Mother of the Year ?

[bhaexpress]

Prison should at least clean 'em up. Even a third of the nine years should be long enough to wean the girl off even methadone - bent screws notwithstanding

Doesn't though, that's part of the problem. They don't do squart for junkies in prison, they give them Antabuse which is very dangerous.

 

[Barrel of Fun]

Prevention is better than cure. Plenty of people do terrible things to children but don't get nine years though. Take your average peodophile.

Paedophile's generally do not get sentences worthy of their crime. Seperate cases and their sentences should not be used as an exact measure. Each case must be judged in it's merits.

I know Anthony Niblett having spent a fair amount of time with him during my work experience and being a family friend. He is a very astute judge of character and I believe he has issued a just punishment.

In this case....
Prevention is better than cure? How can one prevent it, if it has already happened?

 

[bhaexpress]

Prevention is better than cure? How can one prevent it, if it has already happened?

By getting to the root of the problem, easier said than done I know but thats where it starts.

 

[Commander]

Maybe so, but she won't be able to administer them to her 12 year old kid any more.

Exactly.

 

[Brovion]

This woman gave her kid heroin.

Your argument seems to be based on the fact that this 'unfortunate woman' has been failed by society, is at rock bottom and should be helped rather than punished. My point was, that if someone else who has been failed by society and is at rock bottom, killed someone close to you then would you want them to go to prison?

As someone said earlier, "when addicted to this drug, life becomes about your next fix, that's all that matters. She probably knew what she was doing was bad, but it was the easy option, rather than taking care of herself and her son."

So, if this is the case (which it is), then she could have feasibly mugged and stabbed someone to get money for her habit, just as she gave her son heroin because she was not in touch with reality anymore. If she had, why should she be treated differently to how she would have been if her son had died from her giving him this drug?

Sorry, but I just cannot understand your viewpoint on this. I'm all for second chances and helping people, but this woman gave her kid heroin. Sick.

You're still trying to drag murder into it aren't you? As I said that isn't really what we're discussing. But to answer your question, yes, if they killed somebody during a robbery to get cash to pay for their fix then I'd want them to go to prison. You're saying she 'could have' stabbed somebody or the boy 'could have' died, if this was an American court I'd shout "Objection! Pure conjecture!"

At the risk of repeating myself, judge each case on it's merits. This woman didn't kill anybody, deliberately or otherwise.

EDIT - Typo corrected.

 

[bhaexpress]

Maybe so, but she won't be able to administer them to her 12 year old kid any more.

Yes but that won't stop somebody else will it ? I can't see a spell behind bars changing her in a hurry if at all.

 

[Brixtaan]

Believe me she'll soon get drugs inside.

Really? I hope you've informed the Police about this.

 

[bhaexpress]

Really? I hope you've informed the Police about this.

Did you know that 'Police Intelligence' is an oxymoron ?

Drugs are rife in most prisons depsite the best efforts of the authorities to stamp them out. The currency is telephone cards and tobacco.

 

[Easy 10]

Yes but that won't stop somebody else will it ? I can't see a spell behind bars changing her in a hurry if at all.

But the overriding point is, she WON'T be able to harm her son any more. By the time she gets out, her little boy will have grown up (and hopefully will have been fully rehabilitated by his foster parents). Its about getting HER out of the picture so that her son still has a chance in life.

With her banged up for the next 9 years, that gives him every chance.

 

[Barrel of Fun]

But the overriding point is, she WON'T be able to harm her son any more. By the time she gets out, her little boy will have grown up (and hopefully will have been fully rehabilitated by his foster parents). Its about getting HER out of the picture so that her son still has a chance in life.

With her banged up for the next 9 years, that gives him every chance.

Quite right. Plus it is not just there as a deterrent, it is there as a punishment for her unforgivable behaviour.

 

[Gerbil]

That's disgusting. People moan that prisons are overcrowded, no wonder when you've got crypto-fascists like this judge deciding that the best course of action is to send the poor woman to prison for nine years!!

Hopefully it's wrong. Nine months suspended is better, what good is prison going to do?

You've got to be joking.

She gave her NINE YEAR OLD SON f***ing heroine.

