Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

Both Chicks look kind of creepy to me..anyway..Discuss.

Must....take......subject....seriously....

ERROR.ERROR.ERRRRROORRR.

What makes this crime so serious and sickening is that they are ugly... sorry but they are actually scary!

Originally posted by Hit_and_Miss
What makes this crime so serious and sickening is that they are ugly... sorry but they are actually scary!

Yep, neither is the pick of the litter. You have to be real sick woman if you can't at least get a teenage boy to sleep with you. I'm betting both of these broads were only able to bag really really fat chicks. No hot chick would cross the line with these dogs.

Originally posted by whobdamandog
Yep, neither is the pick of the litter. You have to be real sick woman if you can't at least get a teenage boy to sleep with you. I'm betting both of these broads were only able to bag really really fat chicks. No hot chick would cross the line with these dogs.



The 15yr old girls are probably worse then them! they are probably happy to get some attention!

Originally posted by Draco69
Must....take......subject....seriously....

ERROR.ERROR.ERRRRROORRR.



What this man said.

-AC

No teacher should have there name disclosed unless they are convicted

Originally posted by Hit_and_Miss
What makes this crime so serious and sickening is that they are ugly... sorry but they are actually scary! I know...

Does anyone know if a video of the alleged molestation is available? I'd like to watch it to see if they are guilty or not.

Originally posted by Mr _Whirlysplat
No teacher should have there name disclosed unless they are convicted


technically since they are over the age of 18 the press is allowed to release it. They will not be allowed to release the names of the victims unless the parents give the ok. But its freedom of information. any time anyone gets arrested it appears in the police log of the newspapers, and it says the crime they were arrested, their name, age, and the city/town their from.

Originally posted by Curl_Up&Dye
technically since they are over the age of 18 the press is allowed to release it. They will not be allowed to release the names of the victims unless the parents give the ok. But its freedom of information. any time anyone gets arrested it appears in the police log of the newspapers, and it says the crime they were arrested, their name, age, and the city/town their from.

At the moment in the UK teaching unions are fighting for this to not happen because so many "made up" allegations are proven to be "made up". It simply should not happen.

Originally posted by Mr _Whirlysplat
At the moment in the UK teaching unions are fighting for this to not happen because so many "made up" allegations are proven to be "made up". It simply should not happen.


I agree with you 110% that allegations should not be 'made up' just for the sake of making things up. However, freedom of information and freedom of the press usually over rule everything. However, i think they could compromise. Whatever amount of news coverage they print or air about an allegation, if the allegations prove to be wrong, they should have to print or air the same amount of coverage of their innocence

Originally posted by Curl_Up&Dye
I agree with you 110% that allegations should not be 'made up' just for the sake of making things up. However, freedom of information and freedom of the press usually over rule everything. However, i think they could compromise. Whatever amount of news coverage they print or air about an allegation, if the allegations prove to be wrong, they should have to print or air the same amount of coverage of their innocence

In the UK the tabloids do not and teachers careers are often destroyed a great deal of progress in this has been made and more and more Magistrates are putting banning orders on release of teachers names in the UK until after the outcome of the trial.

Obviously the cases are judged in high court but magistrates set bail conditions etc. until initial hearings and Judges do not usually change these.

Originally posted by Mr _Whirlysplat
In the UK the tabloids do not and teachers careers are often destroyed a great deal of progress in this has been made and more and more Magistrates are putting banning orders on release of teachers names in the UK until after the outcome of the trial.

Obviously the cases are judged in high court but magistrates set bail conditions etc. until initial hearings and Judges do not usually change these.

the US needs to start doing something like that, because there have been more than a few cases where allegations were made out of revenge for like bad grades. But honestly, people talk no matter what, so even if the names arent released, everyone in the area is going to know about it anyways

Originally posted by Curl_Up&Dye
the US needs to start doing something like that, because there have been more than a few cases where allegations were made out of revenge for like bad grades. But honestly, people talk no matter what, so even if the names arent released, everyone in the area is going to know about it anyways

Agreed, teachers, social workers, doctors etc are easy targets. Yes everyone in the area but not nationally. People can relocate and put things behind them this way.

Originally posted by Mr _Whirlysplat
Agreed, teachers, social workers, doctors etc are easy targets. Yes everyone in the area but not nationally. People can relocate and put things behind them this way.

yeah thats true. but ALL people are going to want that right, not just the easy targets. Rapists, child molesters, murders, drug dealers, everyone is going to want the right to not have their case in the papers, even though many times these people are aquitted on charges they should have been found guilty of. Then these people can relocate and continue doing what they have been doing

hmmm.... the old double edged sword there whirly....

