Lostprophets Singer Facing Child Sex Charges

G|mp said:
You've just proved my point.

You're saying Bulger who was the victim not Venables or Thompson who were the kids that did it.

You think the families of the Women wouldn't be hounded for their crimes?
Click to expand...

Because Bulger was the publicised name that the case became known by.

This has become known by Watkins name, and that is the name that will be remembered.

It has nothing to do with who was the victim and who was the criminal.

You'll note i've not made comment on whether I think naming them is good or bad, just wanted to make the point that the comparison you made suggesting that the babies here are likely to remembered for years to come if their mothers are named is ****ing stupid, they won't be remembered in 6 months time, never mind 15 years (and nor will the mothers names for that matter).
 
elmarko said:
I'd argue your confidence in the public is equally misplaced.

I mean, do you trust the public with knowing names in high profile cases when the public has attacked the house of a paediatrician in the past.

People are stupid, they will go on a rampage & likely end up attacking the wrong person.
Click to expand...

Yes and the evidence is there already, for all to see. When an Iranian immigrant was beaten and kicked to death and then his body set on fire.

His crime? One of Joe public said he was taking photos of children and mob justice took over from there, even though he was an innocent man.

A very poignant and sobering lesson in why we don't have mob rule and why we should be very careful about the information the public can have as often they see what they want, rather than the facts presented to them.
 
elmarko said:
I'd argue your confidence in the public is equally misplaced.

I mean, do you trust the public with knowing names in high profile cases when the public has attacked the house of a paediatrician in the past.

People are stupid, they will go on a rampage & likely end up attacking the wrong person.
Click to expand...

I don't feel that the possibility of vigilantism justifies risking the safety of children by withholding details of criminals from the public domain. On a purely personal level, by knowing who criminals are I can avoid them, I cannot trust the police to protect me from them however.
 
Energize said:
I don't feel that the possibility of vigilantism justifies risking the safety of children by withholding details of criminals from the public domain. On a purely personal level, by knowing who criminals are I can avoid them, I cannot trust the police to protect me from them however.
Click to expand...
Do you google the names of every single person you meet to find out if they are a high profile sex offender?, I mean - they would still be on the register so unable to work with kids.

Is it not possible they could change their name?, or give a false name?.

I'm not sure how you knowing the names of the people involved makes your children any safer.
 
Releasing the names of the ladies involved will do nothing to further safeguard children from them, all it will achieve is to violate the victims and satisfy the hysterical blood/hate lust of the daily fail / sun pedo-mageddon morons!
 
Kenai said:
Because Bulger was the publicised name that the case became known by.

This has become known by Watkins name, and that is the name that will be remembered.

It has nothing to do with who was the victim and who was the criminal.

You'll note i've not made comment on whether I think naming them is good or bad, just wanted to make the point that the comparison you made suggesting that the babies here are likely to remembered for years to come if their mothers are named is ****ing stupid, they won't be remembered in 6 months time, never mind 15 years (and nor will the mothers names for that matter).
Click to expand...

It's not '****ing' stupid at all, in todays society those names will plastered all over the internet in seconds, those kids then have to grow up knowing that at any moment someone could point them out for being the kids that 'Watkins' messed with.

My whole point of the Bulger case is that they are remembered for years, everyone knows about it, even kids nowadays because it was a shocking crime, as is this. I'm pretty sure I would remember the kids names. There is also my point about the families involved, it's not just the kids that could be left scarred by all this.
 
G|mp said:
It's not '****ing' stupid at all, in todays society those names will plastered all over the internet in seconds, those kids then have to grow up knowing that at any moment someone could point them out for being the kids that 'Watkins' messed with.

My whole point of the Bulger case is that they are remembered for years, everyone knows about it, even kids nowadays because it was a shocking crime, as is this. I'm pretty sure I would remember the kids names. There is also my point about the families involved, it's not just the kids that could be left scarred by all this.
Click to expand...

The kids in this case aren't the focus though, that's the difference. Ian Watkins is the focus, he will be remembered. The rest won't be, names released or not.

It's completely different and it is a ****ing stupid comparison, simple as that.

As shocking as both case might be, the kids names in this case will be no more memorable than John Venables mothers name, something I doubt many people could recall without looking up (not 'Mrs Venables' before some smart arse chimes in).
 
Kenai said:
The kids in this case aren't the focus though, that's the difference. Ian Watkins is the focus, he will be remembered. The rest won't be, names released or not.

It's completely different and it is a ****ing stupid comparison, simple as that.

As shocking as both case might be, the kids names in this case will be no more memorable than John Venables mothers name, something I doubt many people could recall without looking up.
Click to expand...

Venables Mother wasn't the victim!

The victims of this (the innocent kids) would have a lifetime of this hanging over them in the hope that people 'forgot'

And you skirted over it again but what about the families?
 
G|mp said:
Venables Mother wasn't the victim!

The victims of this (the innocent kids) would have a lifetime of this hanging over them in the hope that people 'forgot'

And you skirted over it again but what about the families?
Click to expand...

