Baby P

[Sput]

FASCINATING FACT: The drop in the gallows was calculated to be far enough that it would break the neck, often causing instant death.

[Stuart*]

FASCINATING FACT: The drop in the gallows was calculated to be far enough that it would break the neck, often causing instant death.

Indeed, using Marwood's tables developed in the late 1800s. By which time we'd managed to strangle people to death for centuries by not allowing any drop at all.

The current Iranian method of execution (still public) is by hanging sometimes, and is by using a crane. The subject is 'lifted' off the scaffold. No drop there then!

[Sput]

Quite, it's the antiquated equivalent of not moistening the head sponge, which itself is the antiquated equivalent of doing an anaesthetic-less lethal injection.

Why do I know this?

[Chie]

Those responsible = the social workers or the people that did it?

The stepfather was responsible for causing the child's death.

The mother and Social Services were responsible for not preventing it.

[Sput]

I wish I lived in your high-contrast world, chie.

Wait, no I don't: it'd be shit.

[Chie]

I wish I lived in your high-contrast world, chie.

Wait, no I don't: it'd be shit.

Here you go again - waiting in the wings ready to ambush people and slate their opinions, instead of providing your own. :roll:

So what DO you think about the case then Sput?

[marksi]

I wish I lived in your high-contrast world, chie.

Wait, no I don't: it'd be shit.

Here you go again - waiting in the wings ready to ambush people and slate their opinions, instead of providing your own. :roll:

So what DO you think about the case then Sput?

Given we know little of the facts and that legal proceedings are underway can I suggest that guessing - which is precisely what would be happening - is completely pointless and potentially legally dodgy.

[Sput]

I was hoping you'd bring that up, Chie, because the last time I obliged and offered my counter-argument, you gave absolutely no response and disappeared for a couple of weeks. I'm actually still waiting for your response.

ALSO, I might note that you've not actually said anything to back up why it's the social workers' fault. You've just stated it is so. That's why it deserves a good slating.

[Chie]

I was hoping you'd bring that up, Chie, because the last time I obliged and offered my counter-argument, you gave absolutely no response and disappeared for a couple of weeks. I'm actually still waiting for your response.

I can't even remember what that was about.

ALSO, I might note that you've not actually said anything to back up why it's the social workers' fault. You've just stated it is so. That's why it deserves a good slating.

I didn't say it was the social workers' fault. In fact I'm quite annoyed with the fact that 99% of the general public are diverting blame away from the parents and laying it all at the door of Social Services.

The mother could have prevented the child's death if she really wanted to but she is - in all probability - mentally ill, and has an emotional dependence on men, which is why she allowed the guy to torture her own child. Social Services on the other hand don't even have the excuse of mental illness, in my opinion they could have done much more to prevent this from happening, BUT they are not to blame nor are they responsible for the child's death - the perpetrator of the crime is.

[Sput]

I was hoping you'd bring that up, Chie, because the last time I obliged and offered my counter-argument, you gave absolutely no response and disappeared for a couple of weeks. I'm actually still waiting for your response.

I can't even remember what that was about.

Here we are. http://www.metropol247.co.uk/forum/view ... pia#p86968

ALSO, I might note that you've not actually said anything to back up why it's the social workers' fault. You've just stated it is so. That's why it deserves a good slating.

Social Services on the other hand don't even have the excuse of mental illness, in my opinion they could have done much more to prevent this from happening, BUT they are not to blame nor are they responsible for the child's death - the perpetrator of the crime is.

I'd still say your original statement lays blame at their feet with a statement that could applied to anyone that ever came into contact with the kid. Neighbours, friends...

Anyway I'm intrigued what you, in all your experience of social work, think they could have done more of? Dawn raids perhaps?

One other pointer: If you'd not waded in late (as usual) and replied with glib rubbish (as usual) to an old post that wasn't even directed at you then I wouldn't have felt the need to pull you up on it.

[Chie]

I'd still say your original statement lays blame at their feet with a statement that could applied to anyone that ever came into contact with the kid. Neighbours, friends...

I don't see why you've come to that conclusion, since neighbours and friends aren't legally responsible for preventing harm to children and Social Services are.

Anyway I'm intrigued what you, in all your experience of social work, think they could have done more of? Dawn raids perhaps?

I, in all my 5 years of dealing with social workers myself, think the signs were there and they could easily have removed the child from the mother and given him a safe home somewhere else. The house obviously wasn't fit to keep a dog in for starters, never mind the fact they were ripping the kid's ears off.

One other pointer: If you'd not waded in late (as usual) and replied with glib rubbish (as usual) to an old post that wasn't even directed at you then I wouldn't have felt the need to pull you up on it.

You weren't quoting anyone so I assumed it was an open question.