hello its a very solomn grumps column today but i write this with absolute anger and fury in my heart.
TORTURED Baby P was seen SIXTY times by health or social workers during the eight months in which he was brutally abused.
The 17-month-old tot had more than FIFTY injuries or bruises.
When he was seen by a doctor two days before he died, he had a broken back, eight fractured ribs and was paralysed from the waist down.
Yet NO ONE realised the danger he was in. And NO ONE saved him.
He was on the child protection register of Haringey Council in North London - the same authority that failed to help doomed eight-year-old Victoria Climbie in the case that shocked the nation in 2000.
Tiny Baby P — hollow-cheeked and with his curly hair shaved off — died in his blood-spattered cot hours after he was punched so hard in the mouth he swallowed a bottom tooth.
That was probably the blow that finally killed him, causing a neck injury that affected his breathing, the Old Bailey heard yesterday.
Many in the court wept as the full horror of Baby P’s fate unfolded. They were told how the tot’s jobless stepdad, a 32-year-old sadist who cannot be named, tortured the mite to “toughen him up.
The child’s 27-year-old mother, who also cannot be named, and paedophile lodger Jason Owen, 36, stood by as the abuse went on.
The jury found the stepdad — a collector of Nazi memorabilia including knives — guilty of causing or allowing Baby P’s death. He was cleared of murder as jurors could not agree on which of the three adults caused all the tot’s injuries.
Filthy
The Sun can reveal he was once arrested on suspicion of torturing his dying gran to force her to change her will. No charges were pressed.
Baby P’s mother, described as a hardcore porn-watching “slob, admitted allowing him to die.
National Front member Owen, who joined the pair in their filthy council house with his 15-year-old girlfriend, was convicted of the same charge. All three face up to 14 years’ jail.
Baby P’s back was broken by being forced over a bent knee or banister, the court heard.
His ears were torn where he had been lifted off the ground and fingernails, fingertips and a toenail were missing. He had lesions on his scalp — and his lips were ripped.
The stepdad also “trained Baby P to sit on the floor with his head between his legs for half an hour until he clicked his fingers. Police images of the tot’s injuries and stained clothes were shown to jurors.
Prosecuting QC Sally O’Neill told how a family friend revealed the depth of the abuse as the child was used like a punchbag.
She said the stepdad would “pick him up by his throat, punch him and spin him around on the computer chair until he fell off.
Time after time, social workers noticed marks on the boy’s skin. But they fell for a pack of lies they were told by the mum. She claimed Baby P was a “head-banger who kept bumping into hard objects.
They did not see through her even though she smeared CHOCOLATE over his injuries to conceal them.
The blunders continued even after the mother was arrested on suspicion of assaulting Baby P. The child was handed to a friend. But social workers soon returned him to his mum. He died the day after she was told she would face NO charges.
No one realised the stepdad was living in the house even though three dogs were there, including a rottweiler owned by the brute.
Police said they would have objected if they had known either man was there. The £110,000-a-year head of Haringey Children’s Services refused to resign last night — as it emerged SHE had led an “independent review of the case. Sharon Shoesmith concluded NONE of her social workers should be sacked.
She blamed paediatrician Sabah Alzayyat, the doctor who failed to notice the tot’s broken back.
She said two social workers and a lawyer had received written warnings but refused to name them.
Child protection charity Kidscape called for “heads to roll and said: “This child was seen 60 times and yet nobody did a thing. It’s pathetic.
Children’s Minister Beverley Hughes announced a nationwide review of child protection services.
Today Ms Hughes said further examination was needed of the senior management levels of Haringey Council to see if anyone should take responsibility for the death of Baby P.
Ms Hughes said she believed the chief executive of Haringey and councillors needed to look at whether anyone at a higher level should be held accountable.
“I think the council has a responsibility, it is an elected body, it has the responsibility to ask itself the question, in the light of this case, whether there is an accountability at another level in the management of this case, she told GMTV.
