Karen Matthews due to be released

[InOne]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2119151/Kidnap-mum-Karen-Matthews-claims-abducted-Shannon-bizarre-rant.html

[fruit_cake]

'She has a new identity, a new image and wants to start a new life by the sea'


This reminds me of the Bulger killers a bit, and it's all funded by the tax payer no doubt. The idea of being punished for a crime seems to have disappeared completely these days.

[Niamh.]

This reminds me of the Bulger killers a bit, and it's all funded by the tax payer no doubt. The idea of being punished for a crime seems to have disappeared completely these days.

Absolutely. It's sickening.

[Kizzy]

Read about this the other day 4yrs of an 8yr sentence?...disgusting

[InOne]

She showed no remorse in the court either. Was basically laughing

[Niamh.]

So I presume all of her 8 children have gone into care, have they? I hope she doesn't have anymore :bored:

[Iceman]

Vile woman.

[Kate!]

- Wonders what this world is coming to. This sickens me. -

[Livia]

She should be spayed like the dog she is before she reproduces again.

[lostalex]

She should be spayed like the dog she is before she reproduces again.

wow. eugenics much?

[Jack_]

Meh...she's served her time and she's a pretty disgusting woman, but oh well. Not much else can be done really, she's done her time, that's it to be honest.

As for protecting her identity...well if it stops vigilante action, then I'm for it. Such action doesn't solve anything and advocating it is just ludicrous.

[Ninastar]

okay so she has an 8 year jail term and she's being let out now.... can someone explain this to me?

[Iceman]

okay so she has an 8 year jail term and she's being let out now.... can someone explain this to me?

Good Behaviour most times you cut the jail term in half and thats what most people will serve unless theres a specific date set that they cant apply for parole.

(I think)

[Mrluvaluva]

So I presume all of her 8 children have gone into care, have they? I hope she doesn't have anymore :bored:

She shouldn't be allowed to have any more. She should be spayed.

[arista]

Meh...she's served her time and she's a pretty disgusting woman, but oh well. Not much else can be done really, she's done her time, that's it to be honest.

As for protecting her identity...well if it stops vigilante action, then I'm for it. Such action doesn't solve anything and advocating it is just ludicrous.


Is it cheaper this way
is the Tax payer saving money

[bbfan1991]

Disgusting woman, although I agree with Jack RE vigilante action.

I agree that she should not be able to have any more children, she probaly is planning to have more now Shannon and her others have been taken away as she likes to attention seek...

[Jesus.]

I can understand peoples outrage, and she shouldn't be let out early, but what do people think should happen to her?

If she goes out on to the streets without a new life she will be murdered. She committed a horrible crime, which, in the eyes of the law, she has now paid for. We don't have the death penalty over here, and rightly so, but her crime wouldn't have qualified for it anyway.

Once individuals have done their time, we have to support them back in to the community.

[Jack_]

Is it cheaper this way
is the Tax payer saving money

Social issues come way before money, I'm afraid. The world is not going to be a safer place while ever we allow vigilante action to take place or encourage it to take place. It doesn't solve anything, in fact it makes matters worse. This isn't a question of money, this is about working towards ensuring that vigilantes, and eventually (however long it may be, and however impossible it may seem) crime is eradicated.

Once individuals have done their time, we have to support them back in to the community.

This.

[Patrick]

‘When I get out I want a lie detector test to show I’m innocent – and a Big Mac.

Disgusting Pig.

[Ammi]

I can understand peoples outrage, and she shouldn't be let out early, but what do people think should happen to her?

If she goes out on to the streets without a new life she will be murdered. She committed a horrible crime, which, in the eyes of the law, she has now paid for. We don't have the death penalty over here, and rightly so, but her crime wouldn't have qualified for it anyway.

Once individuals have done their time, we have to support them back in to the community.

Social issues come way before money, I'm afraid. The world is not going to be a safer place while ever we allow vigilante action to take place or encourage it to take place. It doesn't solve anything, in fact it makes matters worse. This isn't a question of money, this is about working towards ensuring that vigilantes, and eventually (however long it may be, and however impossible it may seem) crime is eradicated.



This.


...I agree with this...if someone commits a heinous crime and then they decide to end their own life...I'm fine with that...but I would never feel comfortable with any violent action towards this woman...I wish the sentencing would mean just that....that's the thing I would like to see changed..two wrongs solve nothing

[Mrluvaluva]

Once individuals have done their time, we have to support them back in to the community.

I believe in some cases yes, but not in all cases. But that's a matter of law. As for the death penalty being a good thing or not, well that's another matter, and not one to do with this case. So I'll keep it zipped. :blush:

[Harry!]

Nowadays the criminals get more help then the victims due to poxy human rights laws!

[arista]

Nowadays the criminals get more help then the victims due to poxy human rights laws!



Yes Stinking New Labours Fault

[Jesus.]

Yes Stinking New Labours Fault

That's a false statement.

Human rights are human rights, regardless of which party is in the majority.

[Marc]

Hope somebody recognises her and stabs the bitch

[Kizzy]

Bad day marc?...:)

[Marc]

Haha no but this women is vile, death to her would be lovely

[Niamh.]

She shouldn't be allowed to have any more. She should be spayed.

Well, for a mother to do what she did to one of her children then I whole heartedly agree that any right to bring any other children into this world should be taken away, the British state is already looking after 8 of them.

[joeysteele]

The sentence didn't fit the crime anyway in the first place, for me this person? should have been sentenced to and had to do at least 10 years.

I wondered just what may have happened had the net closed in earlier and it appeared to her and her accomplices that if caught she would be in massive trouble, that may have resulted in a greater crime being committed and even maybe harm or worse to the child in order to try to get away with it.

For me in cases like this, a new additional crime should be supposed,normally supposition cannot be considered in law but I would in kidnapping cases, especially of children make the charge kidnapping with intent,which would leave open for consideration all the horrific possiblities that may have been the result of this action planned by her.

I really have no sympathy at all for her.she is a despicable Mother,not fit to be one again either.

[Mystic Mock]

Meh...she's served her time and she's a pretty disgusting woman, but oh well. Not much else can be done really, she's done her time, that's it to be honest.

As for protecting her identity...well if it stops vigilante action, then I'm for it. Such action doesn't solve anything and advocating it is just ludicrous.

I think this post is disgusting,she hasn't done her time and no way should she be having her identity changed,the police shouldn't be rewarding these criminals for there crimes and they certainly shouldn't be giving them sentences that people like you and me would laugh at.

[Jack_]

I think this post is disgusting,she hasn't done her time and no way should she be having her identity changed,the police shouldn't be rewarded these criminals for there crimes and they certainly shouldn't be giving them sentences that people like you and me would laugh at.

What are you, a walking, talking Daily Mail?

Okay then...so her identity isn't protected. Her house is burnt down, she is murdered, and other people are hurt as a result of vigilante action. Now please tell me how on earth that resolves anything? How it works towards eradicating crime, instead of provoking it? And how two wrongs make a right? Let's of course not forget that even if she isn't allowed to see her children, they might not (and this of course is just a wild guess) want her dead, or to be attacked, despite what she did.

I hardly think an eight year term in prison is a 'reward'. There's no denying what she did was wrong, but Christ, what more do you want...blood, piss, sh*t?

[Ammi]

I think this post is disgusting,she hasn't done her time and no way should she be having her identity changed,the police shouldn't be rewarding these criminals for there crimes and they certainly shouldn't be giving them sentences that people like you and me would laugh at.

..No she didn't serve her time and that is where our law is wrong imo...but what Jack's saying is it really wouldn't be any kind of civilised society at all if we allowed people to...deal with people like her violently...and that will mean they have to be protected

[Mystic Mock]

What are you, a walking, talking Daily Mail?

Okay then...so her identity isn't protected. Her house is burnt down, she is murdered, and other people are hurt as a result of vigilante action. Now please tell me how on earth that resolves anything? How it works towards eradicating crime, instead of provoking it? And how two wrongs make a right? Let's of course not forget that even if she isn't allowed to see her children, they might not (and this of course is just a wild guess) want her dead, or to be attacked, despite what she did.

I hardly think an eight year term in prison is a 'reward'. There's no denying what she did was wrong, but Christ, what more do you want...blood, piss, sh*t?

I don't care how the bitch gets treated tbh,I just don't think the Government should be protecting her,afterall she didn't protect her children so why anybody would care what happens to her is shocking.

[Ammi]

..or what Jack said...sort of

[Marsh.]

I'm still a bit shocked this was 2008, I felt sure it was only last year. Time goes by so fast it's scary.

[joeysteele]

However Jack, she hasn't done 8 years in prison though, in fact from sentencing for the crime she has done just over 3.

