Your are viewing a read-only archive of the old DiS boards. Please hit the Community button above to engage with the DiS !
Anyone opposed to this? I aint. But I'd like a contrary opinion.
with either it's more the public reaction, two rights and all that...
The BNP one was just silly as it was clearly out-dated.
I want to make this totally clear, i have never heard a single BNP view i agree with and child abuse has to be the most terrible of crime and this is one of the most shocking cases. < Massive overegging of my point, you know this internet and the idiots who use it get things massivley wrong.
They're not equal measures of evil.
That one works
Tenner on Bianca & Gaz.
(apologies to anyone called Bianca or Gaz)
Is there a prize?
You heard me, FLAMING BRICKS.
a million tabloid headlines and neighbours/old classmates/partners saying they always knew they were dodgy etc
And I bet one is called Ken and one is called Deidre. Their second name will be Barlow.
Did any of us win the sweepstake?
Yeah yeah, I know...
Did you ban him?! I wasn't being sarcastic, i thought it was a pretty funny post.
Sorry, reckoned that was the sign of him about to descend into the abyss once more.
also, i'll have a score split on darren and carly with a Q
...and it's headline news. I'm being topical, michael. I'm hoping ITV will give me my own show.
"a damnation of ... Labour’s legacy of incompetence and useless bureaucracy."
It's not like finding out Celtic are up against Arsenal, nor finding out who the secret headliners at Glastonbury are, nor are they celebrities. I imagine them revealing the names on Sky News and going 'Right, release the fanatics with clubs and bring me my pitchfork. Let's get these fuckers.' I'm not opposed to naming them, just this 'Tune in at midnight to find out!' approach.
To have a court order that runs out at some vague unspecified time?
It's not when the court order ran out, it was the way it was published. This could've been done on the morning news, it didn't have to be release exactly at midnight. To me, it seems like it's pandering to sensationalism.
but in the 24 hour news climate we're in, getting the story before anyone else is a news editor's priority.
But no news network/website is going to hold off on giving the details until tomorrow morning several hours after everyone else. I did feel that maybe newsnight could have done it more civilised although earlier in the programme they managed to sensationalise a story about badminton.
Is this legit?
and i think that allowing Sun-reading mongs to have unnecessary details is a small price to pay really.
Why should the state protect these people? Why do they deserve to be given exceptional treatment?
it'd lead to further hushing of the names of convicted criminals over all sorts of crimes. Eventually, you'd end up with a CJS that meant that all convicts' details were kept secret from the general public. It'd be impossible.
As for the rights of scum, they should probably be the same as the rights of everyone else, right?
the press embargo expires.
Vigilante justice doesn't exist in this country.
Even if it turned out they got released and moved into your street, no-one would do anything. People might bitch about them and say 'them murderers live there, bastards', but people don't dare do anything after heroes like Tony Martin get chastised by the law.
Vigilante stories rarely appear in the press.
This means that they're either not reported on purpose (which would be very annoying) or that they're not happening. I reckon it's probably somewhere halfway.
Loads of paedophiles are named on that sex offenders register aren't they?
about a pensioner who told some yobs to clear off and are generally delivered in a patronising manner.
I'd like to see more paedophiles publicly burned in giant wicker penises, Brass Eye-style.
I know you were probably too young at the time to properly be aware of it, but there were a LOT at the time. Here are just a few where they got it wrong:
Balls, that was gonna be my #1 guess, but I thought it was too clichéd...
1st link: Someone attacked by an idiot who thought a paediatrician was a paedophile.
2nd link: Someone wrongly accused gets their window bricked.
3rd link: Exactly the same story, posted again as if it makes it more relevant.
4th link: Convicted paedo gets harrassed.
Sounds like the turn of the decade was a truly chaotic time, based on your concrete links.
Admittedly I didn't actually read the 2nd & 3rd stories to see it was the same man (ok, ok, or the 1st or the 4th) - I hardly have a folder on the subject - but it's late and I'm going to bed.
Anyone who watched/read the news circa 2000 will remember the NOTW's publication of addresses - and the depressingly predictable attacks that accompanied them - dominating the headlines to the same extent as MP's expenses /the Telegraph have done this year. Forgive me for not having full figures to hand.
Vigilante justice may not exist in this country now, you're right, but it wouldn't be hard to stir up.
Thanks I needed a laugh
but I couldn't help but sigh out loud when I saw a headline today along the lines of 'BABY P KILLERS TO GET NEW IDENTITIES AND FACES PAID FOR BY YOU, THE TAXPAYER!!!11!'.
I'm with poptimus. I don't see any reason why they should have their identities protected, considering they've all admitted guilt, have been convicted and were all legally adults at the time of the offences. The public hysteria is a little unsettling though.
because they have other children, to protect their identities. Or something.
As for the papers whining that money will have to go to giving them new identities etc, well that's nothing to do with said papers trying to encourage people to pay idiot vigilante now is it
did anyone else think they were Andre the Giant and Andrew Flintoff?
I can see the latest tabloid campaign - Terminators for child killers.
is how vacant and bovine the mothers eyes are.
It's fun to mock the underclass.
I didnt recognise either of their names, nor their faces.
All this 'hugely announced portent of groundbreaking news' did was to make me probably be a bit more predjudiced against people who looked like them (oooh they did look shifty didnt they?)
Sorry for being so callous sounding, but Baby P did not have many freinds who could be offended by this, and i am more offended by the fact that the media make dramatic gain from such a story, squeezing every last drop of melodrama from it, they are vultures. my callousness is directed towards their treatment of stuff