saintwarwick Posted 12 August, 2009 Share Posted 12 August, 2009 This is our magnificent legal sytem at work here - it is reverred around the world as one of the fairest systems in place. It takes hundreds of hours and costs millions of taxpayer pounds to administer - most of it going to politically correct lawyers and judges who are so out of touch with reality it is untrue. A 7.62mm round to the head costs about 13p and can be dispenced in about 0.13 seconds over a range of 10 yards. I know which system I prefer. Good old SLR, let me at them and I won't miss at 600 yards let alone 10. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gingeletiss Posted 12 August, 2009 Share Posted 12 August, 2009 Good old SLR, let me at them and I won't miss at 600 yards let alone 10. Loved the SLR.......trained on the 303, what a rifle!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saintandy666 Posted 12 August, 2009 Share Posted 12 August, 2009 So you know this for sure do you? Have you questioned her yourself? At the trial the Judge said she showed no remorse for the murdered kids, only for herself, by continually lying to the police for weeks. She was manipulative and treated the whole investigation glibly, with no appreciation of the severity of it all. Once she was questioned the first time, she should have confessed she was lying in her statement. To not do so is not "stupid and naive" but knowingly perverting the course of justice. She deserved her sentence and more, but not to be let out early. Unfortunately, there are too many people in this country willing to look for excuses for people like these. The tabloid press may be sweeping in their stories, but people like you, peddling equally unjustified or unsubstantiated theories are just as bad, if not worse. No, I'm not looking for an excuse for her. I'm not defending her at all. She is clearly a ****, but not a murderer. What I am saying isn't unjustified or unsubstantiated, but fact! The court/judge ruled that she had no idea that the murders had been done by Huntley. Stupid, Naive, Selfish; yes, of course... but on a par with a murdering bastard? I think not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Special K Posted 12 August, 2009 Share Posted 12 August, 2009 No, I'm not looking for an excuse for her. I'm not defending her at all. She is clearly a ****, but not a murderer. What I am saying isn't unjustified or unsubstantiated, but fact! The court/judge ruled that she had no idea that the murders had been done by Huntley. Stupid, Naive, Selfish; yes, of course... but on a par with a murdering bastard? I think not. Errrrrr, the Judge didn't "rule" on anything. She was convicted, by a Jury, of perverting the course of justice by knowingly lying to police. End of. And there was no suggestion of her being on par with a murderer in my post :-? don't know where that came from. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saintandy666 Posted 12 August, 2009 Share Posted 12 August, 2009 Errrrrr, the Judge didn't "rule" on anything. She was convicted, by a Jury, of perverting the course of justice by knowingly lying to police. End of. And there was no suggestion of her being on par with a murderer in my post :-? don't know where that came from. Sorry, it was not just a reply to you, but the general opinion of some of the posters on this thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
INFLUENCED.COM Posted 12 August, 2009 Share Posted 12 August, 2009 I don't think Carr believed that Huntley had murdered the girls when asked to provide the alibi and that's why she lied. Your not cuckoo but you are pleased this individual has benefited financially for her role in this crime ?? Has she ever explained where she believed he was when this act took place ? when asked to provide an alibi for somebody that actually was not where they say they were logic would suggest this person has something to hide, he was not being questioned over a punch up or petty theft, it was an alibi to a suspect in the murder of two little girls She provided a false alibi for Huntley believing his word that he as innocent. She's naive and stupid. What word of his did she believe ? the one about the nose bleed and trying to stifle the screams ? My mum can be naive and we all know stupid people but the people I know with those attributes certainly would not provide a false alibi for the ones they love under these circumstances. Maxine Carr didn't know he had murdered the two girls. He was arrested and she created an alibi for him believing his innocence. Stupid and naive, but not the same as knowing he had done it. How do you know she was not aware ? because she said so ? she is a proven liar so therefore everything she says should be considered the same The court/judge ruled that she had no idea that the murders had been done by Huntley. Wrong, she was found guilty of what she was charged with thats all the court/judge can deal with. She did not murder the girls but she contributed to the pain those girls families endured during that period and for that I consider her a partner in the crime. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saintandy666 Posted 12 August, 2009 Share Posted 12 August, 2009 Well, the judge/court accepted she had no knowledge of the murder. She is a bad person for the lie, but not on a par with Huntley who is a child murdering ****. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
benjii Posted 12 August, 2009 Share Posted 12 August, 2009 If and I mean if............... you were the father of one of these girls, how would you stand then. She is evil through and through. Is this the medieval forum? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now