Ian Huntley trial...

[palexander]

Anyone got any views on this emotive news story?

Personally, I thought his story was fully conceivable (wether I believe it or not). He has admitted to the girls dying with him, him moving and burying them, de-clothing them etc so its not as if he is hiding that... though I suppose he is bang to rights according to the forensics...

You wouldnt know exactly how you would react in the same situation - you know how you think you would (i.e. phone the poilce etc).

One thing that has troubled me from the very start, is if he did murder them, how (and why) did he do it so quickly? If they did just turn up on his doorstep and went into his house did he immediately think "oh... I'll murder these girls now" or did he set it up via a chat room or something??

I also think its a bit bizarre that the pathologist claimed it to be 'impossible' for the girl to drown in the bath unless drugged or drunk. What if she smashed her head and passed out? Thought the pathologist should be impartial...

 

[Matt the Shrimp]

Quote[/b] (pboreham @ Nov. 27 2003,12:46)]One thing that has troubled me from the very start, is if he did murder them, how (and why) did he do it so quickly? If they did just turn up on his doorstep and went into his house did he immediately think "oh... I'll murder these girls now" or did he set it up via a chat room or something??

It's not known how long they were in the house for before they died, but it is known that there was plenty of previous contact: one of them (Holly?) reportedly had a crush on him, and of course they both knew Maxine well since she was their classroom assistant.

Quote[/b] (pboreham @ Nov. 27 2003,12:46)]Thought the pathologist should be impartial...

As for the pathologist, you'll invariably find that expert evidence on pathology is brought by both prosecution and defence.  Whilst his or her main duty is to the court, undoubtedly the home office pathologist brought by the prosecution will, if there are two possible causes one of which will lead to a conviction, tend to lean in a particular way as regards to the evidence.

It's such a sad story, though. I just hope that it is properly dealt with by the court and press alike.

Matt

 

[Vange Shrimper]

The thing i dont understand is what posseses someone to murder 2 young girls. It's awful

 

[palexander]

Yea, its terribly sad Matt (I knew you'd reply!

)

Thing is, if Huntleys story is true and he is convicted anyway, that also is sad.

Not sure if he'd ever get a fair trial, but I dont think its a cut and dry as I once thought.

That reminds me of when I did jury service. The case was GBH - 3 lads who badly beat 2 brothers in public. There were witnesses, positive ID's, convincing forensics, the lot. During summing up, we all argued for pretty much 2 days and in the end agreed on a "Not-Guilty" verdict, 11-1.

The clerk of the court (who was a spot on chap and got to know us well in those 10 days as we were the last case running before X-Mas) said that he has NEVER been involved in a more 'guilty' verdict case than that, yet we still found them innocent! Strange ole world...

 

[steveh1510]

Quote[/b] (Vange Shrimper @ Nov. 27 2003,13:02)]murder

Innocent 'til proven guilty, Hils....

 

[Matt the Shrimp]

Quote[/b] (pboreham @ Nov. 27 2003,13:06)]Thing is, if Huntleys story is true and he is convicted anyway, that also is sad.

Not sure if he'd ever get a fair trial, but I dont think its a cut and dry as I once thought.

More than sad - it would be a tragedy and a travesty. The whole point of the three pillars of the criminal justice system - trial by jury, innocent until proven guilty and beyond all reasonable doubt - is so that we can live up to the maxim that Lord Coke (pronounced "Cook"), one of the fathers of the English Legal system, established in 1603:

"It is better that a hundred guilty men go free, than one innocent man be deprived of his liberty"

You see, John Stuart Mill wasn't actually expressing that much of an original concept in On Liberty...

As for jury service - glad to say that I can never do it!

Matt

 

[Vange Shrimper]

Quote[/b] (steveh1510 @ Nov. 27 2003,13:13)]

Quote[/b] (Vange Shrimper @ Nov. 27 2003,13:02)]murder

Innocent 'til proven guilty, Hils....

