Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

Is Maxine Carr innocent ( ish ) ?







Simster

"the man's an arse"
Jul 7, 2003
54,763
Surrey
The worst thing about Huntley in this trial is that he's so busy lying to make his story fit the facts as they come out, that he hasn't given the jury any inkling as to why it might have happened.

I have my suspicions as to how this whole situation manifested itself but there has been no reason for the prosecution to coax it out of him. As a school caretaker, I suspect he was the subject of cheeky backchat and lip from kids who maybe he thought had it all. One day, maybe these two girls flipped a switch in him and he had enough, decided to teach them a lesson, thought he had killed one (by accident?) and then thought he'd cover his tracks by making sure they were both dead. I don't no.

I'm not making excuses for him, just trying to understand the motivation for killing those poor girls. As it is, he appears to be a phsycopath.
 


Spiros

Well-known member
Jul 9, 2003
2,374
Too far from the sun
The pointer for me is that once it was clear to her that Huntley had killed the girls she dumped him. Although what she did was wrong, I think she knew about him being fitted up before for the rape and wanted to stop it happening again thinking that there is no way he would have done it. I think if she had suspected him of abducting the girls she would have shopped him herself as by all accounts (including some from the kids own parents) she was very fond of them.
 


DTES

Well-known member
Jul 7, 2003
6,022
London
Dick Knights Mum said:
She is clearly guilty of perverting the course of justice, as would anyone else who followed the same path. But Myra Hindley she aint. She made some bad decisions but she didn't kill anyone.

Spot on. She's got to go down for perverting the course of justice, but she didn't kill them.
 


Albion Rob

New member
Whatever happens, she will have to live with what she has done and she doesn't seem as crazy as Huntley.

I would suggest she will be dead by the time she is 30.

I do have a bit of sympathy for her position, she came home from a nice weekend to find her boyfriend had gone and murdered those two poor girls. Her life was changed forever in that moment and she appeared to panic and did exactly what Huntley wanted.

She should have told the police, no doubt about it, but she didn't do anything to contribute to being in that position.

It amazes me that Huntley just reckons he can outwith the police and the legal system.
 




Brovion

In my defence, I was left unsupervised.
NSC Patron
Jul 6, 2003
19,687
Dick Knights Mum said:
She is clearly guilty of perverting the course of justice, as would anyone else who followed the same path. But Myra Hindley she aint. She made some bad decisions but she didn't kill anyone.
I agree as well. To call her the 'New Myra Hindley' as some of the more excitable tabloids have done is disgusting. She wasn't there, she didn't do it. Ok she lied and will get done for it but that should be the end of it. Only it won't be. As another poster has said when (if ) she comes out she'll be hounded for the rest of her life.
 


southstandandy

WEST STAND ANDY
Jul 9, 2003
5,957
Why spend all the tax payer's money ?

If ever two people were guilty then these two are (and usually I'm all for the innocent until proven guilty principle)
 






Lady Whistledown

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Jul 7, 2003
47,499
Maxine Carr seems the gullible and easily influenced type: the school she worked at didn't offer her a permanent job because she was incapable of maintaining an appropriate distance between herself and the pupils. Nothing sinister meant by that, purely that she was too friendly and not in a position to gain the respect and trust of the kids.

i'm guessing Huntley is a pretty dominant character, the type who always looks for weaker people who won't stand up to him. Witness all the attention seeking behaviour before they found the bodies of Holly and Jessica.

Maxine Carr obviously loved the guy and lets face it, if the one person you love tells you they have been accused of something they didn't do, your inclination is going to be to believe them, at least until you have been presented with irrefutable evidence to the contrary. So she clearly lied to the police, but maybe just maybe she genuinely believed (or wanted to believe) he didn't do it. She is still guilty of perverting the course of justice, but I honestly doubt she was fully aware of what he did until all the evidence was put before her. She called him "that thing" in court today, so it seems the gravity of the case has now hit her.
 


larus

Well-known member
From what I've heard so far, he's guilty.

As for her, lets look at the facts and not the hysteria.

1. She was in Grimsby - (can't hold that against her).
2. She knew he had seen the girls in the house.
3. He did not tell her that he had killed them, either accidentally or on purpose.
4. She thought that he had an unproven rape charge on his record.

What has she done. She gave him an alibi because of her love for him and her naive fear that he may get fitted up by the OB (gosh, thay don't do things like that do they).

All sh'e done is to be stupid and lie. Not to conceal the murders, but to protect him from getting accused of something she thought he hadn't done.
 
Last edited:






Albion and Premier League latest from Sky Sports


Top
Link Here