Saint-Armstrong Posted 2 April, 2013 Share Posted 2 April, 2013 Absolute scumbags. How could someone deliberately do this? Anyone watching the shows.....? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dubai_phil Posted 2 April, 2013 Share Posted 2 April, 2013 Wow, that was quick? You lot turned it into a Reality TV series already? Jeez I know I read that your media is pretty tasteless at times but....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pedro Posted 2 April, 2013 Share Posted 2 April, 2013 Absolute scumbags. How could someone deliberately do this? Anyone watching the shows.....? My wife watching in tears, absolute bastards, hope they suffer years of abuse inside. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colinjb Posted 2 April, 2013 Share Posted 2 April, 2013 Obviously a pre-planned documentary on BBC1. I am beyond words at how someone can do what that man orchestrated. The calculated risk that the BBC must make in commissioning shows like this though.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sheaf Saint Posted 3 April, 2013 Share Posted 3 April, 2013 The Mrs and me watched the documentary lastnight. I'm just astounded that anybody could be so callous and show such little regard for the lives of their own children. The poor kids obviously didn't stand a chance of any kind of normal upbringing with these people as parents. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackFrost Posted 3 April, 2013 Share Posted 3 April, 2013 I'm amazed the guy was only jailed for 8 years for attempted murder back in '78 when he stabbed his 17 year old ex-girlfriend 13 times and then attacked the mother when she tried to intervene. How could anyone do this? Simple, he's got a big ego, he's spent the majority of his life getting what he wants and doing what the hell he wants to other people and doesn't give a stuff about anyone apart from himself. The guy should never be let out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CB Saint Posted 3 April, 2013 Share Posted 3 April, 2013 A couple of things I heard on 5live re this Mick bloke Apparently the locals raised thousands of pounds for the kids funerals, and he made a play to get the money signed over to himself personally. Secondly there was a shrine with cuddley toys etc, he wanted to auction the lot and trouser the proceeds Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hockey_saint Posted 3 April, 2013 Share Posted 3 April, 2013 Don't they say that often what truly defines an evil person is a lack of any kind of feeling? well this Mick fella appears to have that aspect of his personality in bundles....I really shouldn't have been surprised at how quickly the women in his life aged as well and let's face it, if you're not part of the solution, you are part of the problem which I think makes them as culpable as him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibden Purlieu Saint Posted 3 April, 2013 Share Posted 3 April, 2013 Can't wait until he gets inside. The guy will cut ear to ear. It seems those of a criminal persuasion seem to have a high moral compass when it comes to issues like this, rape and paedophilia. The guy will die inside. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibden Purlieu Saint Posted 3 April, 2013 Share Posted 3 April, 2013 What I can't believe is the day after the fire and their kids died they were staying in a hotel room which was bugged by the police, and they heard the woman sucking off another man in front of this guy. The DAY AFTER their kids died. Utterly abhorrent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sheaf Saint Posted 4 April, 2013 Share Posted 4 April, 2013 Mick Philpott gets a life sentence... http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-derbyshire-22023117 I doubt he will last 6 months inside. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KelvinsRightGlove Posted 4 April, 2013 Share Posted 4 April, 2013 Mick Philpott gets a life sentence... http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-derbyshire-22023117 I doubt he will last 6 months inside. Too good for him. I'm vehemently opposed to capital punishment. But this level of scumbag is worth the exception. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
solentstars Posted 4 April, 2013 Share Posted 4 April, 2013 Too good for him. I'm vehemently opposed to capital punishment. But this level of scumbag is worth the exception.i think thats the easy way out,i prefer his life is made hell inside everyday and make him suffer that he tops himself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sotonjoe Posted 4 April, 2013 Share Posted 4 April, 2013 15 years is nothing for the death of six kids. Not good enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
solentstars Posted 4 April, 2013 Share Posted 4 April, 2013 (edited) 15 years is nothing for the death of six kids. Not good enough.hes not being let out in 15 years its the minimum he will do before he can apply for parole and doubt he will win that so i think hes in for life.In England and Wales, life imprisonment is a sentence which lasts until the death of the prisoner, although in most cases the prisoner will be eligible for parole (officially termed "early release") after a fixed period set by the judge. This period is known as the "minimum term" (previously known as the "tariff"). In some exceptionally grave cases however, a judge may order that a life sentence should mean life by making a "whole life order." Edited 4 April, 2013 by solentstars Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crazy Diamond Posted 4 April, 2013 Share Posted 4 April, 2013 There were six in the bed and the little one said "can you smell smoke?" Source: Sickipedia Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
