Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
News
Original poster

Shannon Matthews Mother arrested !!!!!

1002 replies

kay1981 · 07/04/2008 09:22

They have arrested her on perverting the course of justice - which i think means lying to the police under oath doesnt it?

Is it at all possible that they knew where she was all the time?

Perhaps cahnnel 4 should now re-show the documentary on shannons family and see how it is received knowing what we know.

OP posts:
JeremyVile · 10/04/2008 13:16

Thanks all!

Trolleydolly71 · 10/04/2008 13:16

Message withdrawn

policywonk · 10/04/2008 13:18

You don't 'know' any such thing, trolley. All you know is that someone you've never even met claims that it is true.

DrNortherner · 10/04/2008 13:19

Faking your own daughter's abduction doesn't make you a bad mother". LMAO. What a gem!!!!

I think, from what we know, KM probably was a bad mother. I'm not saying she doesn't love her kids - I'm sure she does, however, those kids did not have a happy, stable childhhod - I'll bet you that much.

Trolleydolly71 · 10/04/2008 13:22

Message withdrawn

chocfest · 10/04/2008 13:23

we do know that there is sufficient evidence for her to warrant an arrest, and charges for child neglect.

We do know that it is very strange that when a child has been found after being abducted for 24 days, she cannot be reunited with her mther, only through a one way glass mirror.

We do know that she admitted she knew where shannon was all along.

we do know that the rest of her children where taken into care prior to her arrest. Once the boyfriend was arrested for child porn. If he had been arrested for something he had done and was safely away from them, why instantly remove the children from her.

It doesnt take a rocket scientist to work our that there was alot more to this than orginally thought.

policywonk · 10/04/2008 13:24

But chocfest is rushing to judgement on the basis of this 'fact'. That's why the police, collectively, should keep their bloody mouths shut. (In all cases, not just this one.) This behind-the-scenes rumour-mill stinks.

InLoveWithSweenyTodd · 10/04/2008 13:25

"but why isnt it a good idea?hw is it detrimental to the children in the long run if they are loved and well cared for?"

I think and have never doubted that stability and continuity of care is v important for a child to feel that he or she belongs, that is why. And I think we should strive for that.
BUT that doesn't mean a woman has to endure an abusive relationship. In fact she should break that abusive relationship as soon as possible, for her sake AND for her children's. And I have all the respect in the world for women who have the balls to break the vicious circle of an abusive relationship.

MissPaulaYates · 10/04/2008 13:28

the child neglet is imho soley relating to during the time of abduction

anything prior to this is unknown

chocfest · 10/04/2008 13:30

child neglect is exacgtly what is says.

whether it was before, during or after the abduction, it stands for the same thing. Neglect of the child.

If it was not before the abduction, does that mean 'not to worry it was only the once for 24 days'its ok?

MissPaulaYates · 10/04/2008 13:34

not at all

it very obviously was not ok

but neither is demonising the womans very existance

Trolleydolly71 · 10/04/2008 13:46

Message withdrawn

chocfest · 10/04/2008 13:49

yup, that just about sums it up.

But remember, she's not a bad mother, its not her fault a grown woman like KM decided to put her daughter through this, not it must have been the fairies!

policywonk · 10/04/2008 13:51

Oh good grief. I am beginning to understand why people do that multiple-posting thing.

ruddynorah · 10/04/2008 13:52

yes jv i said that. and yes dh has told me other things. i wouldn't post anything else on mn. the toothbrush comment is a tiny tiny thing. and he isn't a policeman.

JeremyVile · 10/04/2008 13:54

Well, I'm glad you wont be posting anything else.

PW - Someone said yesterday that this thread was sapping. It so is.

chocfest · 10/04/2008 13:54

what multiple posting thing?

policywonk · 10/04/2008 13:59

Multiple posting - posting nonsense/empty posts again and again until the thread hits its 1000-post limit and dies. Doesn't achieve anything and MNHQ don't like it, but this is the first time I've had the urge.

I can quite see that this case excites interest - hell, I'm posting about it too. But I'm really surprised by how resistant you are to the idea that SM has not been found guilty of anything. Why are you so insistent that every single unpleasant accusation made against her must be true? I'm assuming that you don't know her.

chocfest · 10/04/2008 14:19

no, i dont know her, and don't wish to either,

ruty · 10/04/2008 14:20

knit knit knit. Clack clack clack. [sorry, couldn't help myself]

policywonk · 10/04/2008 14:22

chocfest - so, you don't know her. Why are you so sure that she is guilty of everything she has been charged with, and a lot more besides?

chocfest · 10/04/2008 14:25

from everything i read in the tabloids!

ruty · 10/04/2008 14:26

hilarious chocfest.

policywonk · 10/04/2008 14:28

So... your reason for viciously villifying this woman in a public forum is that you believe everything you read in the papers??? (Or are you taking the piss??)

chocfest · 10/04/2008 14:29

nope, if its in the sun/mirror/star/DM its gospel

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

Join Mumsnet Log In
This thread is not accepting new messages.