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

News

Does anyone else think this man really ought to have received a custodial sentence.

201 replies

BAFE · 10/06/2010 23:04

here

quite graphic, sorry

just can't believe the man wasn't punished in any way.

OP posts:
hobbgoblin · 11/06/2010 16:01

Doesn't baseless mean unfounded sakura? I still don't get what you mean about the judge accusing people of being baseless...

If anyone does complain or campaign for a review of this sentence do we think it would be a good idea to stick to facts? I don't think saying things like[the judge] has never looked after a baby ergo knows nothing about them is that helpful.

ImSoNotTelling · 11/06/2010 16:25

No I think it's a terrible idea to stick to the facts.

I think when complaining we should try to look as stupid as possible, That is bound to yield the best results

I mean , come on, hobbgoblin. We are talking about it here on this thread, how we feel. Do you really imagine that anyone is going to write to the attorney general saying "yeah but like the judge is fick innit".

ImSoNotTelling · 11/06/2010 16:26

Sorry for sarcasm but do you really think that your felllow MNers as a group and on this thread are as thick as two short planks?

DorotheaPlenticlew · 11/06/2010 16:29

I will also write/object if possible, if we can work out how to organize this. Sorry cannot take the time to research it myself just now but wld be v grateful to anyone who can.

This had me in tears earlier. I shouldn't have read it. I never learn.

foureleven · 11/06/2010 16:31

This has troubled me for the past few hours..

If an adult did this to another adult they would be locked up. Why is it less of an offence because the victim was a baby?

hobbgoblin · 11/06/2010 16:37

okay, apologies for sugar coating what I would have said:

"oh do stop the ridiculous 'judge has never held a baby' crap because it just weakens the argument"

As does apparent misunderstanding of the reporting on this.

DorotheaPlenticlew · 11/06/2010 16:41

OK I have some q's which may be dim, but I don't think I can re-read the article, sorry to be a pain.

Does it say anything about what his relationship was to the child/its family -- anything that might give any slight clue as to on what grounds someone decided to leave him in charge of the baby? Just wondering, not thihnking towards any conclusions really.

Also: what if the baby dies? Will that change anything at all for the perpetrator?

HerBeatitude · 11/06/2010 16:45

"FFS! What exactly would he have to do before he'd be locked up?"

To borrow from another thread, the answer to that question is:

Do it to a man.

ImSoNotTelling · 11/06/2010 16:45

Is there an argument on this thread? I thought that it was a thread to express shock at this terrible crime and the seemingly extraordinarily lenient approach of the judge.

I would have thought that peopel should be allowed to vent their upset at what has happened here in whatever way they like. If people want to say the judge was a wanker (or whatever) then no harm in that.

I don't think you can assume that people would express themselves in the same manner in a thread talking to some other mothers, as they would in a formal letter to the attorny general.

As for the facts, we only have the report from the BBC, we don't actually know the facts at all really. I have to say I don't have the stomach to research this one

ImSoNotTelling · 11/06/2010 16:47

Dorothea your questions, My answers are

I don't know

and

I don't know. I doubt that he can be prosectued again though, they knew that the baby's life was still in danger during the course of this trial IYSWIM

foureleven · 11/06/2010 16:53

And how can this have even been passed until we know whether the baby will live or die..?

Is that picture the man in question? I shall carry a tea towel on me at all times in case I bump in to him.

sethstarkaddersmum · 11/06/2010 16:56

I just read the article again and it doesn't say the baby is still likely to die.
It says it is unclear whether he will make a full recovery, and that he was near to death when he was taken to the doctor. This happened more than a year ago.

just posting this because I know people on the thread are upset & worrying. of course it is still bad enough as it is.

HerBeatitude · 11/06/2010 16:58

Presumably the poor child will have serious bowel problems for the rest of his life.

DorotheaPlenticlew · 11/06/2010 16:59

oh ok. thanks.

sometimes I really wish I believed in prayer, and hell and damnation etc.

dittany · 11/06/2010 17:02

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

LittleWhiteWolf · 11/06/2010 17:22

I agree wholeheartedly with foureleven. If it were a crime of two adults then yes, there would be serious consequences for the offender, yet because its a newborn baby it isnt taken seriously...in what world does that make sense!!!
A newborn deserves more protection than an adult, simply because they are so helpless, vulnerable and unable to tell anyone whats wrong when so fucker shoves a wipe up them.

2shoes · 11/06/2010 17:23

omg
he should have been locked up....

bibbitybobbityhat · 11/06/2010 17:29

I would be extremely grateful if somebody could find out how/where to make ones voice heard in protest re. this case.

Is it worth writing to the local MP?

sowhatis · 11/06/2010 17:39

the bloke is a c*nt and needs punishing. end of.

SomeGuy · 11/06/2010 17:41

Dittany trotting her usual nonsense I see.

"Nichola Bowman, 24, was found guilty of 'causing or allowing' the death of her son Joshua, two, who was killed by her drug-addict partner Wayne Davenport.

But although his mother knew about the abuse and lied to the authorities and in court, she was only given a six-month suspended sentence and set free.

Judge Ouseley, at Chester Crown Court, ruled she was also a 'victim' and disagreed with a pre-sentence report that said she was still a danger to children."

"A mother-of-four who let her children live in appalling conditions, with broken beds and a tray for a toilet, has been spared jail.

The woman, who cannot be named for legal reasons, was handed a suspended jail sentence after she admitted four counts of child cruelty at Hull Crown Court."

"A mum who killed her six-month-old baby by shaking him and throwing him to the ground causing devastating brain injuries has walked free from court.

Martina McHattie, 26, described as a perfect mum, lost her temper with horrific consequences after baby Reece wouldn't stop crying because he was teething.

A court heard the stress caused her to shake the infant and throw him against a hard object, fracturing his skull.

Reece died from his injuries four days later in October 2004.

The harrowing incident at her home in Wakefield, West Yorkshire, only came to the fore two years later when she admitted that she had caused Reece's death because she was unable to cope.

But McHattie, who pleaded guilty to manslaughter, was handed just a 12-month suspended prison sentence after a judge was told she had tried to commit suicide and had self-harmed in the years since the death."

etc., etc., ad nauseam.

DorotheaPlenticlew · 11/06/2010 17:45

yes, the MP is prob not a bad place to start.

Janos · 11/06/2010 17:48

Why are you singling dittany out SomeGuy?

Plenty of other posters are saying the same thing as she is.

Are they all talking nonsense too?

DorotheaPlenticlew · 11/06/2010 17:50

is it him? sorry am bad at this and am doing it one handed (bfing dd)

DorotheaPlenticlew · 11/06/2010 17:52

btw, that link is to an MP -- nothing shcoking

SomeGuy · 11/06/2010 17:55

Janos, two other posters did say that yes, but they didn't feel the need to add references to random horrible unrelated (and unverifiable) acts by other men as 'proof' that there's some sort of national conspiracy to let men off and punish women.

Swipe left for the next trending thread