Daniel Pelka murder case

Home Forum Bike Forum Daniel Pelka murder case

Viewing 40 posts - 41 through 80 (of 80 total)
  • Daniel Pelka murder case
  • freeagent
    Member

    I disagree with the death penalty, because I feel it is little more than medieval retribution, and not something a civilized society should be doing, however I do feel people like this should be going away with no chance of ever seeing the light of day, and doing 10 hours a day hard graft in jail, not sitting about playing on the X-box.

    Edric 64
    Member

    My in-laws are Foster carers and have had several kids (all fairly young) over the years who have arrived looking like they’ve been living wild in the woods – mal-nourished, thinning hair, sunken eyes, filthy dirty, rotten teeth..

    You quite often see people like this who have existed on a very poor diet .You often see adults on certain estates or in certain towns with a reputation shall we say who look way older than their years because of the way they have lived

    bencooper
    Member

    Read that blog I linked to. Seriously. It’s not just people blowing their benefits of Sky and fags.

    Premier Icon teamhurtmore
    Subscriber

    Yes I have children but that does not alter my view that forced sterilisation is not the solution or indeed IMO morally supportable. Again IMO, I believe that the mark of a civilised society is how we treat others including those we disagree with and those who do evil things, I do not support the death penalty, I find the idea of chopping off the hand of a thief abhorrent and I think that we should be above ideas of forced medical procedure (lobotomies, sterilisation etc) as well.

    Those people should be punished for sure but no one benefits from reverting to things that we outgrew many years ago (thankfully) and again IMO!!

    But on a less forgiving note, I was shocked to hear the extent of excuse making on the radio this morning from people who should have known better. Shocking if not surprising.

    Edric 64
    Member

    The children they cant have after sterilization would be thankful.

    Premier Icon teamhurtmore
    Subscriber

    So if the mother became pregnant again (heaven forbid) would you support a forced abortion?

    Edric 64
    Member

    Is there anyone on here who works in the social services who could give us an idea of what its like to be a case worker? As a country we see these cases of failure highlighted time an again but is it a very small percentage that go wrong and we just remember them because they are in the media? 0r does the whole system need overhauling or an injection of capital ?

    Premier Icon pictonroad
    Subscriber

    No, but I would advocate that the child be taken away. ref: Banned from keeping animals for life for someone who demonstrates that they are morally and mentally incapable of caring for an animal. You don’t shoot the dog but you do remove it from the source of harm.

    Edric 64
    Member

    So if the mother became pregnant again (heaven forbid) would you support a forced abortion?

    .Surely if that occurred compulsory fostering or adoption would be the way to go ?

    Premier Icon tomhoward
    Subscriber

    So if the mother became pregnant again (heaven forbid) would you support a forced abortion adoption?

    Yes.

    spacemonkey
    Member

    Whilst I’m not a fan of the death sentence or forced “treatments”, eg sterilisation, I do believe the latter should be utilised until we develop a proven model of re-education. That’s going to take at least a generation IMO, even if we get the model working now. It may not serve as a deterrent, but it will certainly stop certain crimes from being committed again.

    However … the problem needs to be addressed at source, not x months/years down the line when its too late. This is the part I don’t believe will get any better for at least another generation.

    Premier Icon roverpig
    Subscriber

    They’re evil and they do evil things. I’m not, so I don’t.

    Edric 64
    Member

    Re education can only work if you know there is a problem in the first place.You may not know there is a problem until you find a dead toddler on a piss soaked mattress.Then the re education is to late

    rogerthecat
    Member

    MrsCat has just trained as a Health Visitor after 16 years as a midwife, when she let’s off steam re the state of monitoring/intervention etc it is sometimes hard to believe, it may sound a bit Daily Mail but animals seem to get better protection than children.

    If they didn’t want the kid, why not let him go and live with his father?

    spacemonkey
    Member

    Re education can only work if you know there is a problem in the first place.You may not know there is a problem until you find a dead toddler on a piss soaked mattress.Then the re education is to late

    Which is why I said both re-education and “… the problem needs to be addressed at source, not x months/years down the line where its too late …”

    The latter involves everything from parenting to schooling to peer awareness to employment to the social system etc.

    Edric 64
    Member

    Who are your target audience for education though ? Playing devils advocate its not always the skint on benefits in a council flat .You can only offer help once you see warning signs .Hungry kid with no lunch ? How many times before you see it as a problem .My son wouldnt eat his free school lunch as he didnt like the sarnies (fussy sod)I had to send his lunch in and it had to be right or he wouldnt eat it.You could get the kid who binned his lunch and scabbed chips off his mates .How do you decide between early stages of neglect and fussy kid?

    tinsy
    Member

    The whole thing makes me feel truly sick to the bottom of my stomach, in the same way the Fretzel thing, baby P & other atrocities have done in the past.

