Huntley deserves nothing other than the squeeze of an index finger, and the bliss of not knowing the expanding magnum that ends his life.
He is now suing for around £100,000, no doubt with legal aid. Yet our wonderful legal system is not so clear on the “rights” of Ian Tomlinson’s family, or many victims of antisocial criminals and others failed by our agencies, or whole communities blighted by Council ‘allocation policies’ and other wonderful practices that lead to violent, nuisance scum and paedophiles being dumped on their victims (thus protecting rich people and saving prison costs).
The few of our MPs and Lords being prosecuted for obvious thieving are spending lots more legal aid on spurious legal drongo making more lawyers and judges rich whilst doing nothing for most of us other than make us sick. We see high profile libel cases over nothing, mad Egyptians with conspiracy theories and other weird examples littering our courts.
Huntley, scalded and knifed, was probably better protected than any of the victims living with dire social services and police protection. This won’t do. One of the reasons Huntley can sue is that his suit won’t produce a flood of others. To give turds like this ‘more rights’ than decent people is ludicrous.
Allcoppedout's Blog 
Emotional reaction may enlist support from colleagues sharing a base view but you surprise me to leave no doubt of your willingness to shoot or main Huntley.
Many ‘fitted up’ defendants must be very relieved that we no longer dispense capital punishments with retrospective pardons. Neither do we hand out life sentences, with the option for inmates and colluding staff, to add blinding or maiming as opportunities present themselves behind bars.
We must not allow anger to get the better of our judgement simply because the public purse is again under threat from opportunistic lawyers. We should focus on how circumstances of repetitive negligence have arisen on the part of prison staff and others.
ACO; I fear that we may well be voices in the wilderness!!
There has never been a dearth of bigots on police blogs, Dickiebo. Yet should your view not prompt support, fall back on your sagacious aphorism “It is a far, far better thing to take a pill for a headache than moan at the truth.”
While I may choke on this… I must agree with MTG… If we put faith in a system of justice (however poor it may be) the people that are in the system should be as safe as practicable.
For me, the problem is simply this: we grant ‘people’ rights in prison or we don’t… If you do it peacemeal some one has to make the call as to which ones you deny and grant… Like it or not, he still has the protection of law even in prison.
Anyway… I think he should not be allowed to pursue damages… He should be able to use the criminal law, but not the civil code.
..
I would be in favour of capital punishment if our legal system was reliable and evidence based. I also favour panoptican-style gaols to stop inmate brutality. What happened to Huntley is not good.
My point is he has more ‘rights’ than most victims and this is intolerable. The enquiry was a cock-up from the search on and we should know much more about how people like him survive investigation so easily. Much of this is due to sad police attitudes that hit Gadget from time to time.
However, the range of privileged stuffed-shirts involved with daft ideals that take no account of practice have been around since Plato.
Easy to blame the Police…
The fact is… Poor IT policy allowed Huntley to appear clean.
I worked with child sex offenders for many years and can tell you that you will never find a more cunning, resourceful and dangerous criminal…
Demonstrated by Huntley so clearly… And the two officers working on the enquiry that were arrested for possesing indecent images of children…
That’s the type of cunning we are up against…
I agree 100% with you ACO, that it is truly ludicrous and intolerable Huntley should be granted more legal “rights” than many victims are given. However, shooting him isn’t the solution. He should spend the rest of his life locked up to consider the wrong he did to two little girls.
I hope he suffers for a long time in jail, deprived of his freedom and the opportunity to hurt another child.
His legal action will be strongly opposed by the government. Huntly is taking the micky with that one, considering he’s tried to top himself three times already.
Plus, the TV news reported that the parents of Holly and Jessica, Huntley’s victims, received £11,000 each in compensation for their loss and distress.
The government should re-think the law about scum paedophiles, and have them castrated. B@$t@rds.
Who are the “mad Egyptians” you do not approve of ACO?
Fayed… Or possibly Tutenkamen …
Sorry you just don’t understand sex offenders like I do… He doesn’t feel remorse, he likes what he did and would do it again… Those murders were the end result of years of fantasies… So he isn’t suffering in prison -unless you count the lack of freedom…
You’re just right Shijuro. I’d only point out that bureaucracies resemble psychopaths in cover ups and I have seen agencies try to make out victims are false complainants to extreme degrees. There are two main issues – lack of proper investigation and record keeping and ‘professionals’ who over-estimate their intuition.
Just thin Harrods Mrs.Magoo.
You may well be an academic and obviously well read,
however you do not know it all, Allcoppedout.
It may well be the establishment, plus media and popular view to paint a different picture on that particular tragedy, but that gentleman who lost his son, was not
“mad”. He was correct, unfortunately. But there are some
who would deny the truth of that situation until the cows come home, because it suits them to pretend otherwise.
He was misled however to begin with, and his accusations
against the Monarchy were wrong, due to others who fed him that opinion to manipulate him and harm the Monarchy.
You have blogged often enough about corrupt cops and cover ups on here. Same thing. Poor Mr Rich Egyptian,
and well done to him for giving the establishment a good
run for his money, well spent to try and bring out truth.
Some of them do learn to include ‘remorse’ in their act Shij.
As entertaining a thought it may be, however I don’t support the death penalty either. For a good reason:
humans make mistakes…
One of the first murders I worked on had s man in custody days after it started. He confessed, had knowledge of the crime sceen and had forensic links to the victims… Wasn’t him though… He was just some fantasist chump that had wandered into the crime scene and messed with the bodies…
He would likely be dead now… And the real killer free to kill again…
You are right on this Shij – but I read somewhere that a lot of victims would have been saved if we did just top the lot. Hard on the innocent nicked I know, but one could argue that the greater good is still served because other innocents are later saved. Not my personal position.
Well… there is an alternative…
Life meaning life…