Nick
Administrator
In which case what is the point in prosecuting anybody who is going through guilt? What happens if somebody was drink driving and they killed their kids?
'I judge children by their names' (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Brighton Sky Blue
- Start date
In which case what is the point in prosecuting anybody who is going through guilt? What happens if somebody was drink driving and they killed their kids?
Astute
Well-Known Member
Not an easy case to prove?
What couldn't be proven? They either left their kids alone or they didn't. If they did it was neglect. If they didn't then they lied about their childs disappearance.
Try answering Nick. It was what I had in mind. You shouldn't get away with your actions because of the consequences.
Nick
Administrator
Exactly. If I got into a drunken fight and the guy hit his head and died, I'd be absolutely mortified and would have to live with it every day because of a mistake after a few beers.
Would that mean I shouldn't be punished?
Astute
Well-Known Member
oakey
Well-Known Member
It would be difficult to prove that they put the children at significant risk of harm since they were only 50 metres away in a secure holiday village, were checking on them every 30 minutes and believed they were safe.
My question hasn't been answered yet. What would be gained? You clearly want them to suffer some more.
The idea that every case of neglect is prosecuted is ludicrous. Is a child left in a car whilst parents nip inside a shop or garage or in a caravan whilst parents sit outside, or inside when parents are at the bottom of the garden in summer, or on a beach etc ... at risk or being neglected? The courts would be full. Is that what you want?
oakey
Well-Known Member
There's no comparison since that is clearly a crime committed, manslaughter.
I ask again. What would be gained from a prosecution? Do you not think they have suffered? Why would you want them to suffer some more? Revenge? Spite? It certainly won't prevent further cases like this. No parent will think,
ok I won't do this or I might go to jail. The thought that what happened to this little girl could happen would be deterrent enough for any sane person.
Nick
Administrator
But it's a crime to leave your kid alone if they are in danger.
stupot07
Well-Known Member
You're wasting your time Nick.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors
oakey
Well-Known Member
A court would not look just at the outcome but whether the action was reasonable before not after the event. There would be a huge argument between 2 sets of lawyers about the reasonableness of the action. That's if it made it to court.
Do you recall the dingo took the baby case? No good came of prosecuting that parent.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/jun/12/dingo-baby-azaria-lindy-chamberlain
Astute
Well-Known Member
If you think that it is acceptable to leave small kids alone so you can go for a drink I hope you don't have kids and never have them. You have tried to make out it was an accident. You have now tried to make out that judges wouldn't know that it is wrong. You tried to make out that being in your garden when your kids are in bed is as bad. What a bloody joke.
Grendel
Well-Known Member
No they were in a restaurant which welcomed children and they wanted their adult only time - shame on you for this nonsense you are spouting
Astute
Well-Known Member
Exclusive holiday village? Would you like to explain what you mean by this? Solicitors only? I wonder if the people who just walked onto it agreed.
oakey
Well-Known Member
We will just have to agree to differ.
This is my last word ... A foolish and stupid mistake was made by possibly foolish and neglectful people. Nothing can be gained from prosecuting them. Their punishment is a lifetime of bitter anguish. You would like that to be spent in a cell. I beg to differ.
This is my last word ... A foolish and stupid mistake was made by possibly foolish and neglectful people. Nothing can be gained from prosecuting them. Their punishment is a lifetime of bitter anguish. You would like that to be spent in a cell. I beg to differ.
Astute
Well-Known Member
Do you say that whatever someone does that if one of their children dies they should be let off with what they have done because of the anguish caused? They would all have a lifetime of bitter anguish and regret. If not how would you decide?
oakey
Well-Known Member
It would depend on the circumstances. How many children are injured or die when not wearing a seatbelt? Should parents be prosecuted for that?
It's what police, crown prosecution service and courts are there for to judge the circumstances.
My instinct is to be merciful and I think prison is for those who have done grave crimes or are a danger to others.
I don't want to comment further as I have not made personal remarks against others but I am saddened that others have made personal remarks towards me and alleged poor parenting. So I would prefer not to comment again.
It's what police, crown prosecution service and courts are there for to judge the circumstances.
My instinct is to be merciful and I think prison is for those who have done grave crimes or are a danger to others.
I don't want to comment further as I have not made personal remarks against others but I am saddened that others have made personal remarks towards me and alleged poor parenting. So I would prefer not to comment again.
Nick
Administrator
the driver does get in trouble if the kids aren't wearing seatbelts don't they?
As a sidenote, does my head in to see kids stood up in the car while moving.
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
Child dies in fire after being left at home alone:
http://nypost.com/2016/02/23/2-year-old-girl-killed-in-fire-at-bed-stuy-home/
http://nypost.com/2016/02/23/2-year-old-girl-killed-in-fire-at-bed-stuy-home/
ccfc92
Well-Known Member
The Mercedes SL, a two seater sports car with little luggage ledges behind the front seats.
I once saw two young children stood on said ledges while the two adults sat in the front, on a 70 MPH dual carriageway.
To answer the bold bit, I believe the law is all passengers under 18, the driver is responsible for. Over 18, it's the passenger themselves.
skybluejelly
Well-Known Member
nope under 14 drivers responsibility over 14 passengers responsibility
ccfc92
Well-Known Member
http://www.rospa.com/road-safety/advice/vehicles/in-car-safety-and-crashworthiness/seat-belts-law/
Agreed, I was told 18, but this must be the law.