    I would prefer the thread closed I can see no good in the discussion as it is.

    spacemonkey
    Member

    Who are your target audience for education though ?

    From a big picture perspective, I’d say everyone has a responsibility to look out for “problem people” in whatever their role or walk of life. In terms of formal “education” maybe teachers need more training, as do social workers etc.

    Edric 64
    Member

    I dont think you need more formal education of teachers etc .I think its having the balls to step in if you think there is a problem knowing you may be castigated if you are wrong

    Premier Icon mattjg
    Subscriber

    Dreadful case, which I find upsetting and disturbing, and which is why I’d much prefer this thread wasn’t in the bike forum, because I go there to read about bikes.

    Mods?

    spacemonkey
    Member

    I think its having the balls to step in if you think there is a problem knowing you may be castigated if you are wrong

    Yup. Plenty of politics and bits of red tape to cut through there though. Recognising the signs of “trouble” is 100% key as well though.

    Edric 64
    Member

    +1 agree with this

    Premier Icon Coyote
    Subscriber

    I think its having the balls to step in if you think there is a problem knowing you may be castigated if you are wrong

    It’s not really about the teachers or the social workers. I am married to a teacher and have a couple of social workers in my circle of friends. “Castigated” is a very light word for the process etc if they get it wrong. It is the system that needs attention. It’s easier to take an animal away from an abusive situation than a child. Add to that the abusers are usually very manipulative and evasive and there is always a lawyer prepared to go full on offensive if the abuser feels their human rights are being transgressed.

    Having said all that, the only time you hear about this is when a tragedy strikes. We never hear of the children who are saved by social services etc, of which there are many.

    Oh and whilst I don’t agree with the death penalty under any circumstances, I would have absolutely no problem with forced sterilisation for parents who abuse children.

    Children are a gift to be cherished.

    Premier Icon kimbers
    Subscriber
    mickolas
    Member

    do those opposed to the death penalty because it is “barbaric” and something we have “outgrown” really think life in prison with no possibility of freedom would be more humane and “civilised”?

    of course if we had the means and knowledge to effectively rehabilitate all offenders that would be preferable….but we don’t for now.

    and how is it more “civilised” to inflict these people’s influence (even existence…) on others; either those they encounter in prison or when they get out.

    I’m not suggesting death penalty to all criminals any more than amputating a foot because it has a verucca, but if you get gangrene in a leg, you cut it off and move on (albeit with a limp). it might not be pleasant but a mature person realises that some harsh realities must be accepted and in fact are for the best.

    RichPenny
    Member

    Of course life in prison is more humane than execution. A society which allows the killing of its own citizens cannot argue that killing people is wrong.

    mickolas
    Member

    that’s a circular argument. and a simplification. killing people is wrong because killing people is wrong.

    in rebuttal I say ‘the death penalty should be reintroduced because killing people is right sometimes’. it sums up what I believe without actually saying anything useful. so there.

    Premier Icon transporter13
    Subscriber

    I feel we should revert back to the dark ages and for the people who commit the most horrible and dispicable crimes to be put down for good.

    I can say this in all honesty

    If I was the father of that child, I would wait the thirty or so years that it takes and inflict as much pain upon the mother and boyfriend as I could before I got caught or killed them.

    I would do it without remorse or hesitation. I’ll be ready for the knackers yard by that time anyway

    Premier Icon Stoner
    Subscriber

    Coyote, that’s a common defence of those in responsible positions when cases like this come around, but it begs the question of whether the teachers et al in this case did make any effort to report or notify any concerns. You can’t use a difficult process as a defence for inaction.

    mikertroid
    Member

    The disgusted parent in me would like to see them given the death penalty.

    The Prime Minister in me would like to see these people sterilised before they reproduce so they can’t inflict their misery on their desperate offspring (Recognise screening would be controversial/prone to dispute).

    The citizen in me knows (hopes?) that once they’ve realised they’re in jail for a very long time without their booze/drug binges, the reality of what they did will make the rest of their pointless lives hell to live.

    bencooper
    Member

    The death penalty isn’t about deterrence*, it’s about revenge. As a society, we shouldn’t do revenge. And this is in addition to the whole problem of accidentally executing an innocent person.

