Derby fire deaths: Parents arrested on suspicion of murder

estebanrey said:
You said that, not me.
Click to expand...

I was extrapolating your post to its logical conclusion. The bit about the potential for you to be trolling was my opinion though.

estebanrey said:
What's the point of an internet forum if you can't speculate. How boring.
Click to expand...

Speculation and opinion is fine. I'm just not going to speculate upon why they have been arrested. Simple really.
 
Last edited:
shoes said:
lol no it won't. It'll be 10 years. or 20. or even 30.

Life it will not be.
Click to expand...

i said life, not natural life. very different.

natural life as they call it means you will never be let out. life just means they reassess you every x years. they might never let you out if you dont show signs of remorse etc.

i should have explained that better, my bad.

you can get life with 5 year rec, meaning they will reassess you after 5 years but chances are they wont let you out then, unless you turn into some angel full of remorse.
 
realBabelfish said:
i would imagine its more likely to get a bigger house. since they were moaning about that
Click to expand...

Yes but that begs the question, why set fire to the house with your kids in it? Why not do it when everyone was out, or by ensuring they all congregated into one room at the back of the house so they could all escape?

Mick Philpott doesn't strike me as the sharpest knife in the drawer but he's not that thick to think setting fire to his own house whilst his kids were asleep upstairs would be a good idea if he wanted them to be safe.
 
estebanrey said:
Yes but that begs the question, why set fire to the house with your kids in it? Why not do it when everyone was out, or by ensuring they all congregated into one room at the back of the house so they could all escape?

Mick Philpott doesn't strike me as the sharpest knife in the drawer but he's not that thick to think setting fire to his own house whilst his kids were asleep upstairs would be a good idea if he wanted them to be safe.
Click to expand...

depends. the guy has 14 kids. he isnt bright.

maybe he thought a little fire would look more authentic? if there is a fire when all 100 of them are out that would look much more suspicious.

its hard to get into the brain of such people.
 
I was in Scotland when this happened but of course I'd heard of the family before. It's very, very sad that the children died, more so that anyone should die in that way, its horrible, but I instantly thought this was to do with the fact they have such a large family and I came to 2 conclusions.

Its either a crazy person thinking the family are a drain on the economy and thought they might be doing the country a favour by getting rid, or, it was an inside job gone wrong. A ploy to get the council to move them to a bigger house/better area. I recall a few years ago someone started a fire at Rivermead House (big tower block) because they hated living there and wanted to move, or at least that was the suggested reason...

I doubt this was a case of random arson and now that the parents have been arrested it might turn out my initial thoughts were correct.

When news of this fire and the deaths broke it was all over Facebook with people talking about raising funds for the children's funerals. I'm sorry but, why? Even if innocent you shouldn't have so many kids if you can't cope financially. Oh wait, maybe that's why they did it.... :(

But I suppose a trust paying for the funerals is better than it coming from the state...
 
Last edited:
holymonk said:
Mick Philpott on Jeremy Kyle show - Man who's 6 children dies died in fire

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TX64Oj8Ua-Y

hmmmmm....
Click to expand...

He wanted a bigger council house. Burn the house down in a sick way, get a bigger house, have more kids to bring the number to 17..... Claim more dole.

Guilty as sin....

That alongside with Kate and Gerry who haven't even had access to there bank accounts since there daughter went missing.

Odd.....
 
LordSplodge said:
From the wording it looks like they've been arrested so other witnesses can come forward without the fear of intimidation. At least that's how I read it.
Click to expand...

There would have to be more suspicion or evidence than that. To arrest them and for a custody sergeant to accept them, there would have to be evidence pointing to their involvement and the arrest would have to pass the necessity test under sec 24 of PACE which does not include the above circumstances. They couldn't be arrested solely to make it easier for others to come forward.

I see where you are coming from though.
 
Funny the McCanns being mentioned - I found it interesting how the two couples have been treated so differently.

One couple being doley oxygen thiefs and the other seemingly well to do middle englanders.

Similar to the McCanns, I can't see how the police can make the charge stick. How can it be proved that someone did or didn't squirt petrol through the letter box? Or that the Philpots set fire to the house in order to get a bigger house (in their out-pouring of grief they made much comment on how awful the area was) and ended up killing the children by mistake. How can it be proved either way?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom