no doubt about it, Ian Watkins is a nonce

[eFestivals]

Returned to the mother ? WTF ?

I don't know the details, and to some extent don't want to know, but really ?

It doesn't explicitly say that, but that was the inference I got from reading some (not all of it) of the judgement.

Whether or not a person might think it the right thing to do or not ultimately comes down to whether a person thinks that some people are intrinsically evil, or whether at least some criminals are criminals as the result of circumstances and can revert to 'normal' behaviour.

Amusingly enough, just last week the Daily Hate Mail went with the NOT intrinsically evil angle, possibly for the first time in their existence .... but in that case the murderer was one of 'our boys', and who could ever think that someone employed for the further glory of Her Majesty could ever be nasty? I'm sure they're still saying though that every other crim should be shot.

[kaosmark2]

Amusingly enough, just last week the Daily Hate Mail went with the NOT intrinsically evil angle, possibly for the first time in their existence .... but in that case the murderer was one of 'our boys', and who could ever think that someone employed for the further glory of Her Majesty could ever be nasty? I'm sure they're still saying though that every other crim should be shot.

[eFestivals]

It all depends on whether you're "the right sort". You can be excused for anything if you're "the right sort", while the slightest offence if you're young or poor or left-wing or female or foreign is just inexcusable.

yep ... cos right now there's a very very similar story of 'soldiers' who stepped over the line of what is regarded as the nice way to kill people, but here's betting that the Daily Hate Mail won't have a headline tomorrow saying "let them off", instead they'll probably be demanding that they're publicly hung and then the dead bodies paraded thru the streets.

But hey, what do you expect of the paper who still haven't apologised for nearly ten years of headlines about what a nice bloke that Adolf was?

[bunique]

"Long Term Foster Care" does not mean the child will be returned to its mother. It usually means that they are not suitable for adoption.

[eFestivals]

"Long Term Foster Care" does not mean the child will be returned to its mother. It usually means that they are not suitable for adoption.

But, I'd guess, it doesn't mean that they won't?

It wasn't just that bit which had me thinking one of the mothers might eventually get her child back, as there were a few other bits which implied she'd have contact (if not anything more) at some point down the line.

[bunique]

LA has a duty to promote contact between a child in care and it's birth family as long as it is in the best interests of the child. She wouldn't present a "risk" in prison so it's possible, if she's placed with family, that she may have contact but I think it's unlikely. I haven't read judgement yet though, will do on way home

[bunique]

That was rough going. I didn't get any impression that the child would be returned. He was a used from 10 months, he'd now be approaching 4 and his foster carers seem to have indicated there is already evidence of the psychological trauma manifesting itself (reading between lines of judgement). It may be his age precludes him from adoption, or his behaviour, or the fact that a suitable family cannot be found who would be adequately able to support him with the aftermath of the abuse. It is more likely that long term foster care has been identified as the best option available to him as it opens doors to more specialised support. I would imagine a no contact order may be put in place for mum, but this would be very dependent on the psychological reports, which seem more favourable of her than the mother of the little girl.

[Rufus Gwertigan]

it's pretty standard for sex offenders to be segregated from other prisoners, because otherwise they tend to get unwanted attention from other prisoners .... but given how prisons are, they're likely to get that unwanted attention anyway.

I'm not sure if it's changed yet, but one prisoner is set to be a 'specialist' prison for sex offenders - I'm guessing mainly to try to avoid the costs of that segregation hassle. I'm not entirely sure that will work tho, cos I reckon there's likely to be a hierarchy amongst them no different to the wider prison population.

Edited December 19, 2013 by Rufus Gwertigan

[Rufus Gwertigan]

That was rough going. I didn't get any impression that the child would be returned. He was a used from 10 months, he'd now be approaching 4 and his foster carers seem to have indicated there is already evidence of the psychological trauma manifesting itself (reading between lines of judgement). It may be his age precludes him from adoption, or his behaviour, or the fact that a suitable family cannot be found who would be adequately able to support him with the aftermath of the abuse. It is more likely that long term foster care has been identified as the best option available to him as it opens doors to more specialised support. I would imagine a no contact order may be put in place for mum, but this would be very dependent on the psychological reports, which seem more favourable of her than the mother of the little girl.

[bunique]

Good question! I don't know! I'm guessing once the police started investigating the children were removed on an interim care order and placed with family/foster carers. I think it would depend what came out of any assessments, regardless of the outcome of criminal proceedings, to establish whether the children would be likely to experience significant harm if they remained in the care of their parents.

[eFestivals]

That was rough going. I didn't get any impression that the child would be returned. He was a used from 10 months, he'd now be approaching 4 and his foster carers seem to have indicated there is already evidence of the psychological trauma manifesting itself (reading between lines of judgement). It may be his age precludes him from adoption, or his behaviour, or the fact that a suitable family cannot be found who would be adequately able to support him with the aftermath of the abuse. It is more likely that long term foster care has been identified as the best option available to him as it opens doors to more specialised support. I would imagine a no contact order may be put in place for mum, but this would be very dependent on the psychological reports, which seem more favourable of her than the mother of the little girl.

