Paulo P

iTrader: (42)

Breaking news now. Shame she won't serve very long

SteveLegacyToo

What has she done??

Paulo P

iTrader: (42)

She was found to be intimidating a witness at the Soham trial

Chip

So why does it make Scoobynet news then?

Just cos she's Carr's mother I guess. So what.

Chip.

tiggers

Chip,

Come on man, get with the beat.

The Scoobynet Kangaroo Court sat weeks ago now and found Maxine Carr as guilty as Myra Hindley hence obviously her mother needs locking up for at least 20 years

tiggers.

Paulo P

iTrader: (42)

I just thought it was good news because intimidating winesses isn't on no matter what the circumstances.

tiggers

Agreed, but at the end of the day thanks to the media and the narrow mindedness of the British public I think Maxine Carr has had a raw deal from this whole affair.

Not saying she shouldn't be punished for what part she genuinely did play, but to be likened to Hindley as she has been by so many is wrong and hence it makes you wonder about her mother's motives in this situation.

Again not saying it's right, but their might be mitigating circumstances up to a point in this case I think.

tiggers.

Dunk

iTrader: (1)

Yeah, lock up her second cousins as well, together with the lollipop man who helped her to school.



D

WRX_Dan

At the end of the day she never harmed the 2 girls, she only lied to protect her boyfriend, who's story she presumably believed.

Comparing her to a mass murderer seems slightly excessive!!!

EddScott

Perhaps she shouldn't be compared to Hindley but FFS people, two young girls were dead and only him there yet she lies to protect him?

Perhaps her mother going to jail should not be headline news but IMO Carr got off lightly.

I know I'm going to upset a few of you by saying this and I apologise but to attempt to justify her actions is F'ing mind-boggling.

tiggers

Well let's not get too far in to this again, but she simply and naively provided an alibi for the man she believed was not capable of these crimes. She then later withdrew that alibi when she realised the truth of what had happened.

Did she pervert the course of justice? - Yes!
Was she naive? - Probably
Is she another Myra Hindley - Yes (if you're the media, the majority of the general public, the SKC), No in truth.
Will she ever be able to lead a normal life? - NO!!!
Is that getting off lightly? - IMHO no, but maybe I'm wrong.

tiggers.

The Guv'nor

She was trying to protect her daughter, fair play to her, I would do ANYTHING for my kids. Agreed it was a despicable crime but Maxine Carr didn't actually do it.
If the boot was on the other foot would you leave your kids out to dry?

T.G.

CrisPDuk

Bring back ducking stools and burnings at the stake I say!

Oh yeah, and while we're at it, you can't beat a good stoning, the ultimate in audience participation!














FFS there's some double standards on this bbs, on one hand we're condemning ALL muslims on the grounds that some fanatics are abusing their religion. then on the other we are have no hesitation in calling for a reversion to mob rule every time a certain news agency perverts the truth in order to sell more copies.
Go Figure

OllyK

Carr did her time, fine. It just bugs me that tax payers will be paying out for the rest of her natural life to protect her, keep her identity secret, sort out a job for here etc etc. It just seems that anybody convicted of a crime gets a better deal than the victims these days.

tiggers

The reason we the taxpayer have to pay out for this is due to the narrow mindedness of the British public (just look at the posts about her on the BBS for starters) and the media. Yes, it's annoying, but are you seriously suggesting she should be thrown to the mob?

tiggers.

gsm1

The costs to keep Carr protected are the fault of ragmags like The Scum.

OllyK

I don't really care who's fault it is, I object to it. Besides if you want to be pedantic it is her fault for backing up Huntley and Huntley's for committing the crime.

If criminals want protection that's fine, but they should have to foot the bill for the most part. I.e. they work and get enough to pay rent on a grotty bedsit and pay for food, the rest goes on their protection and if there is anything left they get that back.

tiggers

She doesn't want protection - she has to have it thanks to the reasons mentioned above which are NOT her fault.

She has done her time and that should be an end to it, but thanks to the Kangaroo Court mentality of the media and much of the British public it won't be will it?

EddScott

Its a joke that the system seems to have to fall over itself to accomodate criminals and the criminals needs. I agree that tabloid papers do nothing but fuel nationwide anger towards these people and I for one cannot being myself to read the utter **** written in these papers.

However, as far as I'm concerned Carr is either incredibly stupid or had some sort of infatuation with Huntley to willingly go along with his version of the truth. Who knows why she changed her story? Granted I'm not in full possesion of the facts but those girls parents have been given a life sentence. She was involved and could well have deliberately tried to hide her involvement or her knowledge or what really happened to protect him and for that she has been let off lightly.

OllyK

If she doesn't want it then we shouldn't be providing it against her wishes. Or did you mean "she would pefer not to have it"? which is slightly different.

There are some reasons that are not her fault, I grant you that, but I don't think she can be totally absolved of any responsibility do you. Yes the media have stirred it all up, but if she hadn't broken the law, she wouldn't have been in court for the media to stir things up in the first place.

blip

[QUOTE=tiggers]...she simply and naively provided an alibi...She then later withdrew that alibi when she realised the truth...QUOTE]

How do you know she 'simply and naively provided an alibi'?

That is her story sure, but considering Huntley wasn't exactly whiter than white when it came to sexual offences how can you be so 100% sure that she didn't have any inkling whatsoever that he was capable of something like this and only changed her story to protect her own neck when things got heavy? Oh no hang on she is the 'real' victim in this isn't she.

Personally I'm sick of the bleeding-heart liberals that now proliferate in this country and only ever consider the 'poor' criminals. It's the main reason our country is in the state it is. The notion that real hard punishment for the worst criminals is cathartic and therefore valuable for our society is totally lost on these limpd*cks - and I'm not referring to Ms Carr here when I say 'worst criminals' before you start grizzling again you muppets

You can f*cking guarantee that the same self-righteous individuals would be crying out for hard punishment and zero compassion for the perpetrator if one of their children was raped and slaughtered. But of course predictably they will say not.

'oh no don't be too hard on them, that would be barbaric'

'ooh, ooh, you're infringing that paedophile's human rights'

'yes of course that child killer has served his 8 year sentence and should now be released - he's done his time, he looks repentant and we have a team of 'experts' who say he is cured and won't offend again', blah, blah, blah....

You people make me sick.

Chip

Chip.

CrisPDuk

Based on that reasoning, I vote we all go down to London and burn the East End to the ground, coz none of them stood up to be counted when the Kray's were doing there thing!

Christ, there are some f**king muppets about these days

the moose

No, she wasn't involved. She wasn't there when the killings took place, she knew nothing of it, didn't dispose of the bodies .....

The ONLY involvement she had was to stick up, mistakenly, for her partner. And you're telling me you'd not do the same for your brother/sister/father/mother/husband/wife? I know I would.

In this case, she was wrong, but her crime was in no way connected to Huntley; in this case people such as yourself perpetuate the view that "she must have known" "no smoke without fire" and so on, which leads to the need for protection. At which point you then shout "disgraceful" even though, indirectly, you're the cause of it!

the moose

[QUOTE=blip]School's out! Beware 16 year old trolls!

OllyK

Boy that was one hell of a jump. I am saying that somebody who was living with the killer. lied for him and then was found guilty in court should take some of the responsibility for the position that she now finds herself in.

Are you trying to suggest that everybody in the Eastend of London was sleeping with Ronnie and Reggie and providing them with alibies or is it just you that happens to be the muppet?? Oh and I can't be arsed to hide a smiley 20 lines down the page

The Guv'nor

How did this stray so far away from the original thread? This is Carr's mother being jailed for intimidating a witness not whether Carr was involved in a crime or not.

Blip, WTF are you on about???????

T.G.

tiggers

Tell you what OllyK next time you get a speeding ticket and pay your fine and collect your points I'm going to rent a mob to come round and torch your car and make your life a living hell for a year or so as I don't think the punishment was harsh enough - is that OK?

Obviously that is not OK, but that seems to be what you are happy to see happen to Maxine Carr.

OllyK

If you want to lie to protect a loved one then that is your perogative of course, however, don't then bitch about it if you get taken to court and are shown to be a lier and get dragged over the coals as a result of it. If you do something that you know is wrong and get caught then face the consequences.

tiggers

Blip,

Sorry, but I cannot see how your rant really relates to the discussion here.

Regards,

tiggers.