A child's welfare and protection should mean much more than that.In my opinion she has hardly had to pay much for the crime at all. people who commit financial crimes get and serve more than she has had to.

[Mystic Mock]

..No she didn't serve her time and that is where our law is wrong imo...but what Jack's saying is it really wouldn't be any kind of civilised society at all if we allowed people to...deal with people like her violently...and that will mean they have to be protected

Tbh I would have her locked up for life,afterall it's not like she committed a petty crime is it.

[Ammi]

However Jack, she hasn't done 8 years in prison though, in fact from sentencing for the crime she has done just over 3.

A child's welfare and protection should mean much more than that.In my opinion she has hardly had to pay much for the crime at all. people who commit financial crimes get and serve more than she has had to.

..Yes I think this is the problem Joey.....the sentencing should mean just that imo

[Mystic Mock]

However Jack, she hasn't done 8 years in prison though, in fact from sentencing for the crime she has done just over 3.

A child's welfare and protection should mean much more than that.In my opinion she has hardly had to pay much for the crime at all. people who commit financial crimes get and serve more than she has had to.

Exactly on all of this.

Some of the people that get defended is appalling.

[Ammi]

Tbh I would have her locked up for life,afterall it's not like she committed a petty crime is it.

.....it's the sentencing that should be looked at...and 8 years should be just that

[joeysteele]

Tbh I would have her locked up for life,afterall it's not like she committed a petty crime is it.

I would have sentenced her to 15 years with a recommendation she serve a minimum of 10 for this crime so I am more with you on this.

Her accomplices could have panicked if things had got heated and poor Shannon could have been another child statistic as to loss of life, this woman clearly didn't care one hoot about that,not even showing any remorse at her trial either.

[Mystic Mock]

I would have sentenced her to 15 years with a recommendation she serve a minimum of 10 for this crime so I am more with you on this.

Her accomplices could have panicked if things had got heated and poor Shannon could have been another child statistic as to loss of life, this woman clearly didn't care one hoot about that,not even showing any remorse at her trial either.

Exactly Joey so why some people think we should care about her life when she didn't care about Shannon's or her other childrens lives is beyond me.

Leave her hung out to dry I say,I wouldn't be to upset if somebody shot her dead.:dance:

[joeysteele]

Exactly Joey so why some people think we should care about her life when she didn't care about Shannon's or her other childrens lives is beyond me.

Leave her hung out to dry I say,I wouldn't be to upset if somebody shot her dead.:dance:

I am actually half surprised she is walking out of prison at all jf. Prisoners themselves are very intolerant of people who set out to harm children, being the Child's Mother too in this case,she is very fortunate indeed to be even walking out of prison intact.

[Jack_]

I don't care how the bitch gets treated tbh,I just don't think the Government should be protecting her,afterall she didn't protect her children so why anybody would care what happens to her is shocking.

Because, let me explain:

1) Okay...say we just allow vigilantes to step in, and I don't know, murder her? Along the way many other innocent bystanders are injured, or even killed. Now without even going any further, her children are already left without a mother, and to be honest, I don't think that's something anyone should take away from them, no matter how she treated them. We of course don't know how they feel about her.

2) By allowing such action, you are promoting and enticing violence. Oh hey...look, a criminal has just been released, come beat them up, bring some knives and we'll kill the bitch! Loads of people turn up, exercise their quite worrying need for violence, and everybody acts like they're baying for blood, like it's some bear pit or something. Quite barbaric when you put it like that really. People see this as 'okay', and they think they can take the law into their own hands, and so levels of violence rise, people accused of crimes (not convicted) end up being attacked, and violent crimes in general rise, because this is seen as an 'okay' thing to do. Instead of it being frowned upon, it is essentially promoted. Not good.

3) Two wrongs just don't make a right. It's hypocritical.

However Jack, she hasn't done 8 years in prison though, in fact from sentencing for the crime she has done just over 3.

Ah, I see. That makes sense now. I admit I didn't read the article in full, and when I saw the '8 years' I did think to myself 'has it really been that long?!', so in which case I understand the concerns here now, and as such I'm in agreement that she has been released too early.

That still doesn't excuse screams and wails for vigilante action though. It doesn't solve anything, it makes matters worse.

[Niamh.]