AAG
talk about passing the buck and a cover up.
heads should roll at harringay social services and all those involved should lose their jobs the general medical council should also get involved and sack the paediatrician who did not do their job properly as this is medical neglect and is against the doctors hippocratic oath.
now i turn to the savages who did this to baby p.
it is said they could face up to 14 years in jail this is nowhere long enough
they must never see the outside again this also goes for the animal of a so called father who cannot be named possibly as he is still on remand and not yet convicted.
but i hope he will get whats coming to him as he will have to serve his sentence as a rule 43 prisioner but word gets round jails and wherever they send him or move him to he will have a reception waiting from the cons and screws and i speak from experience no one can hear you scream in segregation so take comfort in that FG
readers.
finally we must stop listening to the lilly livered do gooders and return to the death sentence for heinous crimes of this nature .
i will keep you informed as more about baby p breaks.
AAG
why did no one help baby p ? the AA grumpy column
why did no one help baby p ? the AA grumpy column
There are around fifty child deaths like that each year in the UK. One a week among a population of 60 million.
That gives the UK just about the lowest rate of child death through familial assault of any country in the world.
The reason we have so low a rate is the size and capability of our local health services together with the legal framework in which they operate.
No system has ever been devised by which a zero rate is achievable. This instance occurred because of deliberate deception on the part of the mother.
The court has recommended that future practice place less reliance on the word of any family member. Perhaps that will even bring the rate down to one a fortnight instead, who can tell. What it won't do is reduce the rate to zero. You'll still have a minuscule number of instances creeping below the net and resulting in tragedy.
I do, as it happens, have an alternative. It's to remove all children from their parents at birth and have them all brought up in State crèches. I think that would be a far more effective way of raising responsible citizens.
As for release, you know my view on that already. There should be no maximum detention period for any crime. Nobody should ever be released from any jail sentence unless they pose less risk of offending than the average citizen currently at liberty, and all re-offending should immediately result in a massive fine on the private enterprise paroling body so as to give them a meaningful incentive to do their job effectively.
That gives the UK just about the lowest rate of child death through familial assault of any country in the world.
The reason we have so low a rate is the size and capability of our local health services together with the legal framework in which they operate.
No system has ever been devised by which a zero rate is achievable. This instance occurred because of deliberate deception on the part of the mother.
The court has recommended that future practice place less reliance on the word of any family member. Perhaps that will even bring the rate down to one a fortnight instead, who can tell. What it won't do is reduce the rate to zero. You'll still have a minuscule number of instances creeping below the net and resulting in tragedy.
I do, as it happens, have an alternative. It's to remove all children from their parents at birth and have them all brought up in State crèches. I think that would be a far more effective way of raising responsible citizens.
As for release, you know my view on that already. There should be no maximum detention period for any crime. Nobody should ever be released from any jail sentence unless they pose less risk of offending than the average citizen currently at liberty, and all re-offending should immediately result in a massive fine on the private enterprise paroling body so as to give them a meaningful incentive to do their job effectively.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
why did no one help baby p ? the AA grumpy column
What a horrible horrible nightmare that child lived through.
They not only should all be sacked but the head of Haringey Children’s Services and the pediatrician Sabah Alzayyat should both be charged with neglect causing death or something.
This is terrible, absolutely terrible and their dreams at night should be filled with horror the way that poor child's life was.
They not only should all be sacked but the head of Haringey Children’s Services and the pediatrician Sabah Alzayyat should both be charged with neglect causing death or something.
This is terrible, absolutely terrible and their dreams at night should be filled with horror the way that poor child's life was.
why did no one help baby p ? the AA grumpy column
baby p time line
Mar 1, 2006: Baby P is born.
Dec 11: Baby P is taken to his GP with a head injury, bruising to his nose and right shoulder. Mother "flustered" and claims he had fallen off the settee and been scratched by the dog. Baby P referred to Haringey Social Services and mother later arrested for assault.
Jan 26, 2007: Baby P returns to the care of his mother while she is still on police bail.
Mar 22: Social worker Maria Ward notices Baby P has a red mark on the side of his chin. The mother claims he bumped into a side table at her friend's home. Health visitor Paulette Thomas completes a one-year check and reports "no concerns".
Apr 9: The mother takes Baby P to hospital with a large swelling and bruising on the left side of his head and a small bruise on his right cheek. Social services are informed and a diagnosis of possible meningitis is made.
June 1: Ms Ward finds some bruising under the chin and a red line under his eye. Later, medical staff at hospital find 12 areas of bruising.
June 5: The mother is arrested for a second time and questioned by police. She claims she is a "damn good mum".
June 8: Photographs of a bruise at the centre of his spine are taken during a visit to his home by the police child protection team.
