Maxine Carr

[harman]

Message withdrawn

oh sugar, don't know how that got in there folks, couldn't be more inappropriate...

sophable - quite. The same goes for child murderers.

PS you get a winky when you put a quotation mark immediately before a bracket. Ithink a full stop too - it's a bug. I always put spaces before brackets to be safe.

I did say "relatively" minor. As in relative to what Myra Hindley did. MC did not take part in the murders nor have any prior knowledge that he was going to carry them out. Compared to MH, MC just isn't in the same league, which is what the media is trying to turn her into.

thanks for the tip senora...do the techies know this? tech2 where are you?

Since when is lying on a CV a criminal offence?

Also in her defence, from what I remember, she lied when it was not yet clear that the girls were dead. When she is accused of providing a double murder suspect with a false alibi, you have to take into account that she had no idea that that in fact was what she was doing - she probably kidded herself that the girls would turn up and the whole thing would blow over, or if the worst had happened, the police would very soon arrest the "real" killer. As soon as it became clear that the girls were missing probably dead, she went to the police and admitted that she had provided a false alibi.
And as to the question, how can she possibly not have known, well, ask any woman whose husband has had an affair that they didn't know about - are they all lying too? It's very easy to be deceived if someone you love and trust sets out to deceive you.

From all I have read and heard I feel that Maxine Carr is perhaps a little simple in the head - a simple soul as one said. I heard, though don't know the source, she wondered why she couldn't just move back to Grimsby. Which is proof indeed she is obviously not that "with it."

I saw a programme that played her reaction to finding out that Ian H was guilty. She was genuinely broken hearted and bewildered. I think that she is meant to be a bit naive. I know that I would never provide a false alibi for ANYONE, however, I can't judge someone who did it for 'love'.

but where do you draw the line on things you can and cant do for love? a lot of crimes are committed out of love, that doesnt make it ok. i know it wasnt the case but what if the girls had still been alive and she'd dragged it out for so long that it was too late. would it be ok then?

I don't think it is OK to commit any crime for love, but the gist of this discussion, is whether Maxine Carr should be the only person in England who should be locked up for life for what in English law is a fairly minor offence, or whether she should be allowed to be re-habilitated along with other much worse criminals than herself.

I think she did something incredibly stupid and unhelpful to a police investigation, but she has been punished with a longer and harsher sentence than anyone else who has ever committed that offence before, even though the commission of that offence did not affect the final outcome of either the murder itself or the trial. And she has been vilified by the media to such an extent that there is some discussion as to whether it is safe for her to be let out of prison. But there are people let out of prison every week who have committed far worse crimes than her; and the media are not jumping up and down about how evil they are, because they have not been set up as this generation's Myra Hindley. ( And they don't sell as many newspapers. )

i wasnt saying that she should be jumped on and beaten or hunted out, and i dont think she's the new myra hindley. i was saying that i would certainly not want her moving anywhere near to us and that i dont feel at all sorry for her, which i dont. if she believed that he was totally innocent after knowing about his past then she IS an incredibly stupid woman. (and i DO find it hard to believe that anyone could be that stupid) we're going to have to agree to disagree on this one, ive never had a row with anyone on here and im not going to start one now over a subject thats distressing enough as it is. not flouncing but gracefully bowing out of this thread.

Am not trying to stir things up when they've settled down, but for what its worth I do think that she should be left alone.
I think the jury (who heard all the evidence after all) convicted her of the lesser offence of perverting the course of justice - i.e.lying.
If they had been convinced that she knew or suspected that IH had committed the ofence, I thinkthey would have had to find her guilty of conspiracy to murder (or similar not sure exactly what she was charged with). And she would have been sentenced accordingly.
I don't really see what the alternative is - she has been through the court system, heard by a jury, served the relevant sentence.
However, I expect that if it were my baby I may well feel differently.

Surely none of this is anyone's business other than her and her parole officer. Do people on here really have such shallow lives that they need to voice opinions on facts they obviosly know little-or-nothing about. If you must read the Mail or Express, please leave your adopted attitudes outside this forum!

I agree with Chinchilla - I heard the same recording of her police interview and found it completely convincing or else she's the finest actress on earth.
I don't think she believed he'd murdered them for one minute. She really liked those girls and they clearly liked her too.
I think she has been vilified in a way that even Ian Huntley hasn't - yet he murdered them and she was nowhere near at the time.

crikey!

(to HenleyMom's post)

HenleyMom - erm, not quite sure what you're getting at. This is a discussion board, the idea is that we can disuss what we like no?

Henleymom thats bit harsh, this is a discussion forum after all. We are actualyl being very civilised not like the gutterpress at all.

Have you changed your name for this Henley, or are you new? It's a bit full on for a first time poster don't you think?

Sorry if I have caused any offence by earlier post - on reading again it was a bit ott.

It is just one of those topics where I wish people would leave alone. I don't think any of us on here have enough of the facts (and I mean first-hand knowledge, rather than second-hand opinion) to contribute anything meaningful.

Sorry again for any offence.
HM

HenleyMom
Re: 'I don't think any of us on here have enough of the facts (and I mean first-hand knowledge, rather than second-hand opinion) to contribute anything meaningful. '

Are you in a position to make that judgement?

have similar suspicions to lou33 about HM.
and if we all only commented on only topics which we had "first-hand knowledge, rather than second-hand opinion" on, then MN, the daily newspapers, tv/radio news etc etc would all be v empty places. I have no first hand knowledge of the Iraqi war, the death penalty in US states, GM crops etc but I do have opinions about them, and am interested to read about other people's too.