Help her rebuild her life? What about the poor kids bloody life I'm sure he loved his mother getteing him hooked on that shit.

You are obviously an example of leftie liberalism gone mad or you don't have any kids and if you do you should be ashamed of yourself for spouting shit like that

 

[Starry]

Reckon it would take a non-parent to disagree with you there Starry mate. And you have more right than the vast majority of us on here to hold that opinion.

Little kids need protecting. Because little kids are vulnerable. Screw the personal f***-ups of the parents. They have ZERO right to inflict their personal f***-ups on their vulnerable little kids, who are people too. Like they say, you need a licence to keep a dog but...

Absolutely.

I hope she sits in that cell for years and suffers and suffers some more.

And for those harping on about prevention being better than cure, it's a bit late when she has already drugged her poor son, sent him to school with wraps and carted him all over East Sussex and London looking for their next hit.

To say we should help her rebuild her life and not feel anger at her is fcuked up. She got lucky, she didn't bury her baby. Those of us who are good parents who do bury our kids through no fault of our own don't get a second chance, we don't get to rebuild our lives and we don't have someone else to blame or a department somewhere that 'failed' us.

She is scum. She screwed up. She gave her son drugs. Rotting in jail is too good for her.

I just hope her son has been able to recover and is able to have a happy, healthy live despite his so called mothers actions.

 

[London Irish]

Reckon it would take a non-parent to disagree with you there Starry mate.

My kid is three years old and I have another on the way. Throughout my voyage into parenthood I have been expecting at virtually any moment to develop very unforgiving and simplistic ideas regarding punishment in child welfare cases but it is hasn't happened yet. Maybe when the second is born in January

 

[Barrel of Fun]

My kid is three years old and I have another on the way. Throughout my voyage into parenthood I have been expecting at virtually any moment to develop very unforgiving and simplistic ideas regarding punishment in child welfare cases but it is hasn't happened yet. Maybe when the second is born in January

Congratulations on your expected arrival.

Do you not agree with the jail sentence?

 

[London Irish]

No, I was rather hoping that it was the rest of you who were joking with your 'Give the bitch what she deserves' attitudes.

I repeat, in a case like this what good does it do anybody; the woman, the boy, society, to send an inadequate, unfortunate woman to prison for NINE YEARS! Surely we should be looking at helping her rebuild her life not just in making sure she's punished some more?

Well, for what it's worth I agree. She has to surely be some kind of threat or danger to the public for us to spend a considerable amount of money locking her up for this length of time.

I can see why she's a danger to herself, she's a total f***-up. I could see why she'd be a danger to any child in her care, but she doesn't have anything in her care any more. Is she a danger to you and me? I just can't see it.

I would rather see the vast sums spent imprisoning people who are no danger to the public spent on intensive, specialised drug rehabilitation and an array of halfway house services to try and give them some kind of carrot to get their lives back in order.

The problem for those on this thread who are advocating just fairly pointless vengance is that she will be back on the street in 4, 5 or 6 years time. If all she's been doing in that time is hanging around the prison drug fixer, she emerges back into society as an ongoing problem again. As Man of Harveys pointed out, this ain't Nazi Germany, so she will be free to have kids again if she wants then.

What is the long-term solution for this wretch of a woman? As a taxpayer I say it's a waste just to use my taxes to just kick the problem down the line for another 5 years. Better the money be spent trying to sort it now. If it fails, at least we'd have tried, prison looks to me a near-certain failure from the get-go.

 

[Barrel of Fun]

Hmmmm. What about punishment, Steve, or are you more worried about the cost to you and the fellow taxpayers?

 

[London Irish]

Hmmmm. What about punishment, Steve, or are you more worried about the cost to you and the fellow taxpayers?

Yes, I'm more concerned about us not having to spend more and more vast sums of money "punishing" this wretch at regular intervals for the next 40 years if there is a chance that her behaviour can be corrected earlier than that.

As for punishment, removing a child from any mother, even one as degraded as this wretch, is one of the most severe punishments you can ever inflict.

 

[Barrel of Fun]

Yes, I'm more concerned about us not having to spend more and more vast sums of money "punishing" this wretch at regular intervals for the next 40 years if there is a chance that her behaviour can be corrected earlier than that.

