so sad

[sesley]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-13567974 :crying: :crying: :crying: :crying:

 

 

I know the mum was in a dark place,but he was maki g some progress as the school said,even if he was still in nappys i know must be terribly difficult,but when my son looked around Dundee Uni years ago they said they had special support in place for autistic people even if they were still in nappys at 18~.its sad ,because he was intelligent and with a lot of school support he could have had a great life. I know the mum was in a difficult relationship with her violent hubby,she could have got help. And so i feel i can't accept her manslughter plee but Murder,since she knew what she was doing and she even said he giggled while he was dying, he was proberly in a state of terror while he died :crying:

[baddad]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-13567974 :crying: :crying: :crying: :crying:

 

And so i feel i can't accept her manslughter plee but Murder

 

Totally agree... a child's disability is no justification for murder. However 'dark' the place she was in there was probably the option of just walking away and phoning ss or whatever and saying 'my abandoned child is alone at this address'... Anyone who makes a decision not to do that for any reason has made a decision to put their needs before the child's.

 

I think there will sometimes be grounds for 'diminished responsibility', but only when there is absolute evidence of 'momentary madness' and any sort of premeditation has been ruled out. That is clearly not the case here, whatever decision the jury has made. Had the child not been autistic the value judgements made about the 'quality' of his life would not have been enough to sway a jury from a murder verdict. That's prejudice, pure and simple.

 

BD

[sesley]

i feel angry about this and the recent case with bleach the jury i wonder are given a emotional closing speech from the defense and made to feel what if they were in her shoes with a diasabled child to look after so the verdict is diminished responsbility,It seems no one is on the jury to represent the child like a autistic person. who can give some insight on what life is like.bascially no one spoke for the boy. Mine is 11,he has a young mindset,but recently he has progressed so much and is catching up academically and with still some way with social ettiquette we are getting there. Even the ones that are locked inside have a voice and like this lad communicated through computers. I know some are brilliant in mind and go to uni and do great things,this lad was just given up on at 11,no chance at all.

[baddad]

the jury i wonder are given a emotional closing speech from the defense and made to feel what if they were in her shoes with a diasabled child to look after

 

I think that's probably very much how it goes... I wonder, if in such cases, a 'Jury of peers' should be a jury of parents of disabled children who would have some insight into the realities, rather than the stereotypes being promoted by defence lawyers and more widely in the media? Of course, any defence team would reject them as 'non-impartial' - completely overlooking the fact that their jury, populated by people who have grown up in a society full of prejudices and negative value judgements about disability - are in all likelihood even less impartial. That said, even among people who do have more knowledge about disability there are still the bleeding hearts and martyrs who are quite happy to project 'blame' for their inability to cope with the implications of having a disabled child onto the child, and willing to exploit the wider social prejudices in order to do so. [That's not me being judgemental, by the way - I can fully understand why some people might say 'I can't do this' and walk away. The issue I have is with the kind of people who murder children and then blame the child, and the self-serving defence lawyers who are willing to exploit prejudices in order to persuade a jury to blame the child too]

 

Though perhaps indelicate to raise it in a thread about such a tragic case there's another issue here, though... If we want equality of status for the disabled in court cases like this one we also need to make sure that the stereotypes aren't exploited in other types of cases. When computer hackers knowingly hack into military defence computers we should 'judge' their actions without exploiting wider social prejudices and ignorance to defend them. When gun toting turbo-nutters rampage through highschools we should reject the based-on-hearsay assumptions made retrospectively by people who have never met them.

 

L&P

 

BD

[AdamJ]

I wonder, if in such cases, a 'Jury of peers' should be a jury of parents of disabled children who would have some insight into the realities, rather than the stereotypes being promoted by defence lawyers and more widely in the media?

 

Absolutely not.

[Hayley S]

Poor little man R.I.P :'(

[philipo]

And where were the social workers and educationalist and human right lawyers?Just a small thought but it seems once again they draw their wages and pensions and wriggle out of any responsibity for their actions ,or lack of them.Once again the 'educated' ,priveledged and unaccountable ruling classes and their aspiring underlings get off 'scot free'.If it was a father who did it I reckon he would of got off lighter as our expectations and projections of biological roles once again show less forgiveness or understanding for mothers.As for a jury of peers,please note that the legal system is rapidly doing away with 'mere' juries.Most law is about property rights ,as one judge said 'we must be carefull that we don't value our baubles more than our citizens'.

[philipo]

And where were the social workers and educationalist and human right lawyers?Just a small thought but it seems once again they draw their wages and pensions and wriggle out of any responsibity for their actions ,or lack of them.Once again the 'educated' ,priveledged and unaccountable ruling classes and their aspiring underlings get off 'scot free'.If it was a father who did it I reckon he would of got off lighter as our expectations and projections of biological roles once again show less forgiveness or understanding for mothers.As for a jury of peers,please note that the legal system is rapidly doing away with 'mere' juries.Most law is about property rights ,as one judge said 'we must be carefull that we don't value our baubles more than our citizens'

After all the knockbacks for help from the so called carers it's no wonder the mother retreated into isolation,the real criminals are the politicians and social services departments who are forever finding new ways and words to justify their proffesional irresponsibilty,after all it's all about money and budgets.These proffesional are under the delusion that they are'caring' people but very few of them would do the job for half wages because they are proffesionaly deluded and acclimatised to their financial,proffesional and social priveledges,in short hubristic do gooders making agood living out of other peoples misery.

[sesley]

http://www.autism.org.uk/en-gb/News-and-events/News-from-the-NAS/Media-response-Yvonne-Freaney-sentencing.aspx?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

 

from the NAS for anyone needing help and advise also a help line number.0808 800 4104,

Edited July 5, 2011 by sesley

[lynyona]

Poor young man made me cry when i read this article

[philipo]

Thats why we need action, tears and sympathy are limited.We can't expect to wait for the underfunded services to intervene.Thats why 'support groups' should be expanded.Its terrible and a daily hell for thousands.