Errant Mum post removed, Big Brother protects those found guilty in public court Options

[Jayjay]

There's no need to pick holes with Strafin when he posts things like "she pleaded guilty to will full neglect as well as the abandonment". I wonder if he likes both types of music, Country and Western?

Anyway, back on topic, from what I gather the original thread was removed because some forum members with far right leanings started name calling. It seems this thread is descending in a similar fashion with a comments such as "I am not going to get into an argument with someone who is into child abuse" directed at another forum member so I'm putting the offender on Ignore.

Some folk just don't know how to play nice.

Will you also put the member who said 'let's face it, you're a liar*' on ignore, or is it just one particular members name calling you object to?

[NWNREADER]

The simple, legal truth is the woman pleaded guilty to the allegation, which probably stated something along the lines of "On * January 20**, at Newbury in the County of Berkshire, Wilfully neglected and abandoned........

That is the bare detail of what she admitted. the circumstances as described to the Court/reported in the newspaper are not 'admitted', because the niceties of the system mean that allegation was not put to her to be challenged. I remember she said the turmoil was due to a recent burglary (I suspect the offender was trying to find a way out....).

So she admitted leaving the children in the house, uncared for, on the one occasion, with the mess described 'explained'. She did not 'admit' she was responsible for the mess, nor that it was the normal state of affairs.

So 'Mr Average' will draw all the conclusions he likes, and may well be right, but what is described as 'defending' the woman seems to be actually a plea to watch points so the debate can continue and not fall foul of 'excessive vigour'.

I have come across children in such squalor myself. It is no fun, I assure you. However, such 'parents' do wriggle and squirm to justify themselves, and will grip on to any inaccurate comments to demonstrate how people lie about them and they are not so bad after all.... However unbelievable you may think things are, there is someone, somewhere acting in just that way. Not in the slums of Mexico City, but here in the UK.

[Simon Kirby]

The simple, legal truth is the woman pleaded guilty to the allegation, which probably stated something along the lines of "On * January 20**, at Newbury in the County of Berkshire, Wilfully neglected and abandoned........

That is the bare detail of what she admitted. the circumstances as described to the Court/reported in the newspaper are not 'admitted', because the niceties of the system mean that allegation was not put to her to be challenged. I remember she said the turmoil was due to a recent burglary (I suspect the offender was trying to find a way out....).

So she admitted leaving the children in the house, uncared for, on the one occasion, with the mess described 'explained'. She did not 'admit' she was responsible for the mess, nor that it was the normal state of affairs.

So 'Mr Average' will draw all the conclusions he likes, and may well be right, but what is described as 'defending' the woman seems to be actually a plea to watch points so the debate can continue and not fall foul of 'excessive vigour'.

I have come across children in such squalor myself. It is no fun, I assure you. However, such 'parents' do wriggle and squirm to justify themselves, and will grip on to any inaccurate comments to demonstrate how people lie about them and they are not so bad after all.... However unbelievable you may think things are, there is someone, somewhere acting in just that way. Not in the slums of Mexico City, but here in the UK.

Very good post.

[On the edge]

Quite agree! And so for some 'parenting' hasn't moved on since 1900.

[NWNREADER]

We who are perfect have to put up with lesser beings.....

[Strafin]

She was charged with and pleaded guilty to two counts of neglect, and also was charged with two counts of abandonment. Neglect and abandonment. Please note the that she was charged with neglect.

[NWNREADER]

She was charged with and pleaded guilty to two counts of neglect, and also was charged with two counts of abandonment. Neglect and abandonment. Please note the that she was charged with neglect.

No-one denies what she was found guilty of - statute-wise. What I believe is the issue to be guarded over is the language used to describe the offender, and the extent to which she 'admitted' the gory details such that we can say it was 100% admission of everything mentioned and that was the normal state of affairs every day. The two counts of neglect and abandonment arise from the one finding on the day - two children found alone in squalid conditions. She did not admit it was so the day before.

That is not defending her, just trying to keep a highly valid debate on track. My initial tongue in cheek comments about the liability of social workers etc are not totally 'wrong'. In my view the parents are always 100% responsible unless found incapable. However, once Social Services become involved they take a legal accountability and one could wonder how it is that a home could be in such a state with children there. The neighbours and parents too should be examining their positions........

[Strafin]

I was making the point as to what she was charged with as several people have tried to say that she was not charged with neglect. She was.

[On the edge]

We who are perfect have to put up with lesser beings.....

Its not a matter of perfection its simply a matter of abiding by rules set by society. Hate the sin, love the sinner as the old saying went.

[Cognosco]

Its not a matter of perfection its simply a matter of abiding by rules set by society. Hate the sin, love the sinner as the old saying went.

Suffer little children? What does this say about our society today. Will it ever be differernt?

[On the edge]

Suffer little children? What does this say about our society today. Will it ever be differernt?

No it won't be different - not 'till this world ends.

[JeffG]

Not quite sure what you're getting at. "Suffer" in that context is an archaic form meaning "allow" or "permit".