As for punishment, removing a child from any mother, even one as degraded as this wretch, is one of the most severe punishments you can ever inflict.

"Kelly, who formerly lived in Heathfield, also admitted two counts of child cruelty against the boy, who cannot be named for legal reasons.

continued...

Hove Crown Court heard that Kelly had plied her child with opiates and that she drove him around as she toured Sussex and London in search of drugs.


.........................


Her son, now aged 12, is in foster care and is said to be thriving and back at school."


Thankfully the son seems to be getting his life back on track. As for taking her son away being the worst punishment, she lost any right to call him her son, when she gave him heroin.

This is clear cut and I don't believe there is anything to argue about.

I happily contribute a fair proportion of my wages for these sub-normal human beings to be punished for their wrongdoings.

 

[chip]

Well, for what it's worth I agree. She has to surely be some kind of threat or danger to the public for us to spend a considerable amount of money locking her up for this length of time.

I can see why she's a danger to herself, she's a total f***-up. I could see why she'd be a danger to any child in her care, but she doesn't have anything in her care any more. Is she a danger to you and me? I just can't see it.

I would rather see the vast sums spent imprisoning people who are no danger to the public spent on intensive, specialised drug rehabilitation and an array of halfway house services to try and give them some kind of carrot to get their lives back in order.

The problem for those on this thread who are advocating just fairly pointless vengance is that she will be back on the street in 4, 5 or 6 years time. If all she's been doing in that time is hanging around the prison drug fixer, she emerges back into society as an ongoing problem again. As Man of Harveys pointed out, this ain't Nazi Germany, so she will be free to have kids again if she wants then.

What is the long-term solution for this wretch of a woman? As a taxpayer I say it's a waste just to use my taxes to just kick the problem down the line for another 5 years. Better the money be spent trying to sort it now. If it fails, at least we'd have tried, prison looks to me a near-certain failure from the get-go.

Good Lord, I actually agree with you. What this woman has done is assault her son. There are many children who are damaged by domestic violence and this is effectively an absurd form of it. It must be very unusual for a smack head to behave in the way that she did, but is it really clear that her intentions where malicous?

My first reaction to this was that she should be shot, but I'm not sure that what she did was as evil as it first seems. There are plenty of children whos parents are druggies/prostitutes/child molesters & beaters who remain in the parental home. I think there should be some punishment in this case, but think that this length of prison sentence would not be in the best interests of anyone and the money it would cost could be better spent. In general, it would probably be cheaper to give out free heroin in a managed way than put up with the social costs that we currently have with a criminally controlled distribution and supply network.

 

[Gwylan]

I'm with Brovian/LI on this: I'll go further I don't think any drug addict should be sent to prison. It costs £35k per year to keep someone in prison, it's not going to cure her of addiction - as plenty of people have pointed out, drugs are freely available there - and she'll come out in five years time, ready to starting thieving, or doing whatever it takes to feed her habit.

In the meantime, we (the taxpayer) will support her son through foster care and hope that he comes through OK, although 'looked-after' kids have higher than average rates of mental health problem, are more likely to have criminal records and are more like to perform badly educationally. No doubt, in a few years, the people loudly shouting 'scum' will be able to cheer as he joins his mother in the dock.

What should have happened - if we were a decent society - is that this unfortunate woman should have been treated for her addiction, rehabilitated back into society and reunited with her son. This visceral desire for vengeance that's been exhibited by rather too many people on here shames us all.

I've known a few people who have been addicted to heroin. They were kindly, pleasant people before the drugs took its tool, after a few years they would pimped their grandmother for a hit. They did some despicable things to get money but that doesn't make them 'evil' or 'scum' any more than this woman was. It's just that for an addict, nothing gets in their way.

And one other point, all these people talking about Kelly getting her child addicted obviously didn't bother reading the facts of the story. He got addicted by finding her heroin lying around (terrible I know, but addicts have no concept of health and safety) and she procured him heroin to stop him feeling withdrawal pains. It's a sorry story but a far cry from the image of a wicked mother wantonly driving her son into addiction.