Originally posted by Curl_Up&Dye
yeah thats true. but ALL people are going to want that right, not just the easy targets. Rapists, child molesters, murders, drug dealers, everyone is going to want the right to not have their case in the papers, even though many times these people are aquitted on charges they should have been found guilty of. Then these people can relocate and continue doing what they have been doing

Well the Unions have made head way as I say and I think the Magistrates at present are doing a good job on it. Actually I think with these crimes if someone is found not guilty they deserve to remain anonymous, but thats another argument.

heres a little on it its out of date though

http://society.guardian.co.uk/children/story/0,1074,1192316,00.html

Its about teachers sueing over wrongful allegations

I agree to a point with you Whirly, however, I believe that when one commits a crime..they have to accept the fact that their is going to be some social stigma with the crime that they've commited.

Child molestation is a heinous offense, and I truly feel sorry for those who are wrongly accused of it..however..one who is actually found guilty of said crime..should definately be stringently monitored, even after they've served a sentence for said crime.

The sexual drive is a difficult thing to control, and many of the individuals who commit these crimes would definately do it again if given the opportunity to do so.

Originally posted by whobdamandog
I agree to a point with you Whirly, however, I believe that when one commits a crime..they have to accept the fact that their is going to be some social stigma with the crime that they've commited.

Child molestation is a heinous offense, and I truly feel sorry for those who are wrongly accused of it..however..one who is actually found guilty of said crime..should definately be stringently monitored, even after they've served a sentence for said crime.

The sexual drive is a difficult thing to control, and many of the individuals who commit these crimes would definately do it again if given the opportunity to do so.

I think we agree totally actually, but the stigma should not affect those found not guilty.

Thats not the way the media works! possibly guilty doesn't sell like Possibly Innocent! sad state of affairs really! People see the bad before the good!

Originally posted by Hit_and_Miss
Thats not the way the media works! possibly guilty doesn't sell like Possibly Innocent! sad state of affairs really! People see the bad before the good!

Thats why Unions are involved and Magistrates tend not to give names of teachers in the UK involved as much these days when they are initially granting bail, before trial. It also stops this happening.

http://www.scholastic.co.uk/magazines/downloads/017-ce11.pdf

ttp://www.epolitix.com/NR/rdonlyres/F78EB28A-FD91-4E7A-82E2-3D8467190033/0/8.pdf

http://society.guardian.co.uk/children/story/0,1074,1192316,00.html

Guidance for response again out of date

http://66.249.93.104/search?q=cache:7bHKdje2I98J:www.dfes.gov.uk/consultations/downloadableDocs/ Word%2520version%2520of%2520Consultation%2520Docum
ent.doc+NASUWT+child+sex+allegations&hl=en&client=safari

I agree look at poor john lesley... (only the crimes brought against him... Not his other problems) I saw a paper has interviewed 26 women claiming he had taken advantage of them... Yet they all got lost quite quickly when one fell apart.... It ruinned him.....

But Its good to know these peoples names... Someone might be able to clear them or give more damming proof if they see them in the paper...

Originally posted by Hit_and_Miss
I agree look at poor john lesley... (only the crimes brought against him... Not his other problems) I saw a paper has interviewed 26 women claiming he had taken advantage of them... Yet they all got lost quite quickly when one fell apart.... It ruinned him.....

But Its good to know these peoples names... Someone might be able to clear them or give more damming proof if they see them in the paper...

No its really not good to name the innocent when the accuser remains anonymous.

ah but the accuser can get sued afterwards and they can be named... Really the police should of done there homework before it comes to trial...

What did you make of the Jackson trial?? well its more of a saga now...


If only spelljammer was here to blame the liberals now... Its all there fault for once!

Originally posted by Hit_and_Miss
ah but the accuser can get sued afterwards and they can be named... Really the police should of done there homework before it comes to trial...

What did you make of the Jackson trial?? well its more of a saga now...


If only spelljammer was here to blame the liberals now... Its all there fault for once!

Its actually difficult to sue a minor.
Jackson was found not guilty thats what happened, we accept the verdict thats the rule of law.

Originally posted by Mr _Whirlysplat
Its actually difficult to sue a minor.
Jackson was found not guilty thats what happened, we accept the verdict thats the rule of law.

in jackson's case it was different. You really cant use celebrity cases in this discussion, only because their life is always in the spotlight, so there really is no way to keep anything that happens to them under wraps

but it really all goes back to the fact that no matter who is innocent or guilty, the arrest record is made public knowledge in the newspapers in the police log section

and also papers can not legally print that someone is guilty before the verdict actually comes in. only because that person can turn around and sue for something called liable. Aka printing information that is not true. Even if they end up being guilty, at the time he was 'innocent' because he had not been convicted of anything

but it is freedom of the press to print what they feel is socially important.

Originally posted by Curl_Up&Dye
but it really all goes back to the fact that no matter who is innocent or guilty, the arrest record is made public knowledge in the newspapers in the police log section

Not always in the UK and I think various Unions actions are improving things here. Courts can give anonimity till after a trial or permenantly in regard to reporting.

