W.T.F is going on

Bearair said:
We cannot draw any definite conclusions from that I agree, but we can look at the numerous studies that have been done which mostly indicate that the death penalty is not a deterrent. I'm not sure about the life without any chance of parole because of a hostage situation, but much harsher sentences are required for some types of crime.
Click to expand...

I'm not arguing in support of the death penalty, but I don't think comparisons with historical eras are very helpful, and many of the studies produce theories which may, or may not, be valid. In any case, deterrence is only one of the theories of punishment, and I suspect that retribution has more resonance for a lot of people.

Do you mean a hostage situation at the point of arrest, inside a prison, or both?
 
fracster said:
It wasn`t a rant and my breathing is quite normal thank you.

The death penalty was in force for centuries when all kinds of vile acts were prevelant amongst all sections of society. But this is supposed to be the 21st century, we are suppose to be more civilised, so could you please explain how we should deal with people who commit crimes as the one mentioned above?
Click to expand...


Personally I'd lock them away forever. Crimes like this are abhorrent. I don't have words for it. But personally (and I know its just me) I don't think death is the worst thing can happen to a person, but spending the rest of your life in a box, without any hope of getting out may just be
 
fracster said:
It wasn`t a rant and my breathing is quite normal thank you.

The death penalty was in force for centuries when all kinds of vile acts were prevelant amongst all sections of society. But this is supposed to be the 21st century, we are suppose to be more civilised, so could you please explain how we should deal with people who commit crimes as the one mentioned above?
Click to expand...
This wasn't some random attack, not sure why you get so worked up about it. It is very clearly a targeted attack.
 
dejongj said:
This wasn't some random attack, not sure why you get so worked up about it. It is very clearly a targeted attack.
Click to expand...

yep …… looks planned - all facts released so far would indicate that

very very tragic and an evil act - hopefully the young lady will recover and facts will emerge over the next few days to help the police in the enquiries

"They" will be punished "in accordance with the law" which in a minority of cases is just woefully inadequate considering the crime.

That's "democracy"
 
Last edited:
dejongj said:
This wasn't some random attack, not sure why you get so worked up about it. It is very clearly a targeted attack.
Click to expand...
Because I find the act of two men kicking and stamping a heavily pregnant woman in the midsection to be an utterly vile act, an act that has no regard for the human life growing within the victim. I suppose it could be passed off as cost effective abortion by some, to others, it is a pretty despicable act.

On the subject of whether to lock them up in a small room under a strict regime, well that just does not happen anymore. Perhaps a prisoner exchange scheme with Turkey, for example, may be a deterrent.
 
Bearair said:
Very impressive rant, hope you got it off your chest, unfortunately the death penalty will not stop this type of crime, vile acts like this have always happened in our society and were more prevalent in times when the death penalty was in force.
Click to expand...
Yeh, but it will stop reoffending. Something jail and 'rehabilitation' doesn't always achieve. It's also a fitting punishment.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ST4
Bearair said:
Yes this is sickening and I do dispair at what this country is coming to.
However where is the evidence that bringing back the death penalty will stop this type of crime?
Click to expand...

The death penalty will stop the offender re offending because they are dead.

All serious violent crimes and sex crimes should carry the death penalty.
 
ST4 said:
The death penalty will stop the offender re offending because they are dead.

All serious violent crimes and sex crimes should carry the death penalty.
Click to expand...

I understand, better to get retribution than actually reduce this type of crime. Better to make people feel safer even if they are not.
 
First, such sad news and I hope the woman is okay at least physically. Can't imagine the emotional damage from the attack.

Secondly, the attack definitely sounded targetted without the need of the police to say so, unless there was a gang going round stamping on pregnant women.

Thirdly, America has the death penalty but it still doesn't stop people committing crimes that carry the death penalty as punishment.
 
ST4 said:
Reduces reoffending as the said offender cannot reoffend because they are dead. It's simple logic.
Click to expand...

You are correct it is simple logic!
 
Steve Smith said:
It isn't. It is called child destruction (according to the BBC news this morning).
Steve.
Click to expand...


That's interesting terminology I've never heard before !
taken from the Beeb just now
The charge of child destruction is under the Infant Life (Preservation) Act 1929.
Click to expand...

1929 - looks to me as if they've really had to go looking for an Act here . This is when , of course Abortion was illegal - I wonder whether this was the Act that was used for charging back street abortionists [ when they were actually caught ] then

NB this is NOT intended to start a discussion as to the rights and wrongs of abortion -- I just find the terminology and the date interesting
 
The BBC this morning have reported

"The London Ambulance Service apologised after admitting police were forced to take the victim to hospital themselves when, after an hour and ten minutes of waiting, the ambulance had still not attended"

not sure why - as it is just a blank statement

I was in London yesterday - it took me 90 minutes by car to get from Richmond to Wandsworth at 4:30 in the afternoon …… the traffic was just nose to tail for 8 miles …… all the traffic light junctions were just blocked
 
Last edited:
Bearair said:
I understand, better to get retribution than actually reduce this type of crime. Better to make people feel safer even if they are not.
Click to expand...