Astute
Well-Known Member
You have constantly said that leaving your small children that are nowhere near big enough to look after themselves alone so you can go out drinking is only an error or a mistake. You have tried to belittle me and twist my words for having a different opinion. You have said several times that child neglect isn't against the law. You are trying to make the point that if you lose a child you shouldn't get prosecuted because you have suffered enough. You have said that it is as bad leaving your children in bed whilst you are in your garden as leaving them in a room unattended so you can go drinking with friends. And you don't understand why most of us don't agree with you.
oakey
Well-Known Member
You're entitled to your opinion. That is not a fair summary of my views so I'm wasting my time. I have never said child neglect is not against the law. I have said defining it and making a case to prove it is very difficult. You are unable or unwilling to grasp the nuance of my points so let's just leave it that you see things differently.
Astute
Well-Known Member
So you didn't say that child neglect isn't against the law?
oakey
Well-Known Member
Don't think so. If you want to find where I did?
Astute
Well-Known Member
oakey
Well-Known Member
We agree their actions were negligent. The law is a very different beast. It is not easy to even get a legal definition of child neglect that you could feel confident would stand up in court. That's what court cases argue over. U.K. Law does not expect us to predict or foresee all dangers. It focuses on what is reasonable and the fact that holiday complexes had baby listening services then would lead many people to believe their actions were not negligent.
The case stupot07 referred to
An article about parents being arrested in the uk for leaving children alone:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...r-leaving-kids-home-alone-made-every-day.html
If you read it the conviction was overturned on appeal.
I'm done and off to bed. My children are all grown up and were never neglected to the best of my knowledge. Goodnight.
The case stupot07 referred to
An article about parents being arrested in the uk for leaving children alone:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...r-leaving-kids-home-alone-made-every-day.html
If you read it the conviction was overturned on appeal.
I'm done and off to bed. My children are all grown up and were never neglected to the best of my knowledge. Goodnight.
Astute
Well-Known Member
You said that you agree that it was child neglect. Then you say that you don't think they would have been prosecuted in this country as no law was broken. Yet you say that you never said it. You have backtracked in this thread and wonder why people don't agree with you.
If you break the law you should get prosecuted. It shouldn't depend on the consequences. You should forsee that leaving very young children alone is dangerous. Even more so away from home.
Nobody has said that you have neglected your own children. But you are willing to stand up for someone who has. As a parent myself I never would. Just like the majority of other people.
If you break the law you should get prosecuted. It shouldn't depend on the consequences. You should forsee that leaving very young children alone is dangerous. Even more so away from home.
Nobody has said that you have neglected your own children. But you are willing to stand up for someone who has. As a parent myself I never would. Just like the majority of other people.
oakey
Well-Known Member
As I said agree to disagree. I have not backtracked at all, merely clarified for people who were not clear about my very consistent viewpoint. No law was broken or they would have faced charges. Others have resorted to personal slurs.
It is simply not true to say that everyone who breaks the law should get prosecuted. It doesn't and could never happen. I note that you made no reference to the dingo baby case when public opinion demanded a witch hunt to punish the bad parent. It took many years to clear her name.
As it happens everyone I know, whose opinion I respect, agrees that compassion is better than condemnation.
It is simply not true to say that everyone who breaks the law should get prosecuted. It doesn't and could never happen. I note that you made no reference to the dingo baby case when public opinion demanded a witch hunt to punish the bad parent. It took many years to clear her name.
As it happens everyone I know, whose opinion I respect, agrees that compassion is better than condemnation.
Otis
Well-Known Member
I think this has now gone very off piste hasn't it?
Isn't this all about whether Katie Hopkins should have said what she said?
My stance, as has already been well documented, is that I think it is wrong of her to dredge this all back up after 9 years.
It seems to me that though it is obvious the McCann's did wrong, they are now trying to do something good and that shouldn't just be derided and ridiculed.
Anything that is trying to be implemented to help keep all our children safe should be welcomed.
Isn't this all about whether Katie Hopkins should have said what she said?
My stance, as has already been well documented, is that I think it is wrong of her to dredge this all back up after 9 years.
It seems to me that though it is obvious the McCann's did wrong, they are now trying to do something good and that shouldn't just be derided and ridiculed.
Anything that is trying to be implemented to help keep all our children safe should be welcomed.
NorthernWisdom
Well-Known Member
tbf, the whole McCann debate is because of that, so it is on track... unfortunately!
Eh?!?
Otis
Well-Known Member
Edited.
My mistake.
Otis
Well-Known Member
But isn't this putting the whole thing off track and making everyone focus on something else? Isn't this derailing this new campaign?
Maybe it is best for the McCann's to now walk away from this venture. Too much bad blood isn't there?
Last edited:
Astute
Well-Known Member
There you go again. Child neglect is against the law. Why won't you accept it? I would say that they never got charged for two reasons together. It happened in another country and they lost their daughter. It was a very high profile case and their police messed up with the investigation.
OK I will let you know why I feel so strongly. About 4 years ago I was listening to sky blue player with my headphones on. I was going on a night shift straight afterwards. It was at the end of a game and we were holding on to a one goal lead. I could hear something going on in the kids room downstairs. Then I heard my wife scream. I went to see what was wrong. My daughter who is now 7 had stopped breathing. Her lips had turned blue. My eldest lad who is a trained first aider and had saved 3 children before had gone to bits as it was his little sister. The same happened to my wife. She is also a first aider. I resuscitated my little girl while the wife called an ambulance. I had to do it once more before it got to us. She was taken into the ambulance and they took about 20 minutes to stabilise her before they took her to hospital. If we had abandoned our children at that time she would be dead. I know that you can't be with them all the time. But leaving young children alone is neglect and asking for trouble.
