silly but evil I think is possibly fair enough.

I wonder how much of this has to do with the fact that she is a woman, a mother, that people feel this is wrong? If it was a man would people still be saying it was inappropriate?