It's not a case of one or the other. The theories of punishment are broadly based on retribution, rehabilitation, deterrence and protection (of society); and none of them trumps the others.

I have no appetite for the death penalty, and I think we share that view, but what do you consider practical and realistic measures to reduce serious and violent crime?
 
a news update this morning states the woman is critical as well ,the world is going insane . the law needs changing and changing quickly before things de-generate further anyone of my age that can remember a world where back doors could be left unlocked ,and kids could play safely in the streets will know how far down the road we have fallen .
yes there where criminal acts back in the day but not on the scale of today ,there has to be a end point or there is no hope left for decent people to live.

yes there is a answer martynk especially in a case like this ,if the perpetrators are caught and found to be guilty ,place them in a town square and let a crowd of pregnant women and expectant fathers armed with stones deal with it sometimes the oldest methods are the best .
probably a sick answer but in a case like this a fitting scenario my stomach has really been turned by this act of barbarity and i cannot understand the mentality of ANYONE defending them either by act /deed/or the written word
 
Last edited:
Interesting point made by Jeff....



the black fox said:
,i grew up in the east end of london when it was under the control of the krays and this would have been dealt with at street level we didn't need the old bill for scum like that
Click to expand...

Because we have no real old fashioned villains like this anymore, we have to rely on our weak laws and understaffed police forces. I'm not saying having gangland bosses is a good thing, but bad people just don't seem to have anybody to be afraid of anymore, especially the law... Stick them in a prison and let the inmates deal with them.
 
Steve Smith said:
It isn't. It is called child destruction (according to the BBC news this morning).


Steve.
Click to expand...

The lesser charge of Child Destruction will be the easier one to secure a conviction, should they plead not guilty.
I'm not in the least bit surprised they've gone that way.
 
MartynK said:
It's not a case of one or the other. The theories of punishment are broadly based on retribution, rehabilitation, deterrence and protection (of society); and none of them trumps the others.

I have no appetite for the death penalty, and I think we share that view, but what do you consider practical and realistic measures to reduce serious and violent crime?
Click to expand...
I understand that theories of punishment are broadly based on retribution, rehabilitation, deterrence and protection and yes I think we both agree regarding the death penalty. As for measures to reduce serious crime, I think we could fill pages and pages with the things that need to be done, first on my list would be providing the police forces with the resources it needs. We need to go about changing the culture created by previous governments, which to me has left the police having to chase easily "solvable" crime in order to keep their conviction rates up (i am not blaming the police for this). We need to rethink our position on drugs which as I understand are the cause of so much crime. What I have been trying to point out is that there is no easy solution and knee jerk reaction calling for the death penalty or looking at the past through rose tinted glasses do not help.
 
the black fox said:
yes there is a answer martynk especially in a case like this ,if the perpetrators are caught and found to be guilty ,place them in a town square and let a crowd of pregnant women and expectant fathers armed with stones deal with it sometimes the oldest methods are the best .
probably a sick answer but in a case like this a fitting scenario my stomach has really been turned by this act of barbarity and i cannot understand the mentality of ANYONE defending them either by act /deed/or the written word
Click to expand...

Taking a stance against the death penalty doesn't imply defending the perpetrators. No-one has tried to do this, and I suggest that just about everyone shares your sense of outrage.

Parliament isn't going to change the law to permit stoning the perpetrators to death, and we can't turn the clock back to the East End of the Krays, so there's no point fantasising about this. FWIW, I'm a liberal - in the old sense - but I'm not a 'lefty' or a 'bleeding heart' and I believe in law abiding citizens having the right to keep and bear arms for self defence, but I know this isn't going to happen either, and I accept that as a reality.

I'm not convinced that the police and the judiciary lack the resources to deal with these appalling crimes, although there is always going to be room for improvement, and I suspect that the real problem is in how they are employed. That needs to be evaluated and the necessary changes made.
 
viv1969 said:
The lesser charge of Child Destruction will be the easier one to secure a conviction, should they plead not guilty.
I'm not in the least bit surprised they've gone that way.
Click to expand...

From what I have read of the press reports the assault on the women was by blows to her midriff. That being so, it looks very like a deliberate attempt to kill the child. I can understand the reason to use a charge that will secure a conviction rather than risk a different charge that may fail. In any case I suspect that the sentence handed down upon conviction will be massive (I hope).
 