I wasnt accusing him. I'm just saying why would anyone wanna do anything like that?

 

[steveh1510]

Quote[/b] (Vange Shrimper @ Nov. 27 2003,13:16)]

Quote[/b] (steveh1510 @ Nov. 27 2003,13:13)]

Quote[/b] (Vange Shrimper @ Nov. 27 2003,13:02)]murder

Innocent 'til proven guilty, Hils....

I wasnt accusing him. I'm just saying why would anyone wanna do anything like that?

Yeah I know, its not murder as yet though.

 

[chadded]

Quote[/b] (pboreham @ Nov. 27 2003,12:46)]I also think its a bit bizarre that the pathologist claimed it to be 'impossible' for the girl to drown in the bath unless drugged or drunk. What if she smashed her head and passed out? Thought the pathologist should be impartial...

As far as I was aware, the pathologist was 'confused' (wrong word maybe) as to how a young child could drown in a bath accidently when two other people (at least) were also present in the room.

 

[palexander]

2 people ... a grown man in blind panic trying to quieten/pacify a screaming 10 year old child

 

[chadded]

Quote[/b] (pboreham @ Nov. 27 2003,13:25)]2 people ... a grown man in blind panic trying to quieten/pacify a screaming 10 year old child

Don't believe it. I'm not sure which child drowned, but the girls were best friends, surely one would have wanted to save the other. In which case, for a moment (If Huntley should be believed) both the defendant and one of the children would be working for a common goal- saving the other child.

BTW, Huntley claimed there was 18 inches of water in the bath at the time. The baths' overflow was measured in court yesterday at 11 inches......

 

[sufc_stu]

Un f**king believable how the hell can two girls be killed at the same time, then be burried in the same place “BURIED” and then all the evidence is covered up. AND YOUR SAYING THE VERDICT ISNT MURDER YET!

Huntley deserves to be put in a cell with no windows, no bed, a hole in the floor to release his bowles, enough food and water to keep him alive forever and as a treat on a Friday 4 great big poofs rape and beat him for the day!!!!!

THE MAN IS SICK AND SO IS HIS WIFE!!!!

 

[palexander]

Quote[/b] (sufc_stu @ Nov. 27 2003,13:33)]Un f**king believable how the hell can two girls be killed at the same time, then be burried in the same place “BURIED” and then all the evidence is covered up. AND YOUR SAYING THE VERDICT ISNT MURDER YET!

Huntley deserves to be put in a cell with no windows, no bed, a hole in the floor to release his bowles, enough food and water to keep him alive forever and as a treat on a Friday 4 great big poofs rape and beat him for the day!!!!!

THE MAN IS SICK AND SO IS HIS WIFE!!!!

f**king hell... if this is the future of opinions in this country... Matt must be turning in his grave...

Apart from your amazing outburst, Ian Huntley isnt married... Maxine Carr is his ex-girlfriend...

 

[chadded]

Quote[/b] (sufc_stu @ Nov. 27 2003,13:33)]Un f**king believable how the hell can two girls be killed at the same time, then be burried in the same place “BURIED” and then all the evidence is covered up. AND YOUR SAYING THE VERDICT ISNT MURDER YET!

Huntley deserves to be put in a cell with no windows, no bed, a hole in the floor to release his bowles, enough food and water to keep him alive forever and as a treat on a Friday 4 great big poofs rape and beat him for the day!!!!!

THE MAN IS SICK AND SO IS HIS WIFE!!!!

Stu, he is innocent until proven guilty. Now, the way the press have painted the picture so far, then yea, he probably is guilty, but the press want a guilty verdict. Im not saying hes innocent, but you have to be patient over all this.

 

[Wessex Blue]

Quote[/b] (sufc_stu @ Nov. 27 2003,13:33)]Un f**king believable how the hell can two girls be killed at the same time, then be burried in the same place “BURIED” and then all the evidence is covered up. AND YOUR SAYING THE VERDICT ISNT MURDER YET!

