I'd like to discuss the John Hogan case, but I dont want it to descend into a 'lynch' thread

[VVVQV]

It aint gonna happen, is it?

bossybritches, elliot is very clearly saying what dittany says she is. She is saying that Natasha Hogan is equally culpable for the murder of her child, that "she must have known he was on the edge" etc.

On that basis we've all got to make sure we don't argue with our husbands when we know they're stressed, in case they're near the edge and murder our kids.

Because we'd be responsible. Because women are held responsible for men's violence. As you say, we don't know all the facts, we weren't in court, but we do know that inevitably, Natasha Hogan's actions will come under as much scrutiny as John Hogan's, as if she is responsible for his violence. As nearly always happens when men inflict violence on women and/ or children.

spot on, spicemonster and littlebella.

Elliot, your statement that he must have been mad because he jumped off a balcony is false logic. Or putting the cart before the horse. Madness is one possible cause of extreme behaviour. But there are others. Evil, anger, hatred, pride, jealousy, for instance. Men have been known to harm children in order to hurt their wives before now, you know.

dittany ...emm because it's fact and ... eh because his ex wife sold her story saying they'd had an affair. if a misogynist is someone who blindly believes that women can do no wrong and that there is only one side to the story , yes I must be one - pearl before swine and all that

"We don't know all the facts."

Which part of the above phrase is unclear dittany??

I have only commented on the case in that I have raised concerns about the ignorance of MH issues in this case & that it is not black &white. It is apparent that a lot of you are determined to paint John Hogan as an evil bastard who was so angry with his wife threatening to leave him that he threw himself & his two kids over a balcony to spite her!!?

All I am saying is there were many facts that we did not see or hear about that would have been discussed in court involving expert witnesses who have actually interviewed Hogan (& his ex & other witnesses) over a period of time.

Why should we judge one side or another on the basis of unsubstantiated reports -papers need sensationalism to sell.

Anyway I'm off working for the weekend so I shall bow out & leave you all to feel oh so righteous in your convictions.

Oh dear me as VVQV said in her opening post, a measured debate is not possible in a case as emotive as this is it?

Night all .

Agree bossy - some people just want to make this into a black and white issue. It isnt - it's far more complex. Yes, John Hogan killed his son. That is not disputed. But we simply don't know what went on in the days, weeks, months leading up to that evening. Those who imply that John Hogan is absolutely 100% responsible for what happened in the lead up to this tragic event are imo as bad as anyone who tries to imply that it's all his ex-wife's fault. Totally ridiculous to suggest it's as black and white as that. Natasha Hogan said herself that he was a good father, and that the moment of madness was uncharacteristic.We can only assume that at some point she was in love with him - she clearly chose to marry him and have children with him. We just don't know what has gone on between them in the intervening years.

I cannot believe anyone can say both of them are responsible for this situation. On a very basic level, that is like saying women who nag, or fail to get dinner on the table, are responsible for being beaten. Or who go out in a short skirt deserve to be raped. No matter what Natasha Hogan said or did, it cannot excuse that man throwing his son to his death to punish her.

it's the inability to move forward with the argument that drives me so mad - he's killed his son and feels no guilt, feels no guilt because he claims he was oput of his mind, yes , she is proabbaly right to say her daughter can't see him at the moment but nor ecognition of what the daughter is feeling or may feel in the future?
And I think in many instances marital vows should include for better or worse, sickness and ijn health but not mental illness that would be too hard and certainly not supporting you in the face of your family commitiing suicide> But here;s the thing we don't know, we can't possibly know and so I don't wholeheartedly support the husabnd because I'll never know the truth but I wonder how you all possibly can know that he's simply a violent misogynist bullying husband - oh but one whose wife said he was always a great father.... emm not adding up somewhere ...

He's not necessarily a misogynist, just someone who's first thought when told something he didn't agree with was to hurt his son to spite his wife. Is it not telling that he didn't jump first?

well, the fact that he threw his children to their deaths and then blamed his wife in order to escape the murder charge is a bit of a clue, isn't it?

Elliot my point is about the mysogynist tone of the discussion of Natasha Hogan's behaviour, not about John Hogan's. I have no idea if he was mysogynist or not. I have absolutely no doubt that the discussion aroun d the case and the attempts to lable NH equally guilty (FFS) are mysogynist. Of course they are.

It is interesting that as Germaine Greer pointed out, there has been very little discussion of whether they had been drinking alcohol that evening.