    *Do you seriously think that these people would think “I won’t kill my child if I get the death penalty, but I will if I only get the rest of my life in prison”?

    mickolas
    Member

    The death penalty isn’t just about revenge. It’s part revenge (and why shouldn’t victims get that anyway – it’s a long established part of the human psyche and to deny it could be considered unhealthy), part deterrence (maybe not so much in this case, but what about a gang-related murder?), but mostly it’s about removing these people humanely from society for the protection of those who do not indulge in the sickest, cruellest acts and do not want to become future victims.

    If ‘life’ meant LIFE, then that would mean an existence without hope of sex, relationships, reproduction, parenting those offspring one may already have produced, boozy nights out/drugs binges, mtbing or most of the other things that give a point to the human experience.

    In my honest opinion, that is tantamount to the cruellest torture and obviates any argument anyone could make about the death penalty being ‘barbaric’ or ‘uncivilised’ or ‘inhumane’.

    How far does it differ from the actions of Josef Fritzl? Acts which are quite rightly condemned as all those things.

    Premier Icon Northwind
    Subscriber

    mickolas – Member

    that’s a circular argument. and a simplification. killing people is wrong because killing people is wrong.

    Nope, that itself is a simplification. Try “A legal system that kills people has less credibility when it tells others not to kill people”

    Oh, also try “The thing about life imprisonment is you can release the person when you screwed up”

    Junkyard
    Member

    and why shouldn’t victims get that anyway – it’s a long established part of the human psyche and to deny it could be considered unhealthy)

    Well so is murder and rape and theft – you know the bad things we try to discourage and we term crimes so denying this could be considered unhealthy

    lex talionis [ eye for an eye tooth for a tooth means the revenge would never stop

    FWIW brady committed his crimes when the death penalty was in place but was charged once it was repealed. He has been trying to have the right to end his life fro well over a decade

    Life in prison may not be the lesser punishment and the death penalty appears to be of limited use as a deterrent

    stufive
    Member

    I have a four year old and I just cant get my head round how peaple could do these things? they should be tortured end of

    Junkyard
    Member

    so torturing a child is bad

    What exactly is torturing an adult then?

    I dont get why folk go that behaviour you did is so bad. terrible and appalling my only response is to do it to you

    Its still wrong whoever does it

    ninfan
    Member

    A depressingly familiar story!

    Fear not however, there will be a serious case review, with the inevitable ‘revelation’ that there turns out to have been a long history of multi agency child protection reports

    I’m sure ‘no stone will go unturned to make sure this cannot happen again’ will be heard a lot, as will “lack of communication” “opportunities were missed” and “systemic failure”

    The reality will be extra reams of paperwork for social workers. It will of course happen again and further stones will be moved about, nothing will change.

    hels
    Member

    I am sure I read somewhere that there was another child in the family, who was well treated. So they knew what to do and had the means, they just chose to maltreat that child.

    There was a family in the town I grew up in like that, my sister was in the same class as the older girl who was the child from her mothers former relationship, I was in the class of the younger child. One was abused horribly, scapegoated for everything and the younger was spoiled rotten.

    The dad went to prison in this case, the abused girl ended up on the streets sniffing glue and the younger one swanned about like nothing has happened.

    It is not uncommon, apparentely.

    crispy1980
    Member

    Hey guys, thud story really has badly affected me. I have a son if four and everytone I see him smile I think of that poor child and the many more like him that don’t smile very often. I genuinely don’t know what punusishment would suit the monsters that can do that. But what we can all do is help by supporting charities such as nspcc. Do what ice done, nip on the site and make a donation.

    mickolas
    Member

    Northwind – Member

    mickolas – Member

    that’s a circular argument. and a simplification. killing people is wrong because killing people is wrong.

    Nope, that itself is a simplification. Try “A legal system that kills people has less credibility when it tells others not to kill people”

    Oh, also try “The thing about life imprisonment is you can release the person when you screwed up”

    Yes…..my point *was* that it is a simplification 😕

    How about “A legal system that imprisons people has less credibility when it tells others not to imprison people” – that line of argument doesn’t hold in one case or the other; it is irrelevant. Death to an individual by consent of law (ie a judge and jury) is a far cry from acknowledgement of one individual’s right to take the life of another.

    Okay – the redaction argument is a valid one – and so far the only valid argument I have ever seen against the death penalty. Perhaps a post-judgement review with a panel of judges reviewing any proposed capital punishment cases with a 100% concensus required? No doubt there would never be a 100% certain system, but keeping murderers alive and allowing them the opportunity to murder again should surely be a larger hazard and a bigger burden of guilt on the collective conscience.

    edited to change ‘killers’ to ‘murderers’

Viewing 40 posts - 41 through 80 (of 80 total)

The topic ‘Daniel Pelka murder case’ is closed to new replies.