for_heaven's_Saint Posted 4 April, 2013 Share Posted 4 April, 2013 There were six in the bed and the little one said "can you smell smoke?" Source: Sickipedia Not sure that's really funny, or appropriate on a serious thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crazy Diamond Posted 4 April, 2013 Share Posted 4 April, 2013 Not sure that's really funny' date=' or appropriate on a serious thread.[/quote'] I thought the mentioning of the source gave it away - I wasn't suggesting it was funny. Not sure about those calling for the death penalty though, I appreciate people are angry and upset but it's not just cause to add another name to the list of the dead in that family. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badgerx16 Posted 4 April, 2013 Share Posted 4 April, 2013 So, is the Daily Mail correct ? Is he a 'Vile product' of the benefits system, or just a sick, self-centered, bastard ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crazy Diamond Posted 4 April, 2013 Share Posted 4 April, 2013 So, is the Daily Mail correct ? Is he a 'Vile product' of the benefits system, or just a sick, self-centered, bastard ? Can't he be both? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
for_heaven's_Saint Posted 4 April, 2013 Share Posted 4 April, 2013 I thought the mentioning of the source gave it away - I wasn't suggesting it was funny. Not sure about those calling for the death penalty though, I appreciate people are angry and upset but it's not just cause to add another name to the list of the dead in that family. Fair enough, and yes I agree; death penalty solves nothing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Duckhunter Posted 4 April, 2013 Share Posted 4 April, 2013 Fair enough' date=' and yes I agree; death penalty solves nothing.[/quote'] Maybe it would have made one of them think again before going through with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hutch Posted 4 April, 2013 Share Posted 4 April, 2013 Maybe it would have made one of them think again before going through with it. I don't think we've ever had capital punishment for manslaughter, nor should we. However callous, stupid, misguided or downright evil, I don't think any of them actually intended to kill the kids. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bearsy Posted 4 April, 2013 Share Posted 4 April, 2013 Maybe it would have made one of them think again before going through with it. this is true, least we could be sure he wouldn't do it again yo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tokyo-Saint Posted 4 April, 2013 Share Posted 4 April, 2013 You are right bear. I have done some research and re-offending rates are very low amongst offenders that got the death sentence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bearsy Posted 4 April, 2013 Share Posted 4 April, 2013 it makes you wonder why they don't apply them more widely? Like when i was done speeding they made me go to how to speed workshop, and it went on so long i had to put my foot down to get home in time for hollyoaks. If they just give me lethal injection i would never have mowed down them kids. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tokyo-Saint Posted 4 April, 2013 Share Posted 4 April, 2013 Politicians - they never listen eh! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sotonjoe Posted 4 April, 2013 Share Posted 4 April, 2013 hes not being let out in 15 years its the minimum he will do before he can apply for parole and doubt he will win that so i think hes in for life.In England and Wales, life imprisonment is a sentence which lasts until the death of the prisoner, although in most cases the prisoner will be eligible for parole (officially termed "early release") after a fixed period set by the judge. This period is known as the "minimum term" (previously known as the "tariff"). In some exceptionally grave cases however, a judge may order that a life sentence should mean life by making a "whole life order." He will be let out in 15 years as long as the parole board don't think he's a danger to society. The nature of his offence ( not an indiscriminate killing spree, but a stupid plan gone wrong) would probably lead the parole board to think it ok to let him out on licence. I stand by what I said. 15years is not enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Viking Warrior Posted 4 April, 2013 Share Posted 4 April, 2013 The other two will only serve half their sentence . Philpott is pure scum look at his previous convictions stabbing g a former girl friend road rage etc etc . I hope he gets done in prison Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hockey_saint Posted 5 April, 2013 Share Posted 5 April, 2013 Personally, I also find the privately-educated, millionaire politician who's jumped on this and used it as an excuse to justify his demolition of the welfare state scum as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
solentstars Posted 5 April, 2013 Share Posted 5 April, 2013 He will be let out in 15 years as long as the parole board don't think he's a danger to society. The nature of his offence ( not an indiscriminate killing spree, but a stupid plan gone wrong) would probably lead the parole board to think it ok to let him out on licence. I stand by what I said. 15years is not enough.you could be right and but i doubt he will be released ,has they will take in his previous violent conviction and the judges damming remarks about him into account and he has to behave himself inside which i doubt he will do,i wish they gave him at least 30 years before he can apply for parole but he was charged with manslaughter not murder.i hope the scum rots inside. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