June 12: Childminder tells social services of concerns about sore on Baby P's head and says the toddler is often unwashed, smells of vomit and always seems to be hungry.
July 30: Ms Ward makes her last visit to see Baby P. He is in his buggy and has chocolate smears over his face and hands, and anti-bacterial cream on his scalp - to obscure injuries.
Aug 1: Baby P visits St Anne's hospital, allegedly suffering from fractured ribs and a broken back, paralysing him from the waist down. Dr Sabah al-Zayyat notes bruises to the body and face but does not carry out a full examination because Baby P is "miserable and cranky". In evidence, she insists "he didn't look any different from a child of his age with a common cold."
Aug 3: A 999 call is made. Baby P is taken to hospital but pronounced dead on arrival.
Mar 1, 2006: Baby P is born.
Dec 11: Baby P is taken to his GP with a head injury, bruising to his nose and right shoulder. Mother "flustered" and claims he had fallen off the settee and been scratched by the dog. Baby P referred to Haringey Social Services and mother later arrested for assault.
Jan 26, 2007: Baby P returns to the care of his mother while she is still on police bail.
Mar 22: Social worker Maria Ward notices Baby P has a red mark on the side of his chin. The mother claims he bumped into a side table at her friend's home. Health visitor Paulette Thomas completes a one-year check and reports "no concerns".
Apr 9: The mother takes Baby P to hospital with a large swelling and bruising on the left side of his head and a small bruise on his right cheek. Social services are informed and a diagnosis of possible meningitis is made.
June 1: Ms Ward finds some bruising under the chin and a red line under his eye. Later, medical staff at hospital find 12 areas of bruising.
June 5: The mother is arrested for a second time and questioned by police. She claims she is a "damn good mum".
June 8: Photographs of a bruise at the centre of his spine are taken during a visit to his home by the police child protection team.
June 12: Childminder tells social services of concerns about sore on Baby P's head and says the toddler is often unwashed, smells of vomit and always seems to be hungry.
July 30: Ms Ward makes her last visit to see Baby P. He is in his buggy and has chocolate smears over his face and hands, and anti-bacterial cream on his scalp - to obscure injuries.
Aug 1: Baby P visits St Anne's hospital, allegedly suffering from fractured ribs and a broken back, paralysing him from the waist down. Dr Sabah al-Zayyat notes bruises to the body and face but does not carry out a full examination because Baby P is "miserable and cranky". In evidence, she insists "he didn't look any different from a child of his age with a common cold."
Aug 3: A 999 call is made. Baby P is taken to hospital but pronounced dead on arrival.
"To be foolish and to recognize that one is foolish, is better than to be foolish and imagine that one is wise."
why did no one help baby p ? the AA grumpy column
This is one of those cases that words simply fail to describe. The suffering endured by that small child at the hands of these people including its mother was beyond appalling and is probably best described as simply "Evil".
It is hard to reconcile such actions with any concept of human compassion or empathy for the suffering of another. The fact that the child's own mother was one of those involved simply makes it worse. I am presuming that these people must either be pyschotic or regular drug users to be able to inflict so much suffering on an infant with no remorse.
As to the wider questions about social care etc, I don't really have an opinion other than obviously something is terribly wrong with the services in that particular borough, dreadful, dreadful.
It is hard to reconcile such actions with any concept of human compassion or empathy for the suffering of another. The fact that the child's own mother was one of those involved simply makes it worse. I am presuming that these people must either be pyschotic or regular drug users to be able to inflict so much suffering on an infant with no remorse.
As to the wider questions about social care etc, I don't really have an opinion other than obviously something is terribly wrong with the services in that particular borough, dreadful, dreadful.
"We are never so happy, never so unhappy, as we imagine"
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
-
wildhorses
- Posts: 648
- Joined: Sun Oct 12, 2008 7:08 pm
why did no one help baby p ? the AA grumpy column
Galbally;1056248 wrote: This is one of those cases that words simply fail to describe. The suffering endured by that small child at the hands of these people including its mother was beyond appallingn and is probably best described as simply "Evil".
It is hard to reconcile such actions with any concept of human compassion or empathy for the suffering of another. The fact that the child's own mother was one of those involved simply makes it worse. I am presuming that these people must either be pyschotic or regular drug users to be able to inflict so much suffering on an infant with no remorse.