  • Like
Reactions: ST4
arclight said:
From what I have read of the press reports the assault on the women was by blows to her midriff. That being so, it looks very like a deliberate attempt to kill the child. I can understand the reason to use a charge that will secure a conviction rather than risk a different charge that may fail. In any case I suspect that the sentence handed down upon conviction will be massive (I hope).
Click to expand...

Exactly.

The sentence will be pathetic though.
 
Child destruction and murder both carry a life sentence, it will probably be a charge of assault on the mother though as it will be easier to prove.

The people who did this need to be removed from society.
 
cowboy said:
Child destruction and murder both carry a life sentence, it will probably be a charge of assault on the mother though as it will be easier to prove.

The people who did this need to be removed from society.
Click to expand...

Murder carries a mandatory life sentence (though time served can be as little as eight years).
The maximum sentence for Child Destruction is Life, however they can be sentenced to any shorter term at the Judge's discretion.
 
we all know how this is going to end up

the sentence will be inadequate - the trial will cost thousand and thousands …….. legal aid and money for the QC's

the judges hands will be tied by the law ………… the "great and the good" in parliament may mention it briefly …. and then move on to the price of carrots

in a week it will fall from press reporting when the next footballer injures his little finger

That's what we voted for
 
Last edited:
ST4 said:
Its the callousness of this crime that gets me.
Click to expand...

It has the hallmarks of a "professional" hit with aim of inflicting long time (perhaps lifetime) mental damage to the mother.
 
my guess is the father-to-be did it - it has happened before :(

now facts:

the mother is coloured (for those arguing about describing the attackers as coloured)

the ambulance didn't arrive as the ambulance service had it down as a low priority

this was reported on the BBC
 
The actual statement from the London Ambulance Service:

'We are very sorry that we were unable to send an ambulance. We were called at 8.16pm and police cancelled the ambulance at 9.25pm.

'We are now looking into the circumstances of why this happened.'
 
sturisoma said:
the mother is coloured (for those arguing about describing the attackers as coloured)
Click to expand...

Summer. We are all `coloured` in one way or another, but it's not a term to be used these days. Black is the quote. ;)

(FWIW, I/we used that term until recent years. Completely innocently btw.)
 
Last edited:
It's been confirmed that the former partner handed himself into the police and is in court today charged with causing the death of the baby. They're still looking for the second person.

"A man accused of the "destruction" of his ex-lover's unborn baby has appeared in court, where he has been refused bail.

Kevin Wilson, 21, who is a teaching assistant, is also charged with causing grievous bodily harm to the mother-to-be, Malorie Bantala.

Ms Bantala, 21, is still critically ill in hospital after life-saving surgery on Monday night. She had suffered major blood-loss at the scene."
 
Last edited:
OldCarlos said:
Summer. We are all `coloured` in one way or another, but it's not a term to be used these days. Black is the quote. ;)

(FWIW, I/we used that term until recent years. Completely innocently btw.)
Click to expand...

Totally agree ………….

unless you are in S Africa ……… the "coloured people/persons" are not happy to be called black ……… as I was told …….. "I'm not black I'm coloured" …… although the ladies were black ……. and not as far as I knew of Asian descent, they looked African, if you see what i mean …………. It can all get rather serious or stupid ……. depending on your point of view

as long as the word is used as an adjective ……. I do not see why there should be a problem ……. it is when they are used as plural nouns that the words can be or are offensive

funny olde world


"being unaware of political correctness is no defence against the law" ………………..
 
Last edited:
stevelmx5 said:
It's been confirmed that the former partner handed himself into the police and is in court today charged with causing the death of the baby. They're still looking for the second person.

"A man accused of the "destruction" of his ex-lover's unborn baby has appeared in court, where he has been refused bail.

Kevin Wilson, 21, who is a teaching assistant, is also charged with causing grievous bodily harm to the mother-to-be, Malorie Bantala.

Ms Bantala, 21, is still critically ill in hospital after life-saving surgery on Monday night. She had suffered major blood-loss at the scene."
Click to expand...

"teaching assistant" - he must have had incredible hatred for the woman

Is this not a crime of premeditated attempted murder?
 
BillN_33 said:
"teaching assistant" - he must have had incredible hatred for the woman

Is this not a crime of premeditated attempted murder?
Click to expand...

To be pedantic, any murderous crime automatically carries the assumption of premeditation.
Without it, the accused would be charged with a lesser offence.
 
viv1969 said:
To be pedantic, any murderous crime automatically carries the assumption of premeditation.
Without it, the accused would be charged with a lesser offence.
Click to expand...

no "crimes of passion" in the UK

but they have charged him with GBH ……. is that just as a starters …….. so that they can get an easy conviction

he has handed himself in but he has pleaded "not guilty" .. according to reports …………. presumably he has just handed himself in "to help the police eliminate him from their enquiries"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top