I don't agree with vigilantism but I do think that she should be prevented from bringing anymore children into the world, she has proven that she's a seriously unfit mother and has already had 8 children that the state now have to pick up the tab for so she really should not be allowed to have anymore. Not just for the bill the government is paying for those kids but for the psychological damage those poor kids will have to cope with.

[Mystic Mock]

Because, let me explain:

1) Okay...say we just allow vigilantes to step in, and I don't know, murder her? Along the way many other innocent bystanders are injured, or even killed. Now without even going any further, her children are already left without a mother, and to be honest, I don't think that's something anyone should take away from them, no matter how she treated them. We of course don't know how they feel about her.

2) By allowing such action, you are promoting and enticing violence. Oh hey...look, a criminal has just been released, come beat them up, bring some knives and we'll kill the bitch! Loads of people turn up, exercise their quite worrying need for violence, and everybody acts like they're baying for blood, like it's some bear pit or something. Quite barbaric when you put it like that really. People see this as 'okay', and they think they can take the law into their own hands, and so levels of violence rise, people accused of crimes (not convicted) end up being attacked, and violent crimes in general rise, because this is seen as an 'okay' thing to do. Instead of it being frowned upon, it is essentially promoted. Not good.

3) Two wrongs just don't make a right. It's hypocritical.



Ah, I see. That makes sense now. I admit I didn't read the article in full, and when I saw the '8 years' I did think to myself 'has it really been that long?!', so in which case I understand the concerns here now, and as such I'm in agreement that she has been released too early.

That still doesn't excuse screams and wails for vigilante action though. It doesn't solve anything, it makes matters worse.

I agree with you on number 2 as I don't believe in Vigilantism myself,I just wouldn't be to upset if somebody did kill the bitch is all.

Number 3 on the other hand is not hypocritical as I would be harming a criminal where as she helped harm her innocent Daughter,which one is worse in this hypothisis? I know my answer.

Now to the 8 years thing,I wouldn't call that a long sentence for what she did,she put her Daughter in danger for christ sake.

[joeysteele]

Ah, I see. That makes sense now. I admit I didn't read the article in full, and when I saw the '8 years' I did think to myself 'has it really been that long?!', so in which case I understand the concerns here now, and as such I'm in agreement that she has been released too early.

That still doesn't excuse screams and wails for vigilante action though. It doesn't solve anything, it makes matters worse.

I don't agree with vigilante action either,rule of law and society need to ensure avoidance of that action.

However, the already horrific trauma she put her child though plus the possible implicataions of what could have occurred if things got really difficult,then seeing as she was sentenced only in January 2009, to be walking out with protection after so short a time for such a rotten crime is likely to bring that very action about as many will be really incensed she is walking free at all so early.

She wasted also so much police time, on searching for Shannon even involving other neightbours in her deceit,while all the time knowing where Shannon was and what she had others do with her own child.

[joeysteele]

I don't agree with vigilantism but I do think that she should be prevented from bringing anymore children into the world, she has proven that she's a seriously unfit mother and has already had 8 children that the state now have to pick up the tab for so she really should not be allowed to have anymore. Not just for the bill the government is paying for those kids but for the psychological damage those poor kids will have to cope with.

Absolutely and your post shows that she didn't just cause massive trauma to one child's life but to many others too, all hers as well. Despicable.

[Jack_]

I agree with you on number 2 as I don't believe in Vigilantism myself,I just wouldn't be to upset if somebody did kill the bitch is all.

Number 3 on the other hand is not hypocritical as I would be harming a criminal where as she helped harm her innocent Daughter,which one is worse in this hypothisis? I know my answer.

Now to the 8 years thing,I wouldn't call that a long sentence for what she did,she put her Daughter in danger for christ sake.

Well I wouldn't exactly be shedding tears, but I don't think it's something we should be applauding. Murder is murder at the end of the day.

Well yes it is, because it's essentially saying committing crimes is bad, but oh no, don't worry...if you commit a crime it's fine. Exact same thing as the death penalty. Murder is wrong, you must not do this...so what are we going to do? Oh yeah, kill you. I mean it's just laughable.

And I don't think you understood what I meant. By 'has it really been that long?!' I meant it in the sense that eight years seemed far too long ago for this case, I was thinking it only seemed like a few years ago, so that's why I thought 'surely it hasn't been that long since', not that I was thinking 'eight years is a long sentence'.

[Marsh.]

I agree with you on number 2 as I don't believe in Vigilantism myself,I just wouldn't be to upset if somebody did kill the bitch is all.

