Doubt over Babysitter's conviction

Stanaccy

Stanaccy

Well-Known Local
Weaver
It's mentioned here
BBC NEWS | UK | Doubt cast on baby death verdict

As I read this report I am flabbergasted that the defence barrister didn't question more about the eye adn the fact there was no external injuries.

Just goes to show we really should have the death penalty as this person would not be here now and not be wasting the courts time for a possible wrongful conviction:rolleyes:.

Just wonder how many people were clammering for her to be killed in 2005?
 
Well not me, for one, because particularly after Sir Roy Meadow and the disgraceful way he made up scenarios to suit himself I'm very wary of Court evidence in cases like this. Too often it's a case of a conviction at any price.
 
The court heard that Kyle suffered an eye injury in 2003 after he fell from a buggy while he was being looked after by his mother.
Click to expand...

So the injury which was caused when he was in the care of his own mother could have ultimately led to his death.

I hope the poor woman in jail gets a full pardon and some serious compensation.
 
The silence on this thread is deafening ... If we were discussing the conviction of a babysitter who had killed a child, there would be lots clamoring for all kinds of medieaval punishments to be inflicted on the perp. But this case is an argument against capital punishment.
 
It doesn't surprise me Eric. This case is an example as to why the death penalty is abhorrent.

The thing is when she was convicted a vast amount of the populace would have been "disgusted by her actions" and asking "how could she swing a young child into a bannister with that force, she should be removed from the genepool."

Yet when one of the strongest arguments against capital punishments is thrown into the arena everyone shuts up tighter than a clam.

This woman is entitled to our sympathy just as much if not more than the victim as she has been tarnished as a child killer and suffered who knows what abuse during her incarceration.
 
Totally agree with you and I said as much about poor Stefan Kishko, who spent 14 years inside after being wrongly convicted for the murder of Lesley Molseed. However, the problem is that murderers seem to get away with ridiculously light sentences these days and I think people get frustrated by this. As far as I'm concerned, anyone convicted of murder in cold blood should be locked up for the rest of their natural lives. If they are proved to be innocent at a later date, then they can be released, but if not, then justice has been done!
 
If it turns out to have been a false verdict, I’m struggling to see how Suzanne Holdsworth
will ever manage to fully integrate in society for the remainder of her life. There will always be a stigma about this, be it real or perceived. I know if I was her I would never feel at ease, you’d always be thinking people were talking about you, if someone attempted to befriend you then you’d quiz there motives. Her life is pretty much trashed I feel.
 
think wyns got a good point, if Life meant Life instead of about 8/10 yrs if yer a good little convict, i think there would be very few people yelling- Top-Em.;)
 
A prime example on tonight's news. Some poor bloke got stabbed to death because he went outside his house to remonstrate with a group of youths who were making a lot of noise. The perpetrator received life imprisonment with a recommendation that he should serve a minimum of 14 years. Why?...why didn't he get locked up for the rest of his life? After all, the victim's widow and his two little girls are now serving a life sentence of grief...why should he be able to walk out of prison after 14 years?
 
It wont be 14 years , due to the good behaviour rules that some prat dreamt up. It wont be 14 years of prison life of breaking rocks in some quarry or whatever. It will be 8 years or so ( if that ) with at least 3 hot meals per day, accommodation heated to a comfortable temperature, satellite television on tap, access to the gaming machines of the day, the gymnasium, the library, the opportunity to study, a whole host of other stuff too. Who pays for it ? Problem is that targets have to be met…No MP is going to be held to account if an old couple up my street die this year through hypothermia…A prisoner tho…Heads will roll
 
Bonnyboy said:
It wont be 14 years , due to the good behaviour rules that some prat dreamt up. It wont be 14 years of prison life of breaking rocks in some quarry or whatever. It will be 8 years or so ( if that ) with at least 3 hot meals per day, accommodation heated to a comfortable temperature, satellite television on tap, access to the gaming machines of the day, the gymnasium, the library, the opportunity to study, a whole host of other stuff too. Who pays for it ? Problem is that targets have to be met…No MP is going to be held to account if an old couple up my street die this year through hypothermia…A prisoner tho…Heads will roll
Click to expand...

Actually the key word is MINIMUM his sentence is LIFE with a recommendation he serves AT LEAST 14 years, he therefore is not eligible for parole until he has served 14 years. He will then have to convince the panel he is suitable for release at that time (see the case of Beverly Allit and her tariff of 30 years)
BBC NEWS | England | Lincolnshire | Child killer Allitt's tariff set
 
So if this piece of scum keeps his nose clean for 14 years and then says sorry to the parole panel, there's chance he'll be released. Disgraceful. He should be locked up for the rest of his life.
 
Its a woman not a bloke, not that it makes difference to the things she did, i read about her on a magazine a while ago .
 
You're getting two different cases mixed up. Yolanda. The person who got a 14 year minimum was a guy who stabbed someone to death for complaining about the noise he and his mates were making. The woman was a childkiller who killed four and got a 30 year minimum. No matter - both sentences were way too short.
 
Wynonie Harris said:
So if this piece of scum keeps his nose clean for 14 years and then says sorry to the parole panel, there's chance he'll be released. Disgraceful. He should be locked up for the rest of his life.
Click to expand...


Wynonie I am only correcting Bonnyboy who appeared to get length of sentence mixed up with minimum terms.

Also it isn't just the behaviour in prison taken into account (otherwise Charles Bronson would have been released years ago.) The board take into account other things as well. (Not sure exactly but it includes severity of crime mental state etc.).
 
Stanaccy said:
Wynonie I am only correcting Bonnyboy who appeared to get length of sentence mixed up with minimum terms.

Also it isn't just the behaviour in prison taken into account (otherwise Charles Bronson would have been released years ago.) The board take into account other things as well. (Not sure exactly but it includes severity of crime mental state etc.).
Click to expand...
the mental state is determind by how these scumbags react/behave IN PRISON, surely stan? its the fact that this piece of crap can apply for parole after only 14 yrs thats disgraceful.
 
Stanaccy said:
Wynonie I am only correcting Bonnyboy who appeared to get length of sentence mixed up with minimum terms.

Also it isn't just the behaviour in prison taken into account (otherwise Charles Bronson would have been released years ago.) The board take into account other things as well. (Not sure exactly but it includes severity of crime mental state etc.).
Click to expand...

Thanks for the correction on the minimum term part of the sentence. I initially misread Wynonie's post.
 
cashman said:
the mental state is determind by how these scumbags react/behave IN PRISON, surely stan? its the fact that this piece of crap can apply for parole after only 14 yrs thats disgraceful.
Click to expand...


As I said Cashman, I don't know the full details of a parole board hearing and what is taken into account but I know for a fact it isn't just behaviour in prison.
 
...and I still say that the fact that this low-life can even be considered for release after only 14 years inside for murdering someone who complained about the noise he was making is an absolute disgrace and insult to justice. There are many similar sentences being handed out in this country, too. Funny, Stan, you and Eric seem remarkably quiet about that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top