solentstars Posted 5 April, 2013 Share Posted 5 April, 2013 Personally, I also find the privately-educated, millionaire politician who's jumped on this and used it as an excuse to justify his demolition of the welfare state scum as well. i thought he was disgusting trying to link that with the murders of all those children and shows what a small minded little tory man the guy he is,i thought they would have sacked him by now and replaced him has chancellor with someone who knows about economics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joensuu Posted 5 April, 2013 Share Posted 5 April, 2013 I would have thought this penalty would have been about right had only one child lost their lives. I would have thought 6 back to back life sentences, with possible parole in 90 years time would have been a fairer penalty. Of course, that is assuming that prison is genuinely a punishment, and not essentially a state funded holiday camp. No TV, DVDs, Xbox etc, entertainment should consist of a big stack of books and journals instead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hutch Posted 5 April, 2013 Share Posted 5 April, 2013 ...or a big pile of rocks, a 14lb sledgehammer, a few rolls of hessian and a needle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 5 April, 2013 Share Posted 5 April, 2013 (edited) i thought he was disgusting trying to link that with the murders of all those children and shows what a small minded little tory man the guy he is,i thought they would have sacked him by now and replaced him has chancellor with someone who knows about economics. He wasn't claiming that there was a direct 'cause and effect' link to this man's lifestyle choice and the tragic death of these children. He was saying there should be a discussion in the country as to whether the system encourages SOME people to create a scenario whereby something like this is more likely to happen. I guess I'll be accused of being callous by stripping away the emotional aspect of the situation (just because I look at something logically doesn't mean I'm unaware of the emotional side of the story) but if you watch the various documentaries about this bloke, it's quite clear the only reason all those children were conceived in the first place is because he saw them as a source of income. The stark, unemotional, reality is that those 6 kids would never have been born to die in a house fire if 'the system' wasn't so easily milkable. So, you can't say there's NO connection whatsoever. Of course, the reason people get "outraged" by the likes of Osborne daring to make a connection is because the implication is that they are tarring every welfare claimant with the same brush. Of course "the system" doesn't produce evil scum like this bloke - he would have turned out evil whether there was a system to milk for money or not. So, by 'mending' the welfare system you're never going to rid society of scum like this but you MAY channel their evil in a direction that doesn't involve the sad loss of 6 innocent kids. Edited 5 April, 2013 by trousers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bridge too far Posted 5 April, 2013 Share Posted 5 April, 2013 I'm not so sure that his underlying motive was to get more child benefit, Trousers. I think the whole thing is an awful, dreadful tragedy and I also think that he is despicable. I'm sure he'll get his just deserts in prison. But I've just read this interesting piece and it does suggest to me that fathering so many children is part of his 'need to control everything' mindset. And whilst I think she has been rightly punished, when you read her back story it is clear that she and his other women were also part of this 'control' fixation he had. People wil say that women should walk away from abusive relationships such as the Philpott ones, but none of us have walked in those shoes so we can't really begin to understand why they don't. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-22029904 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 5 April, 2013 Share Posted 5 April, 2013 I'm not so sure that his underlying motive was to get more child benefit, Trousers. That was one of the conclusions that one of the documentaries I watched came to so I'm drawing on that really rather than coming to my own conclusion. I guess there were many contributory factors going on here, including the 'control mentality' aspect, which is why calling for 'a debate in the country' about it is a good thing IMO. The 'debate' may well conclude the welfare system had nothing whatsoever to do with why he had the kids in the first place and treated them like pawns but until we have that debate we'll be no closer to knowing the motivations of scum like this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tokyo-Saint Posted 5 April, 2013 Share Posted 5 April, 2013 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m8z8ygrDSWU&feature=youtube_gdata_player Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bridge too far Posted 5 April, 2013 Share Posted 5 April, 2013 I'm not so sure that a 'debate' will achieve anything at all quite frankly. Let's face it, there have been many, many cases in the past comparable to this and worse where the perpetrator(s) haven't been on benefits. The debate should be about why some people have the need to control others in such a way but there will forever be different schools of thought about behaviour, psychology etc. and no conclusion will ever be reached. I'm a big fan of Oliver James who has much to say on the subject. FWIW I don't think they intended to kill those poor children (hence the manslaughter rather than murder charge). I think he manipulated her into taking part in the plan and none of them foresaw the consequences or risks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