Huntley deserves to be put in a cell with no windows, no bed, a hole in the floor to release his bowles, enough food and water to keep him alive forever and as a treat on a Friday 4 great big poofs rape and beat him for the day!!!!!

THE MAN IS SICK AND SO IS HIS WIFE!!!!

Personally I'd rather see him put in a wicker man and then be burnt at a public execution! But then I'm just a softy old liberal at heart.  

 

[steveh1510]

The Verdict isn't murder yet! He hasn't been fund guilty!

As it is I think its too much of a coincidence that a series of accidents occurred that resulted in this, but admit its a possibility.

How can you tell by looking at a btah full of water what the depth is? i couldn't........

Also bear in mind these are ten year olds, whilst an adults reaction maybe to save their friend, would a childs? or would it be to scream as has been said?

The thing that gets me is why is this explanation only coming out now? Why not when he was first interviewed?

 

[sufc_stu]

Quote[/b] (steveh1510 @ Nov. 27 2003,13:38)]The thing that gets me is why is this explanation only coming out now? Why not when he was first interviewed?

Because he murdered them and thought he could get away with it! SICK!!!!

 

[Wessex Blue]

Quote[/b] (steveh1510 @ Nov. 27 2003,13:38)]The Verdict isn't murder yet! He hasn't been fund guilty!

As it is I think its too much of a coincidence that a series of accidents occurred that resulted in this, but admit its a possibility.

How can you tell by looking at a btah full of water what the depth is? i couldn't........

Also bear in mind these are ten year olds, whilst an adults reaction maybe to save their friend, would a childs? or would it be to scream as has been said?

The thing that gets me is why is this explanation only coming out now? Why not when he was first interviewed?

Because they're not allowed to reveal certain details before the trial as it may prejudice it!

I'd quite like to go to a stoning as well, get a few nice nodules of sharp flint, that should do the trick. Anyone else have any preferences. What about hung drawn & quartered?

 

[Matt the Shrimp]

Quote[/b] (pboreham @ Nov. 27 2003,13:35)]

Quote[/b] (sufc_stu @ Nov. 27 2003,13:33)]Un f**king believable how the hell can two girls be killed at the same time, then be burried in the same place “BURIED” and then all the evidence is covered up. AND YOUR SAYING THE VERDICT ISNT MURDER YET!

Huntley deserves to be put in a cell with no windows, no bed, a hole in the floor to release his bowles, enough food and water to keep him alive forever and as a treat on a Friday 4 great big poofs rape and beat him for the day!!!!!

THE MAN IS SICK AND SO IS HIS WIFE!!!!

f**king hell... if this is the future of opinions in this country... Matt must be turning in his grave...

Apart from your amazing outburst, Ian Huntley isnt married... Maxine Carr is his ex-girlfriend...

Steady!! I'm still alive and well, thanks very much!

It does, however, turn the stomach to read stuff like that.

Stu - hang your head in shame, sir. You are not at the trial. You have not heard every minute's worth of evidence.

Therefore, how in God's earth do you claim to have the knowledge to be this man's judge, jury, and sentencing officer?

IF he is found guilty (and I stress the word IF), we can then make pronouncements on what we should like to happen to him.

Until then, we should steer well clear of the media bandwagon which has decided to try him according to their own "laudable" standards, and wait to hear what the jury of 12 good and true men and women have to say.

Matt

 

[steveh1510]

Quote[/b] (sufc_stu @ Nov. 27 2003,13:41)]

Quote[/b] (steveh1510 @ Nov. 27 2003,13:38)]The thing that gets me is why is this explanation only coming out now? Why not when he was first interviewed?

Because he murdered them and thought he could get away with it! SICK!!!!  

How the hell do you know that for sure? Don't believe what is written in The Sun completely.

Now he may well be guilty, he also may not. But he is entitled to a fair trial as everyone is.

Just wait until all the evidence is out before judging.