Suffragette1 Posted May 31, 2012 Share Posted May 31, 2012 Regardless of the outcome of this investigation (which I believe is still ongoing) and any subsequent trial, I still maintain that it is highly dangerous territory that some have strayed into here in forming an opinion of their guilt on the basis of a snapshot 'performance' at a press conference. I also suspect that some of the views formed had something to do with the fact that this couple is well known for reasons to do with their lifestyle. I still believe that criminologists, criminal profilers, police and other experts would be more likely to go on 'gut instincts' by observing their behaviour and body language when being questioned and/or away from the glare of cameras etc, which would gradually build up a portfolio, along with answers to questions and any evidence. Their 'gut instinct' is one based on training, years of experience and having a knowledge of behavioural psychology. If those instincts led them down a praticular road of enquiry, then that is part of their job. That is a world apart from some of the comments that I have seen on here from people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
esme Posted May 31, 2012 Share Posted May 31, 2012 Mod Note Posts removed for bickering, quoting deleted posts and ignoring the sub judice status of the case. Just to remind you all of the original warning here is the Derbyshire Police report on this incident. http://www.derbyshire.police.uk/News-and-Appeals/News/2012/May/Man-and-woman-arrested-in-connection-with-Victory-Road-fire-charged-with-murder.aspx Discuss the matter by all means however please be aware this matter is sub judice, to quote the police website “It is important to note that the defendants are entitled to a fair trial and nothing should be said or reported that would prejudice that right.” Further as the investigation is ongoing, there may be more charges or the existing charges may be dropped, please do not post anything which may prejudice that, anything that does so will be removed and may lead to accounts being suspended. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Suffragette1 Posted May 31, 2012 Share Posted May 31, 2012 I think you have far too much faith in human nature. I doubt very much they are grieving for their kids. I think they are more likely upset at the impending life sentence should they be found guilty. I just hope they are segregated otherwise there will be two more deaths before this story is over. You equally have a very dim view of human nature. As a parent myself, only a sociopath would not be grieving. I will not believe that they are such monsters that this was a deliberate act designed for this outcome or that they are not suffering, until proven otherwise. One poster has stated that they have experienced parental bereavement felt that their grief looked 'real'. I am far more inclined to go with that than pronouncements from people who don't have kids and/or have never lost a child, never mind 6. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank Sidney Posted May 31, 2012 Share Posted May 31, 2012 Can I just show my ignorance by stating I don't know what sub-justice is...?.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Suffragette1 Posted May 31, 2012 Share Posted May 31, 2012 Can I just show my ignorance by stating I don't know what sub-justice is...?.. I thought that it meant when a matter is still at trial and under court consideration, which this isn't yet, unless you count the magistrates court hearing which was scheduled for this morning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank Sidney Posted May 31, 2012 Share Posted May 31, 2012 I thought that it meant when a matter is still at trial and under court consideration, which this isn't yet, unless you count the magistrates court hearing which was scheduled for this morning. Ok thanks.... I don't see the significance on the outcome of the trial though, for people like me and you, discussing the matter on a forum. I don't think the jury will be logging on to see what Frank has said about the matter..Is is also not allowed to discuss the matter in a pub or over the garden fence...? I'd understand a ban of newspapers giving an opinion though because they carry more influence.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
esme Posted May 31, 2012 Share Posted May 31, 2012 Mod Note ...I'd understand a ban of newspapers giving an opinion though because they carry more influence.... Just to clear up a common misunderstanding here, comments posted on internet forums are not hearsay, or regarded as a private chat between friends. Internet forums are regarded in law as publications, they are subject to the same restrictions as newspapers and comments posted here carry the same weight in a courtroom as if they were published in a newspaper. Further forums are international in nature, what may not be a crime in this country may be a crime in the country where your post is read, for example holocaust denial is not an offence in the UK, but it is in Germany and extradition to a German court is possible. Therefore we remove posts which we think may come under these rules and as this is a private forum we reserve the right to remove anything we perceive as breaking our rules or the law of the land. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buck Posted May 31, 2012 Share Posted May 31, 2012 I thought it was just me that felt this way but I'm away on business and stuck in a hotel room and have seen this appeal 4 or 5 times tonight and something just doesnt seem right. I do hope that I am wrong but those tears and anguish just didnt seem real.What happened to innocent until proven guilty? What I'm seeing here is guilty by appearance. I wonder how many people have been wrongly imprisoned that way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bypassblade Posted May 31, 2012 Share Posted May 31, 2012 What happened to innocent until proven guilty? What I'm seeing here is guilty by appearance. I wonder how many people have been wrongly imprisoned that way. Well I'm sure nobody has gone to prison on the strength on the thoughts of people on a forum, lets wait and see now & let justice, be seen to be done correctly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kid Sampson Posted May 31, 2012 Share Posted May 31, 2012 Regardless of the outcome of this investigation (which I believe is still ongoing) and any subsequent trial, I still maintain that it is highly dangerous territory that some have strayed into here in forming an opinion of their guilt on the basis of a snapshot 'performance' at a press conference. I also suspect that some of the views formed had something to do with the fact that this couple is well known for reasons to do with their lifestyle. I still believe that criminologists, criminal profilers, police and other experts would be more likely to go on 'gut instincts' by observing their behaviour and body language when being questioned and/or away from the glare of cameras etc, which would gradually build up a portfolio, along with answers to questions and any evidence. Their 'gut instinct' is one based on training, years of experience and having a knowledge of behavioural psychology. If those instincts led them down a praticular road of enquiry, then that is part of their job. That is a world apart from some of the comments that I have seen on here from people. I still haven't seen anybody forming an opinion of guilt. Just saying they thought something was odd and I honestly don't see what the problem with that is to be honest. Nobody is pretending to be a criminologist or behavioral psychologist, just some folk having a chinwag about a case which has rightly horrified people up and down the country. I find the attitude of some on here to be pretty patronising. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.