solentstars Posted 5 April, 2013 Share Posted 5 April, 2013 He wasn't claiming that there was a direct 'cause and effect' link to this man's lifestyle choice and the tragic death of these children. He was saying there should be a discussion in the country as to whether the system encourages SOME people to create a scenario whereby something like this is more likely to happen. I guess I'll be accused of being callous by stripping away the emotional aspect of the situation (just because I look at something logically doesn't mean I'm unaware of the emotional side of the story) but if you watch the various documentaries about this bloke, it's quite clear the only reason all those children were conceived in the first place is because he saw them as a source of income. The stark, unemotional, reality is that those 6 kids would never have been born to die in a house fire if 'the system' wasn't so easily milkable. So, you can't say there's NO connection whatsoever. Of course, the reason people get "outraged" by the likes of Osborne daring to make a connection is because the implication is that they are tarring every welfare claimant with the same brush. Of course "the system" doesn't produce evil scum like this bloke - he would have turned out evil whether there was a system to milk for money or not. So, by 'mending' the welfare system you're never going to rid society of scum like this but you MAY channel their evil in a direction that doesn't involve the sad loss of 6 innocent kids. i think osbourne knew what he was doing and playing to the gallery and showed him to be a little man in my opinion but agree that welfare system needs mending and agree with alot of the changes which limit the total amount of welfare a family can get but i cannot understand how philpott a ex able bodied soldier was not made to work and get his ass kicked was allowed to abuse the system for the last 30 years under both tory and labour governments,despite them knowing he was a waster. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 5 April, 2013 Share Posted 5 April, 2013 i think osbourne knew what he was doing and playing to the gallery and showed him to be a little man in my opinion but agree that welfare system needs mending and agree with alot of the changes which limit the total amount of welfare a family can get but i cannot understand how philpott a ex able bodied soldier was not made to work and get his ass kicked was allowed to abuse the system for the last 30 years under both tory and labour governments,despite them knowing he was a waster. Yep, agree that Osborne, like all politicians, said what his 'audience' wanted to hear. Whether it was a reasonable thing to say is a matter of opinion I guess Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 5 April, 2013 Share Posted 5 April, 2013 I'm not so sure that a 'debate' will achieve anything at all quite frankly. Let's face it, there have been many, many cases in the past comparable to this and worse where the perpetrator(s) haven't been on benefits. The debate should be about why some people have the need to control others in such a way but there will forever be different schools of thought about behaviour, psychology etc. and no conclusion will ever be reached. I'm a big fan of Oliver James who has much to say on the subject. FWIW I don't think they intended to kill those poor children (hence the manslaughter rather than murder charge). I think he manipulated her into taking part in the plan and none of them foresaw the consequences or risks. Don't disagree with you and, yep, the root cause here is someone with an evil mentality wanting to control everyone and everything in his path. I think it's right to look at the environments these people operate in and ask ourselves whether 'society' was in any small way making it easier for him to operate in the way he did. Whether we like it or not evil people do use children as pawns in their em quest to control and the more pawns they are able to 'afford' the more controlling they can become. I just don't think we should make it easy for these scumbags to be scumbags. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Viking Warrior Posted 5 April, 2013 Share Posted 5 April, 2013 Hockey saint. I thought Osborne was responding to a question re benefits and philpotts sentences and as usual it's been edited to give it a total different spin by the BBC . And then they go and ask balls for his comments on the osbournes response . Wasnt it labour who allowed the few to abuse the benefits system in the first place . in a similar story Cameron on his visit to Scotland . Responded to a question on jobs in the arms industry and trident during his visit to scotland , Mrs krankie was asked for her response and suprise suprise she was totally scathing about him . She thinks every think everything will be wonderful when they get Independance . Why can't politicians s work together to get this country out of the mess it's in Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hutch Posted 5 April, 2013 Share Posted 5 April, 2013 The debate should be about why some people have the need