Originally posted by Mr _Whirlysplat
Not always in the UK and I think various Unions actions are improving things here. Courts can give anonimity till after a trial or permenantly in regard to reporting.


honestly i dont think there is anything wrong with police logs. I would honestly like to know if my neighbor is a mass murderer. The unions can provide anonyminity (sp?) for the victims, not the accused.

Originally posted by Curl_Up&Dye
honestly i dont think there is anything wrong with police logs. I would honestly like to know if my neighbor is a mass murderer. The unions can provide anonyminity (sp?) for the victims, not the accused.

You see I will disagree with you on this as I believe we should accept the rule of law and not hearsay in the UK Police logs are not as accessible and I feel thats a good thing.

Originally posted by Mr _Whirlysplat
You see I will disagree with you on this as I believe we should accept the rule of law and not hearsay in the UK Police logs are not as accessible and I feel thats a good thing.


police logs are no hearsay....theyre daily logs from the dispatch that works at the police station, and the police logs arent illegal, and in some places required

you would be very very suprised to know exactly what is public knowledge and what isnt

Originally posted by Curl_Up&Dye
you would be very very suprised to know exactly what is public knowledge and what isnt

Not hearsay in the sense that a complaint etc has been logged, but the evidence that complaint arrest is base on my be spurious and in many ways hearsay. I agree I worded the last post badly.

Actually no I wouldn't be suprised at what can be got at - I've paid for Police checks on people myself as part of my job.

Originally posted by Mr _Whirlysplat
Not hearsay in the sense that a complaint etc has been logged, but the evidence that complaint arrest is base on my be spurious and in many ways hearsay. I agree I worded the last post badly.

Actually no I wouldn't be suprised at what can be got at - I've paid for Police checks on people myself as part of my job.


it doesnt matter what youve been arrested for or whether or not youre guilty, the fact that youve been arrested alone is public knowledge. It's freedom of information.

Originally posted by Curl_Up&Dye
it doesnt matter what youve been arrested for or whether or not youre guilty, the fact that youve been arrested alone is public knowledge. It's freedom of information.

Actually in the UK on a standard Police check most things are not shown after various different lengths of time. On enhanced or full disclosure all past arrests are shown.

Originally posted by Mr _Whirlysplat
Actually in the UK on a standard Police check most things are not shown after various different lengths of time. On enhanced or full disclosure all past arrests are shown.

the same in the US. They show the log for the day. Thats it. Theyre not required to do anything otherwise unless they were arrested again. They also do past arrests in the US because it also goes into the dispatch log when they pull the information on the arrestee. Especially if its more than a first offense for that particular crime

Originally posted by Curl_Up&Dye
the same in the US. They show the log for the day. Thats it. Theyre not required to do anything otherwise unless they were arrested again. They also do past arrests in the US because it also goes into the dispatch log when they pull the information on the arrestee. Especially if its more than a first offense for that particular crime

ok I think we are talking about slightly different things in the UK if you are arrested and no action is taken that arrested can be expunged after a set period of time, I think its four years.

Originally posted by Mr _Whirlysplat
ok I think we are talking about slightly different things in the UK if you are arrested and no action is taken that arrested can be expunged after a set period of time, I think its four years.

no we're talking about the same thing.... you said the UK police logs includes past arrests. The US does the same.

Neither is required to post anything further than what is in the daily log, they only post what happens during that particular day. Court logs however, are offered in some papers, do post the outcome of cases

Originally posted by Curl_Up&Dye
no we're talking about the same thing.... you said the UK police logs includes past arrests. The US does the same.

Neither is required to post anything further than what is in the daily log, they only post what happens during that particular day. Court logs however, are offered in some papers, do post the outcome of cases

Court logs are not posted in UK papers with names if the Courts do not want it - you can though read the names in the Court still e.g. Smith v Brown

Originally posted by Mr _Whirlysplat
Court logs are not posted in UK papers with names if the Courts do not want it - you can though read the names in the Court still e.g. Smith v Brown

thats exactly my point....the arrest is public knowledge and so is the outcome of the case, so either way if its posted that someone is arrested, and they are found innocent, if you cared enough to check, the verdict is public knowledge

but as far as national media outlets...

they can broadcast the case proceedings, and the verdict. they can speculate and nitpick, but they are not allowed to say guilty or innocent before the verdict is read

Originally posted by Curl_Up&Dye
thats exactly my point....the arrest is public knowledge and so is the outcome of the case, so either way if its posted that someone is arrested, and they are found innocent, if you cared enough to check, the verdict is public knowledge

If you check the verdict in the court I agree, but that means you have to know of the case, arrest records in the UK can be anonymous to the general public whilst a case is going on if the court wishes. Usually this is applied for Children or cases were it will lead to the victim being identified, but more and more its happening for cases with teachers. I've enjoyed our chat

Gotta go to bed goodnight

night