I've got a feeling that you've got mixed up between the two women involved - tho that might have been what I did too.

I need to re-read the judgement, as I've acquired a little bit of extra info since I did read it, which will help me grasp more of the scenario.

[eFestivals]

I think it would depend what came out of any assessments, regardless of the outcome of criminal proceedings, to establish whether the children would be likely to experience significant harm if they remained in the care of their parents.

it mentions assessments in the judgement, and states (for at least one of the mothers, perhaps both, I forget) that there's unlikely to be a high future risk.

That was a part of what had me thinking that one might get the child back (it explicitly states that one of them will not).

Edited December 20, 2013 by eFestivals

[eFestivals]

I've got a feeling that you've got mixed up between the two women involved - tho that might have been what I did too.

I need to re-read the judgement, as I've acquired a little bit of extra info since I did read it, which will help me grasp more of the scenario.

yep, I definitely got mixed up over the women, and as a result I mis-understood.

But there's defo the suggestion within everything that one of those mothers will have future contact with her child, if not custody.

[eFestivals]

Hmmmm ... so now the woman who reported Watkins to the police on more than one occasion has been nicked for kiddie porn.

If the police had acted on what she'd said at that time then the offences he went to jail for - and that abuse of children - would not have happened.

Further, the courts system made rulings for the purpose of stopping her making these legitimate complaints of his wrongdoing.

It wouldn't be that her arrest is about deflecting blame from the police and court system, would it? That could never happen in the world of perfect UK justice.

[Yellow_Fellow]

Hmmmm ... so now the woman who reported Watkins to the police on more than one occasion has been nicked for kiddie porn.

If the police had acted on what she'd said at that time then the offences he went to jail for - and that abuse of children - would not have happened.

Further, the courts system made rulings for the purpose of stopping her making these legitimate complaints of his wrongdoing.

It wouldn't be that her arrest is about deflecting blame from the police and court system, would it? That could never happen in the world of perfect UK justice.

[eFestivals]

She had committed crimes. Dunno how much I can post but on the day of the trial someone explained to me in pretty explicit detail what she'd done.

You got a news article or something?

I heard on the radio she'd been arrested. I'm guessing you'll find something on the beeb's website.

(The details aren't necessary, we can all get the horrible inference from the words you've used.)

I can easily believe that she might have some involvement at some level at some point - after all, there's somehow that she came to know about it. It's hardly an unusual thing for a girlfriend to go along with their fella to a certain degree, even if it's going somewhere horrid.

And it might well be the case that her complaints to the police about Watkins were motivated more by jealously &/or dislike of him than any morally virtuous reasons. From what I know (which isn't much) there's all sorts of possibilities.

But even so, she DID report him - more than once - and it was ignored and the finger instead was pointed at her for being out to unfairly do him down.

(from what i've read there's the suggestion of at least one other person having reported Watkins too).

If the police are going to take this approach towards those who might report wrongdoing after an involvement at some level within it, then all they'll succeed in doing is uncovering less crime and not more. It's not the way to go to get the best result for society, but it is the way to go to get the best result for the police.

Edited March 5, 2014 by eFestivals

[Yellow_Fellow]

It is extremely unfair that she wasn't taken seriously earlier - however, the details of the investigation don't specify a start date do they? It may well be that it was a long job. However, as it stands, I agree.

[jump]

Someone has gotten an Ian Watkins tat with the words MEGA LOLZ under it.

http://loudwire.com/wretched-ian-watkins-worst-rock-tattoos/

[eFestivals]

Someone has gotten an Ian Watkins tat with the words MEGA LOLZ under it.

OMFG!

How fucking deranged are some people?

[zahidf]

OMFG!

How fucking deranged are some people?

[eFestivals]

Still Gary Glitter fans out there...

It's one thing still liking the music or even the character as you might like to remember them (before they were caught), but it's another thing entirely to have a tattoo that includes his supposed reaction to something about (I forget what) the charges against him.

It's like they're supporting his abuse of children.

[russycarps]

Not a bad tattoo either, must have gone to a half decent place

[jump]

It's one thing still liking the music or even the character as you might like to remember them (before they were caught), but it's another thing entirely to have a tattoo that includes his supposed reaction to something about (I forget what) the charges against him.

It's like they're supporting his abuse of children.

Edited March 14, 2014 by jump

[LondonTom]

The things people will do for attention ffs. My bet is they haven't even considered the morals of it, just thought it "would be laugh"...Yeah Children being abused, very fucking funny.

[eFestivals]

In other news... Man found in street with hacked off leg...

Are you sure those vigilantes will start with his leg?