As to the wider questions about social care etc, I don't really have an opinion other than obviously something is terribly wrong with the services in that particular borough, dreadful, dreadful.
I almost hate to bring this up as this story is already so tragic. But if social services could see this severely abused child so many times, and not know that something was terribly wrong....then just think of the other cases which have gotten by them. Cases that might not be so severe at this one, but severe nonetheless.
The child was tortured and then finally murdered. All three adults should be charged with murder or acessory to murder. And so should the social workers. It was their responsibility to protect this child. The child was full of bruises and broken bones FCOL. This child is dead, and at lease no longer being tortured. May he rest in peace, finally. Poor child. But there are other children, and this agency is not protecting them.
It is hard to reconcile such actions with any concept of human compassion or empathy for the suffering of another. The fact that the child's own mother was one of those involved simply makes it worse. I am presuming that these people must either be pyschotic or regular drug users to be able to inflict so much suffering on an infant with no remorse.
As to the wider questions about social care etc, I don't really have an opinion other than obviously something is terribly wrong with the services in that particular borough, dreadful, dreadful.
I almost hate to bring this up as this story is already so tragic. But if social services could see this severely abused child so many times, and not know that something was terribly wrong....then just think of the other cases which have gotten by them. Cases that might not be so severe at this one, but severe nonetheless.
The child was tortured and then finally murdered. All three adults should be charged with murder or acessory to murder. And so should the social workers. It was their responsibility to protect this child. The child was full of bruises and broken bones FCOL. This child is dead, and at lease no longer being tortured. May he rest in peace, finally. Poor child. But there are other children, and this agency is not protecting them.
why did no one help baby p ? the AA grumpy column
BBC NEWS | England | London | Child welfare review set to begin will report in a couple of weeks. Sharon Shoesmith, head of child services at Haringey social services and chair of Haringey's Local Safeguarding Children Board, made a shockingly stupid error in trying to defend both the staff involved and Haringey's record instead of apologizing. The least she should have done is sacrificed the staff involved or alternatively accepted that the buck stopped at her desk and gone herself. Far too few public servants have any sense of personal honour in these matters. I rather hope Haringey reaps the whirlwind and loses the entire department. Perhaps Sharon Shoesmith could be given Haringey's public libraries to administer instead.
While we're at it, the two-thirds of authorities which allow the head of child services to also chair the Local Safeguarding Children Board should stop immediately and appoint independent scrutiny.
While we're at it, the two-thirds of authorities which allow the head of child services to also chair the Local Safeguarding Children Board should stop immediately and appoint independent scrutiny.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
why did no one help baby p ? the AA grumpy column
spot;1056253 wrote: BBC NEWS | England | London | Child welfare review set to begin will report in a couple of weeks. Sharon Shoesmith, head of child services at Haringey social services and chair of Haringey's Local Safeguarding Children Board, made a shockingly stupid error in trying to defend both the staff involved and Haringey's record instead of apologizing. The least she should have done is sacrificed the staff involved or alternatively accepted that the buck stopped at her desk and gone herself. Far too few public servants have any sense of personal honour in these matters. I rather hope Haringey reaps the whirlwind and loses the entire department. Perhaps Sharon Shoesmith could be given Haringey's public libraries to administer instead.
While we're at it, the two-thirds of authorities which allow the head of child services to also chair the Local Safeguarding Children Board should stop immediately and appoint independent scrutiny.
I think most people could only agree with that sentiment. The entire child services department in that Borough should be disbanded and an entirely different team of people should be brought in to replace them. I would also agree with taking the Child Services Head off the chair of the LSC Board, its an obvious conflict of interest. In this particular case, (and a well known previous case) the people involved failed completely, and actually prevented other agencies such as the local police from actions that may have prevented the death of the child. Its completely inexcusable.
While we're at it, the two-thirds of authorities which allow the head of child services to also chair the Local Safeguarding Children Board should stop immediately and appoint independent scrutiny.
I think most people could only agree with that sentiment. The entire child services department in that Borough should be disbanded and an entirely different team of people should be brought in to replace them. I would also agree with taking the Child Services Head off the chair of the LSC Board, its an obvious conflict of interest. In this particular case, (and a well known previous case) the people involved failed completely, and actually prevented other agencies such as the local police from actions that may have prevented the death of the child. Its completely inexcusable.
