h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

How, Novadog, do you know that maxine Carr fabricated the lie? I'm not saying that Huntley did do the fabricating, but I am asking how you know it was she that did the fabricating?

She was prosecuted and I'm not going to make any bones about that but if a woman phones the police with a report of domestic violence should she be prosecuted for lieing (wasting police time) if she has changed her story by the time the police turn up?

The situations are different but I think the principles are essentially the same.

one love

lets not forget that that 3 year sentance was for conspiring to pervert the cause of justice *AND* 15 counts of benefit fraud and five counts of lying about her qualifications in job applications.

She did not get 3 years for aiding Huntley, she got 3 years for that and 20 other counts against her.

I find it hard to understand why anyone would want to know about Carr's life from now on. I really don't see whay people are interested in this. Even with the rags stirring up the story I still can't see why the average Joe would care. Can anyone explain why people want to know?

A certain newspaper managed to keep finding reasons for putting Princess Diana on the front cover for years after she died. I think we can safely presume that once the papers decide someone is newsworthy, they'll find stories about them even once they stop doing anything (as dead people tend to do).

I'm sure the tabloids could manage "Evil Maxine Goes Grocery Shopping for Evil Groceries" or "Child Murder Associate does Evil Gardening" type headlines.

Icky, that adds more weight to the point that she should not be further punished. She fiddled a bit of money! Its not Guiness or Enron amounts here. She didnt clear out thousands of peoples retirement funds.. Who hasnt "rounded-up" the odd epenses claim or "forgotten" to mention a cash payment on their tax return?

And as for telling porkies to the boss. You can slap the cuffs on me and send the papparrazi round to mine now if you want.

QB,

Its comparative sainthood.

Every sun reading man who feels a slight qualm over ogling the naked breasts of a woman young enough to be his daughter can feel much better about themslf if they compare themselves to Huntley. Every woman who pretends not to notice when some kid is getting a hiding in the bread ailse at the supermarket can salve their conscience with how much she hates Maxine Carr.

one love

I tend to agree, the girl has paid her debt to society, I don't think that she has done anything *that* wrong. Certainly nothing that she can't recover from. I hope that she'll manage to put this behind her and move on, find another job, meet someone else. Do whatever she wants to do with her life.

Without this she's not going to be able to.

If you're really right wing look at it like this. If she doesn't get a new life, she won't be able to find work, so she'll end up on benifits.

blickybadger
"You can slap the cuffs on me and send the papparrazi round to mine now if you want."
I think that's an entirely different unnecessary tabloid story

>I find it hard to understand why anyone would want to know about Carr's life from now on. I really don't see whay people are interested in this. Even with the rags stirring up the story I still can't see why the average Joe would care. Can anyone explain why people want to know?<

QueenBronners, it's irrational, but I think there's a kind of logic to it. It's far too uncomfortable for many people to deal with the idea that Carr didn't know what Huntley was, because that would mean that they might not know if they were living with another Huntley either, so it's better to assume she was guilty of his crimes too and treat her accordingly just to keep fear at bay.

<< so it's better to assume she was guilty of his crimes too and treat her accordingly just to keep fear at bay.>>
Excellent points, Mycroft!

Sorry to butt in here, but just so we can be a bit clear about this, there are privacy laws in the UK and Ms Carr has sought injunctions against the British media to protect her rights. Therefore, we'd prefer it if you didn't speculate as to her whereabouts or future, just in case. The Eds are far too pretty to go to prison for someone else's carelesss talk

Cheers all,

Jims

Don't worry Jimster, I'm sure Mr. Grade would take the fall for you

How are we to understand 'speculate' in this context? Are we just to avoid statements such as 'I hear that Maxine Carr is living in [place]!' or is the stuff about the protective clothing also forbidden?

I'd suggest that the former is definitely out, while the latter is possibly part of a wider discussion.

I think that there have been some fascinating, thought-provoking comments in this thread. I'm just playing the conscientious host here so there are no nasty surprises

That aside, I want to know where to get these Evil Groceries!

RF

I have a cunning plan.

You want to go away for the weekend but are worried about security, who wants to come home to a trashed house, a neat outline of dust free space where the stereo and video used to be and toothbrushes that have been shoved up the durglars rusty sheriffs badge


Not me thats for sure,

Well I have the solution.

News international security services.

Simply phone them up to say that a known paedophile is being released into your community some time over the weekend give an adress a couple of doors away. That bloke who always nicks your parking spot or her with the cat thats forever leaving messages in your flower beds theri adress will do. Anonimously reveal to the sun news desk that you're a concerned citizen who thinks theyre doing the right thing. Dont ask for money you will sound more genuine. dont speak in words of more than one syllable, you're a Sun reader remember.

On friday when you spot someone lurking in the bushes with a camera challenge them and say your're going to phone the bizzies if they dont hop it or tell you what they're upto. When you find out all shocked become a concerned citizen again, but a different one or they'll smell a rat. Say that for a small reimbursement you will let them use your house as a hide while you are away. Before you can say "Rupert Murdochs brand of sleazy journalism is ruining the fabric of society" You're of on you're weekend break with no worries and a pocket full of the Dirty diggers readies.

one love

That's an interesting opinion there, blickybadger. Not sure I can possibly condone such actions, but it's an interesting discussion topic.

Yeah, but what you have to consider is who'd make more mess? Nice clean home-lovin' burglars, or tabloid reporters? (In both cases, I think you'll find your TV/DVD player/stereo missing...)

RF

...and they'd eat all your evil groceries!

"--"

I'm confused?...
Mycroft...
Hypotheticly speaking, since Huntley had been detained previously, (I am presuming under sexual assault investigations)and had on all occasions been released without charge, wasn't the system working for him since the police would not have released Huntley because they just felt like it? Why, if he had not killed those two girls (hypotheticly remember) should he need someone to say 'Yes he was with me...' if there was no evidence to say that he had committed murder? I cannot begin to understand the strain of someone faulsely accused of any sexual assault, never mind child molestation and murder particuarly when society seems to have a mob mentality which does not wait for evidence, or proper investigation. I say this fully aware that I do not know under what evidence, or lack there of that Huntley was released on those previous occasions. I do know that we as indeviduals have to trust the police, to do their job, as their investigations could prove someone was innocent as well as guilty. Lying for him if he had not been guilty, was a vastly unnecissaraly complicated thing to do, since there could have been no evidence that he committed the murders.

And, er, Blicky, perhaps I've got the wrong end of the stick, but whilst carr may have not have come up with the untrue circumstances which gave Huntley his faulse aliby, she did go to the police with it and say 'He was with me...' Isn't that why she went to jail?

Sorry if I have been abit long winded with this, want to make sure I explain myself properly

novadog, your confusion arises because of a false assumption, namely that no evidence means no suspicion or accusation. Even if Huntley had been innocent, he would have been a suspect had the investigators been fully aware of his past dealings with other police forces. As you said, merely being suspected of such a crime carries a high price, so I think it's understandable that someone might try to stop the suspicion before it starts by whatever means if they 'know' the potential accusee is innocent, and you can see examples of this kind of reasoning regularly in, for example, political life.