to control others in such a way but there will forever be different schools of thought about behaviour, psychology etc. and no conclusion will ever be reached. I'm a big fan of Oliver James who has much to say on the subject. Sorry B, but I can't agree with that. The debate should be about why so many idiots who are patently not fit to be parents in the proper and legal sense are left in charge of so many children, and conversely why so many patently fit potential parents are rejected for adoption or fostering because they vote for the wrong political party or have the wrong coloured skin or the responsible social worker just doesn't like them. Solve that and you can go a long way to getting rid of the worst abuses. FWIW I don't think they intended to kill those poor children (hence the manslaughter rather than murder charge). I think he manipulated her into taking part in the plan and none of them foresaw the consequences or risks. I agree with that bit. Fit parents? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted 5 April, 2013 Share Posted 5 April, 2013 It's a difficult one. It's easy to look back in hindsight and say they should have had their children taken off them, but if they had behaved normally or hidden any misdeeds up until the fire then how was anyone supposed to know about it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bridge too far Posted 5 April, 2013 Share Posted 5 April, 2013 Well I know that their actions led to the deaths of 6 children but, from all accounts, the children were actually well fed, well clothed and happy. Was there any evidence of physical cruelty towards the children? I don't know. I can think of instances of poor parenting where, to the outside world, the parents appear to be first rate. Think of the huge percentage of sexual abuse of children perpetrated by members of the child's own family - children from all backgrounds. Who would ever want to be the arbiter of what makes a good parent? Smacks a bit of eugenics to my mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted 5 April, 2013 Share Posted 5 April, 2013 Well I know that their actions led to the deaths of 6 children but, from all accounts, the children were actually well fed, well clothed and happy. Was there any evidence of physical cruelty towards the children? I don't know. I can think of instances of poor parenting where, to the outside world, the parents appear to be first rate. Think of the huge percentage of sexual abuse of children perpetrated by members of the child's own family - children from all backgrounds. Who would ever want to be the arbiter of what makes a good parent? Smacks a bit of eugenics to my mind. Yeah I agree with that. This bloke decided to do sonethibg idiotic but that doesn't mean he wasn't a capable parent beforehand (not that I know if he was or not.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hutch Posted 5 April, 2013 Share Posted 5 April, 2013 Who would ever want to be the arbiter of what makes a good parent? Smacks a bit of eugenics to my mind. There's the problem. I think there are too many people like you (and that's not intended to be a criticism, it's a difficult problem). I consider myself to be a fit parent. I don't know whether I'm a good parent or not. My point was that it's not a real option in the UK, because you don't have a system for it. You are so scared to take a child into safekeeping in case you are accused of being sexist, racist, homophobic or whatever, and even if you do you are even more scared of handing them over to somebody else, either on a temporary or permanent basis, in case anything goes wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hutch Posted 5 April, 2013 Share Posted 5 April, 2013 Taking Hypo's point, I don't know either. What I was suggesting was that it should be the subject of real debate, without party politics interfering. Six lives might have been saved if those children had been taken into safe care. Bear in mind you had 14 people living in a 3 bedroom house, including wife and mistress, father with jail time for attempted murder and GBH, accused of rape, and his mrs bending over the snooker table and giving blow jobs to his mates on request. Probably worth the local Social Services having a look don't you think? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted 5 April, 2013 Share Posted 5 April, 2013 Taking Hypo's point, I don't know either. What I was suggesting was that it should be the subject of real debate, without party politics interfering. Six lives might have been saved if those children had been taken into safe care. Bear in mind you had 14 people living in a 3 bedroom house, including wife and mistress, father with jail time for attempted murder and GBH, accused of rape, and his mrs bending over the snooker table and giving blow jobs to his mates on request. Probably worth the local Social Services having a look don't you think? But what I was saying was that the local social services are not some omnipotent being that can see everything. If on the outside they seemingly were fine then it's very difficult to intrude on someone's life to find out. In regards to your other point I'm glad it's difficult to separate children from their families. Imo this should really be a measure of last resort and where there are problems the solution should always be to give the family support and understanding unless the child is in immediate danger or where all other avenues have been exhausted. The preference should always be to keep the family unit together where possible. 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