"We are never so happy, never so unhappy, as we imagine"
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
why did no one help baby p ? the AA grumpy column
spot;1056253 wrote: BBC NEWS | England | London | Child welfare review set to begin will report in a couple of weeks. Sharon Shoesmith, head of child services at Haringey social services and chair of Haringey's Local Safeguarding Children Board, made a shockingly stupid error in trying to defend both the staff involved and Haringey's record instead of apologizing. The least she should have done is sacrificed the staff involved or alternatively accepted that the buck stopped at her desk and gone herself. Far too few public servants have any sense of personal honour in these matters. I rather hope Haringey reaps the whirlwind and loses the entire department. Perhaps Sharon Shoesmith could be given Haringey's public libraries to administer instead.
While we're at it, the two-thirds of authorities which allow the head of child services to also chair the Local Safeguarding Children Board should stop immediately and appoint independent scrutiny.
It is definitely a time for heads to roll - starting at the top.
While we're at it, the two-thirds of authorities which allow the head of child services to also chair the Local Safeguarding Children Board should stop immediately and appoint independent scrutiny.
It is definitely a time for heads to roll - starting at the top.
-
Oscar Namechange
- Posts: 31840
- Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 9:26 am
why did no one help baby p ? the AA grumpy column
As a final thread after hearing about the abusive power of Haringay Social Services Chiefs that ultimately led to the death of Baby P,
These are the reasons that Sharon Shoesmith, the arrogant over paid chief in the case of Baby P should not only be sacked but prosecuted with 'allowing the death of a child' along with the three charged.
Baby P whistleblower breaks her silence to speak to the Sunday Mirror - mirror.co.uk
In an article in last night's Mail, even Shoesmith's own relatives are calling for her sacking. She refuses to resign.
These are the reasons that Sharon Shoesmith, the arrogant over paid chief in the case of Baby P should not only be sacked but prosecuted with 'allowing the death of a child' along with the three charged.
Baby P whistleblower breaks her silence to speak to the Sunday Mirror - mirror.co.uk
In an article in last night's Mail, even Shoesmith's own relatives are calling for her sacking. She refuses to resign.
At the going down of the sun and in the morning, we will remember them. R.L. Binyon
why did no one help baby p ? the AA grumpy column
oscar;1059955 wrote: As a final thread after hearing about the abusive power of Haringay Social Services Chiefs that ultimately led to the death of Baby P,
These are the reasons that Sharon Shoesmith, the arrogant over paid chief in the case of Baby P should not only be sacked but prosecuted with 'allowing the death of a child' along with the three charged.
Baby P whistleblower breaks her silence to speak to the Sunday Mirror - mirror.co.uk
In an article in last night's Mail, even Shoesmith's own relatives are calling for her sacking. She refuses to resign.
ya, she sould be fired and charged.
in the paper today it said that the mother of baby P was named on the internet. Thank God for the freedom of speech on the internet that is not granted otherwise.
The woman is 27, why should her identity be protected? Lets see her, who is the 'mother' who can be involved in causing her child so much pain?
These are the reasons that Sharon Shoesmith, the arrogant over paid chief in the case of Baby P should not only be sacked but prosecuted with 'allowing the death of a child' along with the three charged.
Baby P whistleblower breaks her silence to speak to the Sunday Mirror - mirror.co.uk
In an article in last night's Mail, even Shoesmith's own relatives are calling for her sacking. She refuses to resign.
ya, she sould be fired and charged.
in the paper today it said that the mother of baby P was named on the internet. Thank God for the freedom of speech on the internet that is not granted otherwise.
The woman is 27, why should her identity be protected? Lets see her, who is the 'mother' who can be involved in causing her child so much pain?
-
Oscar Namechange
- Posts: 31840
- Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 9:26 am
why did no one help baby p ? the AA grumpy column
mikeinie;1059973 wrote: ya, she sould be fired and charged.
in the paper today it said that the mother of baby P was named on the internet. Thank God for the freedom of speech on the internet that is not granted otherwise.
The woman is 27, why should her identity be protected? Lets see her, who is the 'mother' who can be involved in causing her child so much pain?
Agreed and let's see the bastard boyfriend and the pedo lodger as well.