I already said i'm not making comment on whether it's a good or bad decision, i'm not skirting over it, i'm just not partaking in that part of the discussion because I don't care frankly.

My point is very simple. The kids names will not be remembered. It's nothing to do with who is or isn't a victim (as i've already said), it's to do with whose names are publicised and popularised.

These kids names will not be remembered in exactly the same way Venables mother isn't, because nobody is interested in them or who they are particularly. They might be the victims but there is no focus or attention on them, it's all on Watkins and a bit of peripheral attention on the mothers and that's as far as it goes. Much like Venables mother, she was of no interest, her name wasn't massively publicised and no one will remember it.

As such, making the comparison and suggesting these kids will be remembered in 15 years times with the same sort of recognisability as Venables and Thompson is completely retarded, only Watkins will be.

I'd put money on hardly anyone knowing these kids names in 10 years time but it'd be pretty pointless as I highly doubt we'd still be contact in 10 years time :p
 
Kenai said:
I already said i'm not making comment on whether it's a good or bad decision, i'm not skirting over it, i'm just not partaking in that part of the discussion because I don't care frankly.

My point is very simple. The kids names will not be remembered. It's nothing to do with who is or isn't a victim (as i've already said), it's to do with whose names are publicised and popularised.

These kids names will not be remembered in exactly the same way Venables mother isn't, because nobody is interested in them or who they are particularly. They might be the victims but there is no focus or attention on them, it's all on Watkins and a bit of peripheral attention on the mothers and that's as far as it goes. Much like Venables mother, she was of no interest, her name wasn't massively publicised and no one will remember it.

As such, making the comparison and suggesting these kids will be remembered in 15 years times with the same sort of recognisability as Venables and Thompson is completely retarded, only Watkins will be.

I'd put money on hardly anyone knowing these kids names in 10 years time but it'd be pretty pointless as I highly doubt we'd still be contact in 10 years time :p
Click to expand...


I think it would be a massive gamble to take with the lives of people that are innocent in this (hoping people would forget). The more people that know about it, the bigger the risk. The Bulger example was exactly that, an example, of how people remember horrific things.

I agree with you to a point, if this was say, one of Gary Glitters Thai girls or Stuart Halls secretary but it isn't, it's a lead singer of a band that wanted to **** babies, who's groupies offered up to him willingly. It tends to stick in peoples minds more especially in todays age where everything is plastered on Twitter/Facebook within seconds. My point being, the Bulger case was shocking, people remember it and the names involved.

Fiver :p
 
deuse said:
The UK should be more like the US. You can check on anyone and see if they have done wrong in their life time.
Click to expand...

Ohh yes the lovely utopia that is the U.S.A :rolleyes:

You guys also seem to be missing the FACT that 90+% of child molestation case's like this one where the child is below 12 occurs WITHIN the family!

But if you lack critical thinking and swallow the sensationalist stories that gutter papers report as being widespread and representative of the bigger picture then I can understand your ignorance on the matter tbh.
 
G|mp said:
I think it would be a massive gamble to take with the lives of people that are innocent in this. The more people that know about it, the bigger the risk. The Bulger example was exactly that, an example, of how people remember horrific things.

I agree with you to a point, if this was say, one of Gary Glitters Thai girls or Stuart Halls secretary but it isn't, it's a lead singer of a band that wanted to **** babies, who's groupies offered up to him willingly. It tends to stick in peoples minds more especially in todays age where everything is plastered on Twitter/Facebook within seconds. My point being, the Bulger case was shocking, people remember it and the names involved.

Fiver :p
Click to expand...

I agree it will be memorable but the only people who ARE memorable from that case were the people at the centre of the media storm, Bulger, Venables and Thompson.

In this case, it's solely Watkins at the centre of that same storm. The women are already periphery in comparison and the kids themselves are completely by the by as far as the media is concerned.

People will remember the case but the only names will be Watkins and maybe the two women at a push.
 
Kenai said:
I agree it will be memorable but the only people who ARE memorable from that case were the people at the centre of the media storm, Bulger, Venables and Thompson.

In this case, it's solely Watkins at the centre of that same storm. The women are already periphery in comparison and the kids themselves are completely by the by as far as the media is concerned.

People will remember the case but the only names will be Watkins and maybe the two women at a push.
Click to expand...

That is surely because the names have not been made public though.

Hence protecting the kids and families as much as they can.
 
VoG said:
Indeed, when you look at what a rumour led to, just imagine what actual knowledge will lead to.

Vigilante jailed for killing man he mistakenly thought was a paedophile
Click to expand...

I can go one better than that, probably my favourite story with regard to reactionary idiocy over paedophilia. No wonder Brass Eye had a field day with this stuff.

gothic_hobbit said:
http://metro.co.uk/2013/11/28/hmv-pulls-all-lostprophets-albums-following-ian-watkins-trial-4206460/

HMV stop all sales of their albums.
Click to expand...

Doesn't matter, nobody buys from HMV anyway.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom