Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.

2 bottles of wine - 10 joints

edited September 2007 in Not Sports Related
in charge of a little granddaughter and ripped to pieces by a pit bull yet gets acquitted of gross negligence.

Sorry afka this is not a political rant just cannot believe this has happened. How can a jury have cleared this woman. Yes I know she has to live with the guilt but all the same.
«1

Comments

  • I think most parents and grandparents feel the same way Arf, sorry Ledge.
  • Ledge, can you provide a reference or some context for this because not everyone knows what it's about?
  • she already has a life sentence
    but I do think the lad who owned the illegal dog should've been punished more
  • Here's the story:
    BBC
  • I was shocked at the verdict
  • Thats Liverpool for you....

    At least the bloke who owned him got a spell inside.

    If that was my little girl I dont think I could be held responsible for my actions against the woman and her son.
  • I can't help but think the parents are slightly responsible as well, she can't have down all ten joints in the evening. They must have knowingly left their children in the charge of a woman under the influence of drugs and alcohol.

    The whole thing is a mess and it has torn the family apart (both her daughters gave evidence for the prosecution) they will all suffer for their part in this for the rest of their lives. Like someone else has already said her son should be banged up for longer, pitbulls are banned and the dog would have enventually mauled someone even with all the "precautions".
  • This is making me angry on so many levels but from reading the report it seems like the jury had to decide whether what she did was a crime in law rather than her being a totally irresponsible and negligent person.

    There is no doubt - and it was accepted by the defence - that Jacqueline Simpson owed a duty of care towards her granddaughter," he said.

    "However, the jury by its verdict have accepted that, if there was a breach of her duty of care it was not such that it amounted to a crime."


    If I had a smackhead, alchy, stoner granny she wouldn't be coming any where near my child let alone babysitting for him. But then again if I was brought up in a family like that how would I turn out?

    And don't do drugs! If you want to know why look at the picture in the report.
  • My freind John used to have a pitbull when we were young and it was a perfectly charming dog. The problem lies with the sort of people that choose to own that sort of dog because of media hype i.e. its a killer. When trained to kill all dogs are violent. When i was a child it was German sheperds, then Rotwiellers and Dobermans that always got the bad press.
  • Pit bulls are bred to kill.
  • Sponsored links:


  • All very sad but you're right, who would leave their young child with a stoned, heroin dealing granny with a dangerous dog on the loose. But she is to blame.

    What is the difference between a pitbull and staffordshire bull terrier?
  • Staffordshires were bred as fighting dogs too and are closely related yet they seem to be able to resist killing children is it because thier owners are less inclined to break the law? Bull terriers were originally bred for bull baiting but thier temprement is always controlled by the owner.
  • Before I moved house my next door neighbour's daughter had a Staffie which she used to look after whilst she was at work, they look the same but tend to have the personality of a Labrador. Powerful yet soppy, although they chew everything especially plastic.

    Red was a handful though and I used to walk her for Edna (as she was in her 80s) but she used to lick anyone she met. i would never consider a pitbull but i love Staffies and I also think Rottweilers are cute.
  • [cite]Posted By: Salad[/cite]Pit bulls are bred to kill.

    Any dog can be a killer if its brought up that way. Its in the genetic make up

    When I was 20 my then g'friends family bred staffs and pitbulls. They were the perfect family dogs, friendly, loyal, great with the kids....
  • my friend dave had a rottweiler called lucy that was scared of lights on cars. so they had to walk it in the day time. another mate also had a staff who was a lovely family pet. I don't necessarily believe its the dog but the owner that raises a dog to be the way it is.
    there were 2 pitballs on blackheath common the other week outside the princess that were a 'fashion accessory' to these horrible looking oiks, in baggy tracksuits and the dogs were playing, but it was quite aggressive playing, they were on leads, but one got loose and went on a run, and even the owner looked a bit panicky, nothing happened it ran back but could have been bad.
  • Horrible case this, and a strange jury decision, but then you can go for dinner leaving your kids in a holiday apartment, knock back 14 bottles of wine among friends, and be fetted by the press as stolic parents.
  • [cite]Posted By: Rothko[/cite]Horrible case this, and a strange jury decision, but then you can go for dinner leaving your kids in a holiday apartment, knock back 14 bottles of wine among friends, and be fetted by the press as stolic parents.


