The actions of this man have just rendered me completely speechless:
Those of the judge weren't much better either.
Read this and you will probably weep.
Those of the judge weren't much better either.
Read this and you will probably weep.
Un-fucking-believable .. I'm too bloody angry to weep ..
ReplyDeleteI'd like to do the same thing to both McArthur & Turnbull .. but in their cases, I'd use a fence post, wrapped in barbed wire ..
What a pair of unspeakable, cowardly cunts ..
There's more to this than meets the eye. I'm sure.
ReplyDeleteI just stumbled upon the story a half hour ago and it's all over twitter. Bastards.
Jesus....... that story is a stomach churner. I agree with you, what was the judge smoking?
ReplyDeleteFirst thing PIgsy said to me was she had the awfu lfeeling that this is some sort of cover up for activities that we don't even want to think about.
ReplyDeleteI am sure prisoners would help him understand the pain...
ReplyDeleteBut don't forget to send the judge to keep him company. Mitigating circumstances!!!
Ampers
Holy shit - (pardon the pun) - but what the fuck was that judge on about! >:o
ReplyDeleteOther than that - the website's looking very good, Gotty, and I see you've even upgraded to, as Bunnikins calls it, comment thingy! Nice one.
Think Holly Grieg, mate! :(
ReplyDeleteSomething about these judges and leniency towards offences against infants and small children (in very particular areas within Britain as well).
ReplyDeleteFar be it from me to insinuate.... But you know what I mean.
Interesting new design by the way. Minimal :-D
One could reasonably expect to be "admonished" by the Vicar, for farting during the sermon ..
ReplyDeleteBut for an offence of this magnitude ? ... Is it possible that these two are "known" to each other in different circumstances ?
You can bet that if he'd done the same to a dog, he'd have got 5 years .. no messing about ..
Dunblane, Belgium, Jersey, Brazilian visitors. The whole Bilderberger edifice is polluted.
ReplyDeleteCan't see a problem with that idea.
ReplyDeleteThanks Spidey, liked the look of it at your place and TheEye's so thought I'd give it a go ;)
ReplyDeleteKnow exactly what you mean CS and it's sending a shiver down my spine. t's all so sick.
ReplyDeleteGlad you like the new design, been a few teethig problems but hope it'll settle down soon.
Yes "admonished" ... a strange choice of word in the circumstances.
ReplyDelete"Admonished" .. the polite form for being "Bollocked" .. which I have been on a few occasions in my career .. ;)
ReplyDeleteBut not for anything anywhere near as serious as this twisted bastard ..
How, in the world is it possible to do something so dreadful to a child .. and get away with a "Bollocking" ? .. It doesn't bear thinking about ..
The whole thing stinks to high heaven ..
Sickening, absolutely sickening.
ReplyDeleteThe Judges comments says it all ...its a coverup!
ReplyDelete"However, I reject as baseless any suggestion that his behaviour was sexually motivated."
I would be very interested to know whether the Baby wipe, recovered from this child's bowel was subjected to detailed forensic examination & submitted for testing to establish the presence (or not) of any substance or substances which could not have occurred naturally in the body of a child of this age .. and if not, why not ?
ReplyDeleteIf the Judge accepts as "baseless" that there was any sexual motivation .. then the magnitude of the assault must, at the very least have constituted GBH .. which carries a penalty far more severe than mere "Admonition" ..
Here's what Wikipedia has to say about "Admonition" ...
"Admonition (or "being admonished") is a punishment under Scots law when an offender has been found guilty but is neither imprisoned nor fined but receives a verbal warning and is afterwards set free; the conviction is still recorded. This can be compared to an absolute discharge where a conviction is not recorded.
It is usually the result of either the strict application of law where no real wrong has been caused or where other circumstances (e.g. time already spent in custody or attending court) make further punishment unjust in the circumstances specific to the case involved".
It's one of the worst things that I have ever read Rosie. I just can't stop thinking about the pain that child must have been through.
ReplyDeleteYeah right. That's probably because he wouldn't think twice about doing it either. Why else would the scum let the scum off like that.
ReplyDeleteWhen you see the definition like that, in black and white, it really does bring home what an absolute disgrace this whole affair is.
ReplyDelete"Baseless", fucking "baseless"!
As someone else has already said, this is a cover up. Nothing more, nothing less and meanwhile that poor child is still suffering.
I'm not that familiar with the Scottish Courts system .. but presumably, after McArthur was charged, he would have appeared before the equivalent of our Magistrates Court ..
ReplyDeleteWhere, in all probability, in a case of such seriousness, the Magistrate (or District Judge, as they're now called) would have committed the matter to the Crown Court ..
Despite looking at several Scottish press reports, I can find no mention as to whether or for how long McArthur might have been remanded (either on Bail or in Custody) .. which, given the definition of "Admonishment" might have explained the extraordinary conclusion reached by the Judge in this case ..
Effectively, McArthur has been charged, appeared in Court, been "weighed-off" & kicked out .. I suspect (but aren't certain) that he cannot be re-charged or re-tried regarding this matter ..
All very neat & tidy .. Eh ????
Dear God
ReplyDeleteIf we cant protect our children, we cant call ourselves a society.
That's not fucking accidental. I've got children - there's no fucking way you could do that by anything other than violent rage. The man should be fucking shot.
ReplyDelete...and when I say shot, I mean fired from a howitzer into an active volcano.
There must be a way to quality control judges... you can't have justice without justification.
Exactly.
ReplyDelete"<span>by anything other than violent rage"</span>
ReplyDeleteOr sickening sexual deviance.
Either way the judge was in a position to teach this kiddy fiddler a severe lesson but chose not to. Read what you like into that but it certainly ain't good.
is there any common sense in the judiciary ? Jail the bastard for a long long time thats justice if he is so thick he should be locked away for the safety of everyone . Pity he wasn't in Utah they would have shot the twat
ReplyDelete