Has that been reported?

elliot - I don't necessarily believe that he wasn't a good father at some point. But I find it hugely disturbing that he says he feels no guilt, whatever the state of mind he had at the time. And I cannot blame Mia's mother for wanting to keep her daughter safe from him when he's already tried to kill her once.

All the rest of your post is pure speculation - just as much as those who you think are painting him as a monster.

why do they have to be misogynist, why can't they simplye be views based on an individual case rather than labellled? If she had jumped I'd think he had opushed her in some way too - not literally. Would you agree that there are some unbalance people in the woirld becasue of what life has thrown at them? Would you alsp agree that spouses or mothers or anyone close to people know exactly what buttons to push that do make people lose it?

In my opinion that's the case regardless of what gender they are. it's nothing to do with gender just personalities, histories and the awful truth that sometimes in life two personalities coming together are a fatal combination.

She was probabaly at the end of her tether with him- who knows? he may well have been depressed for months/years and had been driving her crazy, who knows but at the end of the day he was her husband and she did have some responsibility for the state of their marriage whether that even just be - yes, he was seriosuly depressed and I couldn't cope with it or things went awry and as a result I wanted tio end it and he reacted badly- to say the least. That's not sayiong that all woemn must tiptoe round men whent hings go wrong, neither should all men tiptoe round women- the exception doesn't make the rule and this case is exceptional, hence our discussion. Anyway, i'm away to bed, it's been a healthy good discussion.

I find it disturbing that a lot of people are pretending to know what John Hogan and, indeed, Natasha Hogan said, thought and felt when that is patently not the case.

I don't know whether he said he did not feel guilty or whether, in fact, he said something that had the word guilty in it but that is being misrepresented and twisted to suit the agenda of someone else entirely.

FWIW, I don't believe that Natasha Hogan bears any responsibility for her son's death. Even supposing she was having an affair and had thrown that in his face (I am NOT saying that she did this - I am speaking hypothetically here), she would still not be to blame for what he did.

Her culpabilty was never really in question, though, was it? The fact is that the court decided that John Hogan was not criminally responsible for his son's death. It does not alter the fact that his actions alone were responsible inasmuch as he, and only he, caused Liam's death.

It is extremely disappointing to find so many people who feel that it is essential that someone is to blame and cannot allow for the situation to be more complex and nuanced than that. The court in Crete heard all the arguments and came to a conclusion. That Natasha Hogan should find its verdict unsatisfactory is entirely understandable but does not, in itself, prove that the verdict was the wrong one.

MsHighwater - I'm only going on what was reported John Hogan said during his trial:

"I feel no guilt because I did not do it," he said. "This person sat before you is not the person who jumped from the fourth floor. I have my son's forgiveness and I have God's forgiveness."

"One day I'm going to be free again and I will be a father to my daughter again," he said, as he concluded his evidence to the court.

I do believe that the BBC can be trusted to accurately record what was said during a trial.

What he meant by those statements seems fairly clear and unambiguous to me.

Mentally ill, me arse.

He killed that child in a fit of temper. Just like that city banker, who had never had one psychotic episode in his life.

No doubt they both regret it now. No doubt they've both driven themselves insane with guilt. But that's the thing about losing your temper. You do things you later regret.

"Just like that city banker, who had never had one psychotic episode in his life"

Bobbysmum...a psychotic episode can come on in a matter of days, even if you haven't experienced one before. This happened to me and it was very frightening.

Anyway, I'm no expert but from the reports around this case it sounds as though did experience a pyschotic episode. I think the two cases are very different.

b spicemonster
That quote is pretty much what tipped me from sympathy to anger. How on earth can he say that?

I know that if I had hurt my DS in any way during such an episode (which I have experienced) then I would NEVER forgive myself.

Look, it doesn't take a psychotic episode for a grown man to kill a two year old (who is refusing to go to sleep) by punching her in the stomach. It takes an outburst of temper.

Which isn't to say that a psychotic episode can't come on in a matter of days, but I really don't see the connection with this bloke.

His child was playing up. He punched her and she died.

Why does that have to be a psychotic episode? Because he claims it was?

Give me a break.

No, I think there was lots of evidence to that effect. hang on, I'll see if I can dig out a reliable link.

News Report

Obviously I don't know all the details but the BBC is reliable source so I am inclined to believe their reports.

Two very different cases, I think.