I am sick of courts hiding scum identity's.
in the paper today it said that the mother of baby P was named on the internet. Thank God for the freedom of speech on the internet that is not granted otherwise.
The woman is 27, why should her identity be protected? Lets see her, who is the 'mother' who can be involved in causing her child so much pain?
Agreed and let's see the bastard boyfriend and the pedo lodger as well.
I am sick of courts hiding scum identity's.
At the going down of the sun and in the morning, we will remember them. R.L. Binyon
-
Oscar Namechange
- Posts: 31840
- Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 9:26 am
why did no one help baby p ? the AA grumpy column
Baby P's mother on benifit and pissed on vodka
Baby P's mum: I was drinking large vodkas & coke. I was as drunk as a t*** - Exclusive - mirror.co.uk
Baby P's mum: I was drinking large vodkas & coke. I was as drunk as a t*** - Exclusive - mirror.co.uk
At the going down of the sun and in the morning, we will remember them. R.L. Binyon
-
Oscar Namechange
- Posts: 31840
- Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 9:26 am
why did no one help baby p ? the AA grumpy column
Baby P... The full list of blunders exclusive tonight
Baby P: The full list of the fatal blunders - Exclusive - mirror.co.uk
Baby P: The full list of the fatal blunders - Exclusive - mirror.co.uk
At the going down of the sun and in the morning, we will remember them. R.L. Binyon
-
Oscar Namechange
- Posts: 31840
- Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 9:26 am
why did no one help baby p ? the AA grumpy column
Baby P's mother demands to see her new baby born in prison. Social chiefs argue that she must be allowed access to bond with the baby.
Mother of Baby P has another child while in prison - Telegraph
Mother of Baby P has another child while in prison - Telegraph
At the going down of the sun and in the morning, we will remember them. R.L. Binyon
-
Oscar Namechange
- Posts: 31840
- Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 9:26 am
why did no one help baby p ? the AA grumpy column
Exlusive tonight. Social workers had foster home for baby P but still sent him home.
The council ruling that cost Baby P his life: Social workers knew he'd been abused but STILL sent him home | Mail Online
The council ruling that cost Baby P his life: Social workers knew he'd been abused but STILL sent him home | Mail Online
At the going down of the sun and in the morning, we will remember them. R.L. Binyon
why did no one help baby p ? the AA grumpy column
oscar;1059955 wrote: As a final thread after hearing about the abusive power of Haringay Social Services Chiefs that ultimately led to the death of Baby P,
These are the reasons that Sharon Shoesmith, the arrogant over paid chief in the case of Baby P should not only be sacked but prosecuted with 'allowing the death of a child' along with the three charged.
Baby P whistleblower breaks her silence to speak to the Sunday Mirror - mirror.co.uk
In an article in last night's Mail, even Shoesmith's own relatives are calling for her sacking. She refuses to resign.
As I have already said in another thread, the corruption is far wider and goes higher than just Sharon Shoestring.
These are the reasons that Sharon Shoesmith, the arrogant over paid chief in the case of Baby P should not only be sacked but prosecuted with 'allowing the death of a child' along with the three charged.
Baby P whistleblower breaks her silence to speak to the Sunday Mirror - mirror.co.uk
In an article in last night's Mail, even Shoesmith's own relatives are calling for her sacking. She refuses to resign.
As I have already said in another thread, the corruption is far wider and goes higher than just Sharon Shoestring.
-
Oscar Namechange
- Posts: 31840
- Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 9:26 am
why did no one help baby p ? the AA grumpy column
OpenMind;1060848 wrote: As I have already said in another thread, the corruption is far wider and goes higher than just Sharon Shoestring.
Yes, i have to agree even if i am a Gordon Brown fan. This is something he has to put right along with policing issue's if he is to secure a landslide in a general election. He seems to have got the economics sorted but many home policie's urgently need reviewing.
I think it was this thread where i said that in the case of 'Victoria Climbie', there was an enquirey and bungling whitehall officials handed the enquiry straight back to Shoesmith and Haringay council.
I just hope that baby P's death was not in vain and even if these arrogant heads are not brought to task, they will stop other councils from ever allowing the same to happen. they do need to look higher than Sharon Shoesmith as well, you are quite right.
It will be interesting to see what comes of the enquirey that Gordon Brown has promised.
