The tragedy of Baby P (please, no jokes, folks)

Look Over There wrote:what'd they do with the body?

I don't get it.

Probably the least offensive joke was:


Some of them are propper harsh, but I suppose that's the point. I'd love to see a celeb read some out on TV just to see the mass outcry.

Sarge wrote:I don't get it.

It is rather cryptic isn't it...

Fatal Exception wrote:Probably the least offensive joke was:

After extensive checks by social services, Gary Glitter will turn on the Christmas lights in Haringey.

Some of them are propper harsh, but I suppose that's the point. I'd love to see a celeb read some out on TV just to see the mass outcry.

If Mock the Week was on air you can bet The Daily Mail would have had Frankie Boyle crucified by now.

I just received the text "naming and shaming" the people involved. Allegedly.
I hope these people aren't on the receiving end of a cruel joke.

Sarge wrote:

Look Over There wrote:what'd they do with the body?

I don't get it.

Allow trip-hop group Portishead to explain:

massimo wrote:I just received the text "naming and shaming" the people involved. Allegedly.
I hope these people aren't on the receiving end of a cruel joke.

The sick bitch is called Tracey Connolly (i read it today but not sure where).

Fazarelli wrote:

massimo wrote:I just received the text "naming and shaming" the people involved. Allegedly.
I hope these people aren't on the receiving end of a cruel joke.

The sick bitch is called Tracey Connolly (i read it today but not sure where).

It's all over the internet. I'm looking for a myspace, facebook or bebo.

Tracey Connolly, Steven Barker & Jason Owen are the mummy strawberry floaters.

Fazarelli wrote:

massimo wrote:I just received the text "naming and shaming" the people involved. Allegedly.
I hope these people aren't on the receiving end of a cruel joke.

The sick ***** is called Tracey Connolly (i read it today but not sure where).

FFS, I know the names and addresses of everyone supposedly involved.
Do you really think we should be posting that kind of information?
Do we even know if these names are correct? I haven't seen anything confirming it officially.
We'll end up with a witch hunt, and innocent people could end up getting hurt.
This isn't Saudi Arabia people.

Interestingly, all three of those names were removed from this article:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/ ... eaths.html

The bit google had cached said:

In a separate case, Tracey Connolly, 25, and Stephen Barker, 31, were charged last week over the death of a 17-month-old boy who is understood to have been ...

The full cached version has been removed from google.

Ah the great British public,

"It's sick what that guy did, what a monster, and the mother she is a monster too, how anyone could do that to another human being is beyond me.....

5,4,3,2,1....

What I'd like to do is have 5 minutes alone with them both, torture them and then kill them, that would make me feel great and would of course bring the baby back."

Get the strawberry float over yourselves, how many of us make donations to children's charities when not annually pushed to do so by some crippled bear and old radio DJ, how many of us actually take an interest in those who are in need in the community, how many of us actually enquired about or pressed their local MP on child protection issues, how many of us considered it an important issue when voting?.....

Yes it's sad, but no one cared while he was alive, starting to get upset now he is dead doesn't show that we are a caring society, it shows that we like a good cry and a moan but are not willing to put in the time, effort or money to protect those in our society who need help the most.

</rant>

Godzilla wrote:Ah the great British public,

"It's sick what that guy did, what a monster, and the mother she is a monster too, how anyone could do that to another human being is beyond me.....

5,4,3,2,1....

What I'd like to do is have 5 minutes alone with them both, torture them and then kill them, that would make me feel great and would of course bring the baby back."

Get the **** over yourselves, how many of us make donations to children's charities when not annually pushed to do so by some crippled bear and old radio DJ, how many of us actually take an interest in those who are in need in the community, how many of us actually enquired about or pressed their local MP on child protection issues, how many of us considered it an important issue when voting?.....

Yes it's sad, but no one cared while he was alive, starting to get upset now he is dead doesn't show that we are a caring society, it shows that we like a good cry and a moan but are not willing to put in the time, effort or money to protect those in our society who need help the most.

</rant>

I wouldn't have put it exactly that way, but well said.

Shadow wrote:You may remember a few months back I posted to say the people in the house opposite me had beaten their baby to death, over the course of several months, they'd just beaten her into a worse and worse state, when she eventually died, she had two broken arms, a broken leg, jaw, about 5 broken ribs, and a cracked skull, aparently the injuries dated from early March through to May.
(

Sadly this kind of thing is a lot, lot more common than most people would like to believe. I'm not sure why this particular case has caught the media spotlight, especially since the actual case is over a year old.

poppy10 wrote:

Shadow wrote:You may remember a few months back I posted to say the people in the house opposite me had beaten their baby to death, over the course of several months, they'd just beaten her into a worse and worse state, when she eventually died, she had two broken arms, a broken leg, jaw, about 5 broken ribs, and a cracked skull, aparently the injuries dated from early March through to May.
(

Sadly this kind of thing is a lot, lot more common than most people would like to believe. I'm not sure why this particular case has caught the media spotlight, especially since the actual case is over a year old.

Because people are sick of Maddie and Shannon is an ugly banana split.

So... how would a breeding licence work? All babies to have a vasectomy/their tubes tied at birth, with reversal operations upon receipt of said licence?

massimo wrote:

Godzilla wrote:Ah the great British public,

"It's sick what that guy did, what a monster, and the mother she is a monster too, how anyone could do that to another human being is beyond me.....

5,4,3,2,1....

What I'd like to do is have 5 minutes alone with them both, torture them and then kill them, that would make me feel great and would of course bring the baby back."

