...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?

LOL Beanie, I also wonder whether people who hate do-gooders so much prefer do-badders. Here they all are on a thread talking about someone who did something very bad, and yet they don't like do-gooders! Surely it would have been better if Karen Mathews had been a do-gooder instead of a do-badder?

And yes SEA, I agree with you.

reminds me of a cartoon in careers where someone wants to become a social worker, and expresses a fear that he will be seen as a "do-gooder". His friend says "Don't worry. They'll never prove it".

Extremely selfish, cruel, stupid and misguided yes. 'Evil' - no.

pondering on the 'nature' of evil. Professionally I have met anumber of people who are labelled as "criminally psychpathic" where there is an absence of feeling and empathy with fellow human beings. This is a mental disorder. At what stage do we visit the moral judgement of "evil"? isn't this a philosophical state rather tahn being at one end of a spectrum as to how "bad" someone has behaved?

A copper calling Karen Mathews "pure evil" is obv. risible.

Agree with OP.
DH and I commented the same when we saw the police rep reading the statement.

but she is pure evil.
why cant the police say it?what would you rather they said?

cheese - can you define what pure evil is?

'Evil, in many cultures, is a broad term used to describe intentional negative moral acts or thoughts that are cruel, unjust or selfish. Evil is usually contrasted with good, which describes acts that are kind, just or unselfish. In some religions, evil is an active force, often personified as an entity such as Satan or Ahriman.'

how can she be described as anything but.

I would rather the police stick to the facts, and remain objective.
They are as entitled as anyone else to their personal opinions, but those opinions are not appropriate for inclusion in a statement to the national press.

I am totally baffled as to why people are so bothered about this.

The woman committed a horrific crime. A crime which destroyed the lives of 4 innocent children (the other three live with their fathers iirc) and which had a whole community rallying around her to support her. And a crime which launched the biggest police hunt since the hunt for the yorkshire ripper and cost the taxpayer £3000000. And that's before we mention that she drugged her child and had her tied up in a flat. And these are just the details that have been made availablle to the public. what details do you think there might be that cannot be made publically available?

She has now been found guilty of these crimes and will be sentenced in due course. What the police say isn't going to make any difference to public opinion. A jury has already found her guilty - they're not going to change their minds - the trial has concluded. And when we remember Karent Mathhews (and people will remember her, the next time a child goes missing), we will remember her for the crime she committed, not for the way she was described by one police officer.

IMO this has nothing to do with the comments of the police. I think people are so outraged by this because Karen Matthews is a woman, and because the same comments have not been made about Michael Donnovan.

If I posted on here that I felt quite uncomfortable about the fact that Donnovan has been categorized in the same league as Karen Matthews, and that I actually think he was used by her and that he didn't have the mental capasity to know better, (and that is a view that I do hold btw),I would be lynched.

wannabe- funny, I was just thinking the same thing! What does it matter, the woman is guilty. She was not a good person. I wish people would get over themselves.

Now if they were complaining of police brutality that would be another issue...

I don't need to 'get over' myself.
I merely think it inappropriate for the police to make the comment they did.
I haven't experienced any police brutality, so that comment is hardly an appropriate riposte in this instance.

I'm not that bothered about it tbh.

I jsut think it's quite a thick thing to say.

Humphrey, neither have I - but words are far less serious than actions, that was my point. Does it REALLY matter what they say? Evil, bad, useless, wicked, whatever - we get the general idea.

Of course you are entitled to your opinion. We all are. That's why threads like this get a bit pointless after a while.

But police, judges etc. quite often say things which are a bit thick

I do think that the term 'evil' is misused in the ways that have already been covered on the thread.

But I haven't any particular prob with the police engaging in this kind of empty talk after the case is over. It is pretty standard for them to make this sort of statement after a guilty verdict. It contributes nothing but I don't see why they should be prevented from making a statement after the case -- unless we all should.

I think an awful lot of people are in denial about endemic fecklessness that they can't even begin to get the point made by this policeman. They just want to take offense.

It's too easy to wipe the floor with him. Instead, try to understand what he meant through his harsh words. Is there any merit in them at all? I say there is. And if so, what should society do about it. I think it is very wrong to do nothing.

Karen Matthews has lived her life in a complete moral vacuum with zero sense of community, even towards her own flesh and blood. Her values are greed, laziness and self-indulgent sex without any thought of consequences.

There are plenty of people who are in a similar economic situation, but they don't live in squalor or neglect/abuse their children. They see their situation as temporary (even if they might be in it for 10 years) - they have hope for the future, and are still ambititious for their children. They don't smoke and drink away their benefits (which in KM's case equated to a salary of over £30k a year).

Unfortunately, KM is not an isolated example - just an extreme one.

Oh squeakypop, well said, you are talking soooo much sense. Couldn't have summed it up any better. Just as I was off to flouncers' corner!

Anyone for a thread on 'what can be done to resolve the problem of the underclass'...?

Agree with almost everyone else - it was a stupid thing to say and, more than anything else, made me think that the DC (?) in question must be a bit thick.

I must admit when I saw the Police Officer on television saying KM was 'pure evil' my immediate thought was - won't the Sun and Mirror hacks be pleased?.

I agree with the term 'wicked' as more appropriate in this case. She is an objectionable person but hardly in the same league as Hitler or Mugabe.

You don't get to DC by being thick.

squeakypop, oh yes you can

oh yes MSB - is this following on from your thread about 'the masses'? sparks may fly!

Hi donnie, yes thought it may be a nice sequel on Monday - keep everyone warm anyway