Can't be named for legal reasons.

[Falmer Flutter ©]

Why ?

Well, I'm sure there are people with a better grasp of the law than me, but essentially the owner of this site could be liable to contempt of court for breaking reporting restrictions, especially if this is a UK-based website. Although the internet is pretty much a grey area at present, I'm not sure Bozza would want to take the risk. Any sites not in the UK seem to be able to do what they like, although most of the official international news sites seem to be keeping schtum.

Also, if there are any on-going cases then this would be sub judice and could prejudice any future trial. Very unlikely, but who knows who reads NSC. It's been widely reported that the names are available on the web, so I don't think it's necessary for them to be on here. Like I say, just my advice.

 

[The Wookiee]

...however, on this occasion, deleting the names and link off this website seems a bit pointless given that a 2 second google search will tell you everything in this case (including names, pictures and addresses of the accused), as would a search on facebook.

Thats why I questioned it.

 

[readingstockport]

Turns out the twat who did most of the torturing of the baby is a bnp supporting, nazi worshiping right wing wanker.

 

[eastlondonseagull]

Robert Murat this week accepted an out of court settlement from Sky News for defamation of character , all down to the Portuguese authorities naming him as a suspect. He earlier was awarded £500k compensation from various newspaper titles who did the same.

What about that poor sod who was named and had his home identified after being linked to the prostitute murders in Ipswich?! He was getting attacked in the street - and he'd done absolutely nothing wrong, poor sod.

Information has to be kept secret in certain situations, for obvious reasons. But I, too, find it hard to understand why the mum and boyfriend are still unidentified when they've been found GUILTY.

 

[Brighton Breezy]

Information has to be kept secret in certain situations, for obvious reasons. But I, too, find it hard to understand why the mum and boyfriend are still unidentified when they've been found GUILTY.

BOUND to be because there are further charges pending. No other reason I can think of.

 

[eastlondonseagull]

BOUND to be because there are further charges pending. No other reason I can think of.

Was thinking that myself, Richie.

.

 

[London Calling]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Richie Morris
BOUND to be because there are further charges pending. No other reason I can think of.

Was thinking that myself, Richie

keep up, unfortunetely there is also a separate trial for their abuse of their 3 year old

 

[Albion Rob]

I can't believe I'm sad enough to be posting this while on holiday in India but I do think it would be abhorrent if a subsequent charge against anyone in the Baby P case had to be dropped because it was presumed they would not be able to get a fair trial through all the exposure on the internet.

I'm not saying it would be NSCs fault but defence lawyers get paid a lot of money for being very cunning.

Unlike others, I'm happy for them to remain anonymous until the outcome of any trials that may or may not be pending - I have every confidence that any ban on identification would then be lifted and our renowned British press could go to town on them.

 

[readingstockport]

Apparently it has now already been raised within the top level of legal circles and the CPS that the names are all over the internet. These are the people who have to make a descision on whether these 2 (or 3) can get a fair trial. Expect that even if a trail takes place an appeal to be successful.

 

[London Calling]

Apparently it has now already been raised within the top level of legal circles and the CPS that the names are all over the internet. These are the people who have to make a descision on whether these 2 (or 3) can get a fair trial. Expect that even if a trail takes place an appeal to be successful.

I assume that a jury of trusted men and women will be chosen. I would still say that a lower proprtion of the pop. are internet users, less so, are using the internet on this case, even less on knowing who these punters are.

Whilst I have been pulled in, Ms LC has been so shocked, she's not looking or reading at all about the cases. Even now, I couldn't tell you their names.

 

[Highfields Seagull]

Unlike others, I'm happy for them to remain anonymous until the outcome of any trials that may or may not be pending - I have every confidence that any ban on identification would then be lifted and our renowned British press could go to town on them.

Although even after this, anonymity may still be appropriate. Not to protect them, but to continue to protect the identity of the victim so that, perhaps, the child may get a chance at a normal life.

 

[DIFFBROOK]

Apparently it has now already been raised within the top level of legal circles and the CPS that the names are all over the internet. These are the people who have to make a descision on whether these 2 (or 3) can get a fair trial. Expect that even if a trail takes place an appeal to be successful.

You can bet your bottom dollar that some lawyer will argue about their Human Rights. Makes me feel sick even thinking about it.

I'm not one for the death penalty, but I truly hope that they never see daylight again, and have the sh*t kicked out of them every day and live in fear of that beating every day and night. Exactly what they put that child through.

That poor liitle boy would have made an adoptive family so proud and would have loved him so much.....I'm almost in tears writing this.

What will happen of course is that they will get 15 years and so be out (in the womens case) still younger than I am now (I'm 42).

 

[London Calling]

You can bet your bottom dollar that some lawyer will argue about their Human Rights. Makes me feel sick even thinking about it.

I'm not one for the death penalty, but I truly hope that they never see daylight again, and have the sh*t kicked out of them every day and live in fear of that beating every day and night. Exactly what they put that child through.

That poor liitle boy would have made an adoptive family so proud and would have loved him so much.....I'm almost in tears writing this.

What will happen of course is that they will get 15 years and so be out (in the womens case) still younger than I am now (I'm 42).

I imagine if he had survived and also for his sister, love and affection would have been very hard to come to terms with.


There is a kid in my daughter's reception class that is very angry violent - 5 years old - I wonder where he gets that from?

 

[DIFFBROOK]

I imagine if he had survived and also for his sister, love and affection would have been very hard to come to terms with.


There is a kid in my daughter's reception class that is very angry violent - 5 years old - I wonder where he gets that from?

You would be surprised what children can overcome. I independently visit a young lad who is in foster care. He too was beaten black and blue as a small boy by his father. He has a very long scar on his head. However, he is not violent and accepts love and attention and is a very pleasant manner about him.

Yes, he is quite nervous and no doubt his situation has seriously affected him, but I think that is more to do with being in an unstable foster environment than what has gone on in his early life. Whether it comes out in later life, who knows. But currently he is not a violent person

 

[cjd]

I was thinking the same. There is a court case ongoing and it could easily constitute contempt.

More importantly if their defence team could show that there has been extensive publicity surrounding the case then their right to a fair trial would without a doubt be compromised and it may result in themwalking on the second trial charge.


People really ought to think occasionally about this type of thing. You may want to kick the f*** out of the scrotes and quite frankly (and some of you will probably be surprised by this terminal 'liberal' that I am) I would find it hard to make myself stop you but they still have the right to a fair trail.

Although I dont think for a minute the publishing of their names etc would mean they can walk free because of it.................maybe it would be a better idea, to just let the public deal with them. Either way...........they are "dead people walking".

 

[seagull_special]

If we are talking about the Baby "P" case, then I understand there is another child in the family and God help the poor little devil.

The thing that really gets me about baby 'P' is that he had a horrid life at the hands of monsters and they even took his name.