Get the **** over yourselves, how many of us make donations to children's charities when not annually pushed to do so by some crippled bear and old radio DJ, how many of us actually take an interest in those who are in need in the community, how many of us actually enquired about or pressed their local MP on child protection issues, how many of us considered it an important issue when voting?.....

Yes it's sad, but no one cared while he was alive, starting to get upset now he is dead doesn't show that we are a caring society, it shows that we like a good cry and a moan but are not willing to put in the time, effort or money to protect those in our society who need help the most.

</rant>

I wouldn't have put it exactly that way, but well said.

Don't take any offence, but that opinion is bullshit. We have every right to be outraged, the law does not factor into this sort of stuff IMO. I'm not saying we should go kill them or torture them, but it pisses me off when some liberal human rights activist wanker tries that line. Don't try and take the moral high ground on this at all, there is none. You say that rubbish to feel good about yourself - "O we're no better than them, we shouldn't lower ourselves to animalistic behaviour like them". The truth is, there is no god or higher power that can punish them, they do not deserve their human rights, the baby won't be coming back, but these people will never be punished for what they've done. So you get on that high horse of yours and ride the f**k on, because anyone who decides they'll take the law into their hands and whatever punishment they mete out will never be enough. Our society is not a product of our own greed and ill, it's the product of SOME peoples greed.


I'm not saying let's go kill the people named, but when the facts come out and when the names are proven, you human rights activists f**k off. Why should I have to give money to charity to protect kids? Why should I have to take part in social services? Why should I have to do anything in the future to protect my children? Why? Because of the minority that feel they can get away with abusing children, and it doesn't happen because I don't give money to charity or because I didn't campaign for social services to get better. It's because gooseberry fool happens and nothing can be done sometimes because there is pure evil out there.


I'm not taking sides here, I do not want to be the one who dishes out punishment for this couple and paedophile, I do not want to incite hatred or preach against these three upstanding people who you seem to think deserve to have my taxpayer money protect them throughout their whole lives. The whore and the boyfriend who killed another mans son will be protected by the very people who we need to prevent crime or stop it. I do feel the necessity to go out and make their life hell for them either, but what YOU and everyone else should accept is that the couple and paedophile have got everything coming to them and it's deserved because they should not be free to do what they want and not take responsibility for their OWN actions. This crime was of their OWN, willing, conscious doing and now they better deal with the repercussions. I'm not wanting anyone to go out and harm an innocent person by mistake either. I'd rather everyone be of the opinion that people do their very best to stay 'good' (not always lawful, law is a creation of man and thus fallible but good is almost something that is idealistic and achievable as no one in their right mind can ever mistake good from bad) and to those who say they'd like to have some alone time with these three animals, then you better think about what you do because you will be committing a crime with a punishment to follow is all but I won't judge you on that because of the magnitude of this case, only the law will judge you.

This issue seems very personal to me, so I don't apologise for causing offence but I apologise if you take it as a personal attack on you, because it isn't that. It's an attack on your view that we're not fit to judge others when we're innocent of anything as atrocious as this.


Suck my dick you human rights, moral high ground taking, high horse saddling banana splits. And that's something when it's coming from me since I generally take a moral high ground at times but not without good reason. Some people are just not good enough to have rights after atrocious crimes such as this.

I'm not sure you've thought your argument through properly.

$ilva $hadow wrote:...the law does not factor into this sort of stuff IMO... I'd rather everyone be of the opinion that people do their very best to stay 'good' (not always lawful, law is a creation of man and thus fallible but good is almost something that is idealistic and achievable as no one in their right mind can ever mistake good from bad)...

So we all get to decide when the law is applicable and to whom? If we can each decide for ourselves what is right and wrong irrespective of the law, then what standard can be used in passing judgement? Instant death to anyone committing a crime involving a minor? Or is it okay as long as one's actions do not fall foul of the public hysteria generated by the media?

$ilva $hadow wrote:...there is no god or higher power that can punish them... there is pure evil out there...

The word evil has inevitable religious connotations, I'm afraid. Without any god or other absolute, how can 'pure evil' be defined, other than through human law? Incidentally, I recall reading that the boyfriend was a Satanist, so to his way of thinking, in causing pain to a defenceless child he was probably doing a 'good' thing by carrying out his satanic majesty's pleasure. Not the best example of one being in their 'right mind', but then the majority of the country does have religious beliefs, all of which (by your apparent definition) could be considered not in their 'right mind'.

$ilva $hadow wrote:...This crime was of their OWN, willing, conscious doing and now they better deal with the repercussions... Some people are just not good enough to have rights after atrocious crimes such as this...

Not even the right to a fair trial and punishment? Why should they have to face any consequences other than what the legal system deems necessary? Perhaps you recall the murder of Jamie Bulger? Should the killers of that unfortunate have also lost their human rights (despite themselves being children)?

$ilva $hadow wrote:...This issue seems very personal to me, so I don't apologise for causing offence...

HOW is it personal to you more so than anyone else?

Memento Mori wrote:

Fatal Exception wrote:Probably the least offensive joke was:

After extensive checks by social services, Gary Glitter will turn on the Christmas lights in Haringey.

Some of them are propper harsh, but I suppose that's the point. I'd love to see a celeb read some out on TV just to see the mass outcry.

If Mock the Week was on air you can bet The Daily Mail would have had Frankie Boyle crucified by now.

I doubt he'd sink that low, seriously.

$ilva $hadow wrote:...because anyone who decides they'll take the law into their hands and whatever punishment they mete out will never be enough....

...I do not want to incite hatred or preach against these three upstanding people who you seem to think deserve to have my taxpayer money protect them throughout their whole lives.

The crowning glory of a barrel of self-indulgent, 'lol, I'm SO common sense' bullshit.

EDIT; Micowned.