    But only if your a nice couple of middle class doctors with loads of media savvy.
  • i thought the 14 bottles of wine that night had been proved inaccurate?

    not saying they were right leaving their kids tho - another strange case.
  • Yeah, and the suggestion that some of the fund should be spent on defence lawyers fees just beggars belief.

    Ain't it funny how the papers go out of their way to paint people in a bad light for alleged incidents in this country yet if one of ours is up on a charge abroad they're always full of how johnny foreigner's legal system is a pile of old shite and our man/woman must be innocent. Tabloid hypocrisy at it's worst.
  • Sponsored links:


  • [cite]Posted By: Off_it[/cite]Yeah, and the suggestion that some of the fund should be spent on defence lawyers fees just beggars belief.

    Ain't it funny how the papers go out of their way to paint people in a bad light for alleged incidents in this country yet if one of ours is up on a charge abroad they're always full of how johnny foreigner's legal system is a pile of old shite and our man/woman must be innocent. Tabloid hypocrisy at it's worst.

    All prisons should be like the Bangkok Hilton
  • edited September 2007
    [cite]Posted By: Off_it[/cite]Yeah, and the suggestion that some of the fund should be spent on defence lawyers fees just beggars belief.

    Ain't it funny how the papers go out of their way to paint people in a bad light for alleged incidents in this country yet if one of ours is up on a charge abroad they're always full of how johnny foreigner's legal system is a pile of old shite and our man/woman must be innocent. Tabloid hypocrisy at it's worst.

    Interesting piece in the Times yesterday, on that same point

    Mick Hume in the Times
  • I love the quote from the "Sun reader"!
  • [cite]Posted By: Rothko[/cite]
    [cite]Posted By: Off_it[/cite]Yeah, and the suggestion that some of the fund should be spent on defence lawyers fees just beggars belief.

    Ain't it funny how the papers go out of their way to paint people in a bad light for alleged incidents in this country yet if one of ours is up on a charge abroad they're always full of how johnny foreigner's legal system is a pile of old shite and our man/woman must be innocent. Tabloid hypocrisy at it's worst.

    Interesting piece in the Times yesterday, on that same point

    Mick Hume in the Times

    Good article. Something myself and Mrs CD have been talking about
  • I don't give a toss about the social class of the respective families.

    The point is that both families, in their different ways, were guilty of gross neglect and sadly two innocent little girls needlessly died.

    The dog case annoys me because the dog should have been destroyed long before having already been involved in two previous attacks if you read F Blocker's link.
  • [cite]Posted By: Rothko[/cite]Horrible case this, and a strange jury decision, but then you can go for dinner leaving your kids in a holiday apartment, knock back 14 bottles of wine among friends, and be fetted by the press as stolic parents.

    Bang on mate. And those cheeky bastards want to use the money raised to look for their daughter to pay their legal bills.
  • [cite]Posted By: Off_it[/cite]Yeah, and the suggestion that some of the fund should be spent on defence lawyers fees just beggars belief.

    completely denied.
  • [cite]Posted By: ThreadKiller[/cite]
    [cite]Posted By: Off_it[/cite]Yeah, and the suggestion that some of the fund should be spent on defence lawyers fees just beggars belief.

    completely denied.

    Er, what is completely denied? All that says is that the fund wont be used on defence fees. What I was saying was that there was a suggestion that it might be - a suggestion that had been raised by Mr McCann himself in a TV interview.

    Rightly they have decided that it wont be - although I fail to see how this was their decision to make!
  • If it’s conclusively proven that they did it then the backlash will be savage, prolonged and entirely deserved. For media cynics the speed of the tabloids' volte face could be the highlight of the year
  • [cite]Posted By: Rothko[/cite]If it’s conclusively proven that they did it then the backlash will be savage, prolonged and entirely deserved. For media cynics the speed of the tabloids' volte face could be the highlight of the year

    I think the backlash is already coming regardless of thier guilt or otherwise.

    The story has gone on for too long now and the press want another angle. Attacking the Portugese police and some Russian who lived down the road have been done so now it's the parents they will turn on.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Roland Out Forever!