Yes, i have to agree even if i am a Gordon Brown fan. This is something he has to put right along with policing issue's if he is to secure a landslide in a general election. He seems to have got the economics sorted but many home policie's urgently need reviewing.
I think it was this thread where i said that in the case of 'Victoria Climbie', there was an enquirey and bungling whitehall officials handed the enquiry straight back to Shoesmith and Haringay council.
I just hope that baby P's death was not in vain and even if these arrogant heads are not brought to task, they will stop other councils from ever allowing the same to happen. they do need to look higher than Sharon Shoesmith as well, you are quite right.
It will be interesting to see what comes of the enquirey that Gordon Brown has promised.
At the going down of the sun and in the morning, we will remember them. R.L. Binyon
why did no one help baby p ? the AA grumpy column
my god..this is so sad,, and horrifying..that any adult human being would treat a defensless child this way..a childs life should carry such importance that if killed by neglect or abuse.the adults responsiple for the death should get the death sentence..they should never ever be allowed to have any more children..stop the evil right there in its tracks..but thats my opinion...
the fact that a child's life isnt considered that important apalls me on many levels..
the fact that a child's life isnt considered that important apalls me on many levels..
-
Oscar Namechange
- Posts: 31840
- Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 9:26 am
why did no one help baby p ? the AA grumpy column
guppy;1060898 wrote: my god..this is so sad,, and horrifying..that any adult human being would treat a defensless child this way..a childs life should carry such importance that if killed by neglect or abuse.the adults responsiple for the death should get the death sentence..they should never ever be allowed to have any more children..stop the evil right there in its tracks..but thats my opinion...
the fact that a child's life isnt considered that important apalls me on many levels..
Some of the details emerging from this trial are just too distressing for some members to look at.
There was another report in our press last night that apparently the police have been searching Epping Forest for the last eight months as the teenage girlfriend of the lodger charged told police that he had buried 2 mobile phones there. When she asked the mother why he had done this, the mother said 'Because, what he did to the baby is on them'. The sickko filmed his torture.
I would imagine that half of the old East End villains are buried somewhere in Epping Forest so it's not surprising that police have said they had to give up their search. It's enormous.
Also last night another report from the trial said that the prosecution were instruscted by the judge halfway through the trial to reduce the cahrge of murder on all three to the lessor charge of 'causing death to a child'. I could not understand this until last night when i read that far from it being a soft Judge's instruction, he was safe guarding a conviction.
The mother, her boyfriend and the lodger have for eight months all blamed each other. It would be highly likely that due to this, a question of doubt could be returned therefore only giving the jury the option of a not guilty verdict. That is the law here, where there is doubt, a not guilty verdict must be returned.
To change the charge to 'allowing the death of a child' allows them to convict all three as they have done. They could have got off with the murder charge without proof which one of the three actually did it.
This now means that the judge can only give them the maximum of 17 years which is the max for that charge instead of life. It is better than having them walk free on a tech though.
the fact that a child's life isnt considered that important apalls me on many levels..
Some of the details emerging from this trial are just too distressing for some members to look at.
There was another report in our press last night that apparently the police have been searching Epping Forest for the last eight months as the teenage girlfriend of the lodger charged told police that he had buried 2 mobile phones there. When she asked the mother why he had done this, the mother said 'Because, what he did to the baby is on them'. The sickko filmed his torture.
I would imagine that half of the old East End villains are buried somewhere in Epping Forest so it's not surprising that police have said they had to give up their search. It's enormous.
Also last night another report from the trial said that the prosecution were instruscted by the judge halfway through the trial to reduce the cahrge of murder on all three to the lessor charge of 'causing death to a child'. I could not understand this until last night when i read that far from it being a soft Judge's instruction, he was safe guarding a conviction.
The mother, her boyfriend and the lodger have for eight months all blamed each other. It would be highly likely that due to this, a question of doubt could be returned therefore only giving the jury the option of a not guilty verdict. That is the law here, where there is doubt, a not guilty verdict must be returned.
To change the charge to 'allowing the death of a child' allows them to convict all three as they have done. They could have got off with the murder charge without proof which one of the three actually did it.
This now means that the judge can only give them the maximum of 17 years which is the max for that charge instead of life. It is better than having them walk free on a tech though.
At the going down of the sun and in the morning, we will remember them. R.L. Binyon