Number 3 on the other hand is not hypocritical as I would be harming a criminal where as she helped harm her innocent Daughter,which one is worse in this hypothisis? I know my answer.

Now to the 8 years thing,I wouldn't call that a long sentence for what she did,she put her Daughter in danger for christ sake.

This doesn't make sense. Your explanation doesn't make it not hypocritical.
It's a double standard

There are laws against violence, murder etc so to condone that anyone can just go and beat someone up or kill them whilst still holding those same laws is hypocritical. No matter what they've done doesn't make it right.

If you killed a murderer, it makes you just as bad as the murderer in question. Yet, somehow you would justify your actions in your own murder.

Like saying "This person broke the law therefore we're permitting the general public to do the same in order to punish them".

[Mystic Mock]

Well I wouldn't exactly be shedding tears, but I don't think it's something we should be applauding. Murder is murder at the end of the day.

Well yes it is, because it's essentially saying committing crimes is bad, but oh no, don't worry...if you commit a crime it's fine. Exact same thing as the death penalty. Murder is wrong, you must not do this...so what are we going to do? Oh yeah, kill you. I mean it's just laughable.

And I don't think you understood what I meant. By 'has it really been that long?!' I meant it in the sense that eight years seemed far too long ago for this case, I was thinking it only seemed like a few years ago, so that's why I thought 'surely it hasn't been that long since', not that I was thinking 'eight years is a long sentence'.

Ok I understand some of your points more now,but I honestly do not think killing a criminal is hypocritical,infact I would call it an eye for an eye in a murderers case.

With Karen Matthews I would give her an eye for an eye in a different way to a murderer obviously.

Sadly that would be if she was still going to be serving her sentence.:(

[Mystic Mock]

This doesn't make sense. Your explanation doesn't make it not hypocritical.
It's a double standard

There are laws against violence, murder etc so to condone that anyone can just go and beat someone up or kill them whilst still holding those same laws is hypocritical. No matter what they've done doesn't make it right.

If you killed a murderer, it makes you just as bad as the murderer in question. Yet, somehow you would justify your actions in your own murder.

No it doesn't.:joker:

[Marsh.]

No it doesn't.:joker:

How is that funny?

You are judging a criminal for committing MURDER.

You are then committing MURDER yourself and yet you get to live and get away with it? That's hypocritical. Do you understand the definition of the word?

By your rationale someone else should be allowed to kill you as punishment. Murder is murder. No one has the right to take away someone else's life. There are laws for a reason.

[Jack_]

Ok I understand some of your points more now,but I honestly do not think killing a criminal is hypocritical,infact I would call it an eye for an eye in a murderers case.

With Karen Matthews I would give her an eye for an eye in a different way to a murderer obviously.

Sadly that would be if she was still going to be serving her sentence.:(

An eye for an eye is hypocritical. The entire concept is...I mean, seriously.

[Marsh.]

As I said before I don't think jedward_fever understands the actual definition of hypocrisy.

[Mystic Mock]

How is that funny?

You are judging a criminal for committing MURDER.

You are then committing MURDER yourself and yet you get to live and get away with it? That's hypocritical. Do you understand the definition of the word?

By your rationale someone else should be allowed to kill you as punishment. Murder is murder. No one has the right to take away someone else's life. There are laws for a reason.

How is it not funny?

I would be killing a criminal,the criminal kills an innocent person,which one is worse? I think the one where the criminal is killing a defenceless and innocent person is by far the worst of the two.

Also the killer didn't care about the victims life so why should I care about his/hers? I also think if anyone killed a murderer people would be singing there praises mostly.

[Mystic Mock]

As I said before I don't think jedward_fever understands the actual definition of hypocrisy.

I do but this is not hypocrisy,am I killing innocent people? no.

[Marsh.]

How is it not funny?

I would be killing a criminal,the criminal kills an innocent person,which one is worse? I think the one where the criminal is killing a defenceless and innocent person is by far the worst of the two.

Also the killer didn't care about the victims life so why should I care about his/hers? I also think if anyone killed a murderer people would be singing there praises mostly.

So, to repeat my question from earlier...

Using your own rationale someone else can be permitted to kill you to punish you for your own crime. That killer then becomes YOUR defenceless victim in your own act. How do you not see that?

[Marsh.]

I do but this is not hypocrisy,am I killing innocent people? no.

Is it not?

hy·poc·ri·sy/hiˈpäkrisē/
Noun:
The practice of claiming to have moral standards or beliefs to which one's own behavior does not conform; pretense.

You can't judge someone else for murder and then commit it yourself and justify it.

The entire point of murder is taking someone else's life which NO ONE has the right to do. To then punish someone by committing the same act is hypocrisy.

[Mystic Mock]

So, to repeat my question from earlier...

Using your own rationale someone else can be permitted to kill you to punish you for your own crime. That killer then becomes YOUR defenceless victim in your own act. How do you not see that?

No when I mean defenceless victim I mean innocent people not psychotic murderess bastards.

Also no as somebody that kills a criminal should not make someone want to kill the person that kills the criminal unless they sided with the killer in the first place.:shocked:

All im saying is,is if the death penalty was still around then you would have a less chaotic country.

[InOne]

I'd be interested to know if there was any form of diagnosis on Karen Matthews. It could be she walks out of prison and straight into Broadmoor or somewhere similar, it's happened to people before.

[Mystic Mock]

Is it not?



You can't judge someone else for murder and then commit it yourself and justify it.

The entire point of murder is taking someone else's life which NO ONE has the right to do. To then punish someone by committing the same act is hypocrisy.

A killer should not get a 2nd chance in life as afterall the victim will never get a 2nd chance so no I still stand that it isn't hypocrisy and it certainly isn't pretending high morals either like that quote you posted up is suggesting.

[Marsh.]

A killer should not get a 2nd chance in life as afterall the victim will never get a 2nd chance so no I still stand that it isn't hypocrisy and it certainly isn't pretending high morals either like that quote you posted up is suggesting.

It most certainly IS proposing high morals.

You are saying that murder is such a heinous crime it must be punished.

But you are punishing by committing the exact same heinous crime. Therefore defeating the basis of your on moral code.

You seem unable to comprehend these things so I'll just end my part in the discussion here.

[Mystic Mock]

It most certainly IS proposing high morals.

You are saying that murder is such a heinous crime it must be punished.

But you are punishing by committing the exact same heinous crime. Therefore defeating the basis of your on moral code.

You seem unable to comprehend these things so I'll just end my part in the discussion here.

Im able to comprehend what your saying but what way would you punish them? locking more and more murderers up in jail is still having them live out there lives,especially when they only get sentenced to 9 years in jail and there victim that they killed will never get there life back,imo that is false high morals to make themselves feel better because no sane person actually jumps at the joy at killing someone but it has to be done in these cases.

[Ammi]

..I really don't know why a sentence isn't just that..why in a lot of cases it seems to be cut in half..and we don't really know how many are 'reformed' when they leave prison..isn't that part of what it should be about..not just the punishment
..I understand why some feel how they do...that this wasn't enough...but that isn't our decision..and this is the only justice system we have...and new identities will sometimes have to be given..and whether we like it or not...it is for a very good reason...and even if she does do something horrific again..it still would have been the right thing to do....even the sickest of minds probably think they have 'a reason' to kill...but there really is no reason to kill......ever
....or to stand back and watch someone else do it....and think..oh well..they deserved it

[joeysteele]

..I really don't know why a sentence isn't just that..why in a lot of cases it seems to be cut in half..and we don't really know how many are 'reformed' when they leave prison..isn't that part of what it should be about..not just the punishment
..I understand why some feel how they do...that this wasn't enough...but that isn't our decision..and this is the only justice system we have...and new identities will sometimes have to be given..and whether we like it or not...it is for a very good reason...and even if she does do something horrific again..it still would have been the right thing to do....even the sickest of minds probably think they have 'a reason' to kill...but there really is no reason to kill......ever
....or to stand back and watch someone else do it....and think..oh well..they deserved it

I have no objection to sentencing reviews for good behaviour etc although in my opinion prisoners should conduct themselves with good behaviour anyway, it would be a start to seeing they were learning something in prison.

I think because no one was actually killed in this case explains the leniency of it,however as I said in an earlier post, I personally would like to see 'with intent' added to kidnap charges adding far more to the sentencing structure.

I also think in cases like this, which is a crime against and on a person, then reduction of time served should at the very best be minimal for good behaviour and other factors as to what makes up the decisions of reduction of those sentences.

I agree with jf in the main,I already know of people especially Mothers themselves,(my own for example), who are totally livid this woman is being released so soon and being given some protective means too.
I would never support vigilante action but I can see why some people are so furious at this case and her total lack of remorse at her trial on it that they would vent real fury out concerning her.

Clearly,if she has to be given a likely new identity, the authorities realise that and so must know release this early is likely wrong.
She was an adult when she 'organised' this crime against her own child, she duped neighbours, police and even the media into her web of deceit and even when caught, showed no remorse whatsoever.

If they had any suspicions the police were turning their attention to them what possibly would she and her accomplices maybe have done to poor Shannon in order to get away with this. She even deceived her own other children, still in her care while this crime and deceit was being played out by her.

I totally understand the anger and jf's anger at this is likely representative of a majority of the Country,of course anyone who harmed her would be seen as guilty by the establishment but I also dare bet they would be cheered by the majority of people in the UK.
I am not saying that is right but when the law appears to mollycoddle criminals like this person?, then others will feel really angry at that.

We don't have the death penalty in the UK, however if a referendum was held tomorrow, the majority for it on certain crimes would be enormous.I still would vote against it but crimes like this against children,who are not able to really defend themselves and then by no fault of their own see their lives devastated and scarred likely for life need a much stronger voice and sentencing.
Never forget this child's suffering and kidnapping was organised by her own Mother,I doubt there are much more despicable actions than that one.

[Ammi]

I have no objection to sentencing reviews for good behaviour etc although in my opinion prisoners should conduct themselves with good behaviour anyway, it would be a start to seeing they were learning something in prison.

I think because no one was actually killed in this case explains the leniency of it,however as I said in an earlier post, I personally would like to see 'with intent' added to kidnap charges adding far more to the sentencing structure.

I also think in cases like this, which is a crime against and on a person, then reduction of time served should at the very best be minimal for good behaviour and other factors as to what makes up the decisions of reduction of those sentences.

I agree with jf in the main,I already know of people especially Mothers themselves,(my own for example), who are totally livid this woman is being released so soon and being given some protective means too.
I would never support vigilante action but I can see why some people are so furious at this case and her total lack of remorse at her trial on it that they would vent real fury out concerning her.

Clearly,if she has to be given a likely new identity, the authorities realise that and so must know release this early is likely wrong.
She was an adult when she 'organised' this crime against her own child, she duped neighbours, police and even the media into her web of deceit and even when caught, showed no remorse whatsoever.

If they had any suspicions the police were turning their attention to them what possibly would she and her accomplices maybe have done to poor Shannon in order to get away with this. She even deceived her own other children, still in her care while this crime and deceit was being played out by her.

I totally understand the anger and jf's anger at this is likely representative of a majority of the Country,of course anyone who harmed her would be seen as guilty by the establishment but I also dare bet they would be cheered by the majority of people in the UK.
I am not saying that is right but when the law appears to mollycoddle criminals like this person?, then others will feel really angry at that.

We don't have the death penalty in the UK, however if a referendum was held tomorrow, the majority for it on certain crimes would be enormous.I still would vote against it but crimes like this against children,who are not able to really defend themselves and then by no fault of their own see their lives devastated and scarred likely for life need a much stronger voice and sentencing.
Never forget this child's suffering and kidnapping was organised by her own Mother,I doubt there are much more despicable actions than that one.

Joey....I do understand people's reaction...and the full term should have been served
...I am a mother too...don't think for one minute that I don't understand your mum's feelings...even felt them myself at times...not only about this woman but other's who's victims are children....but those are emotions...understandable ones yes.....but they will never solve a problem....if they were allowed to...and we 'dealt with things' based on how we feel..what angers..hurts...offends us.....there would only be choas...and violence. All we have is the law....the law has no emotion.....and that's all we can trust...and if it does fail sometimes...because it is flawed imo...then I'll have to hope karma steps in
..to 'let this woman loose'...with no protection of new identity...is quite possibly a death sentence on her...and whether 4 more years would change that...I doubt it...and doing that....sending someone into the arena..when you know that lions are there...you might not be the one to strike the blow...but well...you're not innocent either.
...and this is the dilemma the authorities face

[joeysteele]

Joey....I do understand people's reaction...and the full term should have been served
...I am a mother too...don't think for one minute that I don't understand your mum's feelings...even felt them myself at times...not only about this woman but other's who's victims are children....but those are emotions...understandable ones yes.....but they will never solve a problem....if they were allowed to...and we 'dealt with things' based on how we feel..what angers..hurts...offends us.....there would only be choas...and violence. All we have is the law....the law has no emotion.....and that's all we can trust...and if it does fail sometimes...because it is flawed imo...then I'll have to hope karma steps in
..to 'let this woman loose'...with no protection of new identity...is quite possibly a death sentence on her...and whether 4 more years would change that...I doubt it...and doing that....sending someone into the arena..when you know that lions are there...you might not be the one to strike the blow...but well...you're not innocent either.
...and this is the dilemma the authorities face

No way was I disagreeing with you Ammi, I think we both 100% agree the sentence was too short and is also over much too early too.

I am against vigilante action as I said in my posts, however having said that,I have heard a good few people on this topic this morning and the general view is anyone who got to her, would get cheered.

Again,I don't believe that is likely right but that is why I hope someday and if I got involved in anything as to law in the future after my Uni time, I would certainly canvass for an eventual re-defining of such crimes like this and the sentences for violent crime and kidnap heavily increased.
To me.that would be the only way to stifle the outrage at this early release of people like this woman.

[fruit_cake]

An eye for an eye is hypocritical. The entire concept is...I mean, seriously.

An 'eye for an eye' seems to me to be about revenge. Although it's understandable, especially in cases like this, the Bulgers, or perhaps the Moors Murderers, it is not the act of a decent state in my opinion. I think these type of criminals should be left to rot in a dungeon somewhere and made an example of.

Unfortunately our criminal system appears to do neither. I really wonder why we have prisons that are full of petty non-violent criminals who should probably be given some sort of community service instead and that would free us up to lock up the violent criminals for good. No rights, no cosy cells, just them alone with their thoughts for the rest of their lives.

an 'eye for an eye' also assumes we know exactly what happened too. How many people have been executed who were later found out to be innocent? The Derek Bentley case for example.

I do wonder if those who are vehement that the death penalty should be reintroduced are also vehement that they will take responsibility should somebody who is innocent be executed? An 'eye for an eye' would perhaps not be quite so popular then.

[fruit_cake]

I am against vigilante action as I said in my posts, however having said that,I have heard a good few people on this topic this morning and the general view is anyone who got to her, would get cheered.


I agree with you Joey that vigilante action is wrong, but I don't think I'll spend my time worrying about it with people like this. It seems to me they brought it on themselves.

If people want to take vigilante action then they should be subject to being criminalised for it.

[Ammi]

No way was I disagreeing with you Ammi, I think we both 100% agree the sentence was too short and is also over much too early too.

I am against vigilante action as I said in my posts, however having said that,I have heard a good few people on this topic this morning and the general view is anyone who got to her, would get cheered.

Again,I don't believe that is likely right but that is why I hope someday and if I got involved in anything as to law in the future after my Uni time, I would certainly canvass for an eventual re-defining of such crimes like this and the sentences for violent crime and kidnap heavily increased.
To me.that would be the only way to stifle the outrage at this early release of people like this woman.

...maybe you're right about the bit in bold...put aside the disgust and think about it though.....how awful that would be if it were true..to cheer the taking of a human life
..one thing that I'm certain of...you will be a great asset to the law profession....and will indeed canvass your beliefs.
...we'll have a little chat beforehand....and I'll give you my wish list

[Kazanne]

Exactly on all of this.

Some of the people that get defended is appalling.

Agree with all of this ^ sentances far too light for some henious crimes,IF offenders got a fitting sentence and SERVED it, people would not get so angry

[Ammi]

Agree with all of this ^ sentances far too light for some henious crimes,IF offenders got a fitting sentence and SERVED it, people would not get so angry

..that's so true Kazanne

[joeysteele]

...maybe you're right about the bit in bold...put aside the disgust and think about it though.....how awful that would be if it were true..to cheer the taking of a human life
..one thing that I'm certain of...you will be a great asset to the law profession....and will indeed canvass your beliefs.
...we'll have a little chat beforehand....and I'll give you my wish list

I will look forward to that little chat and your wish list too Ammi.

The whole thing here for me is that I am just so pleased that little Shannon did not end up another statistic as to the loss of a young child's life.
However what happened was bad enough.

Also fruit_cake, I totally agree with you, it is totally ridiculous that petty financial crimes see people in prison and taking up places that people like this woman should be in.
Often as I said before, those committing financial crimes end up getting longer anyway than she did. As again to the vigilante point, maybe the best way of protecting children or anyone in the future from this woman and even protecting her herself would be to keep in there and not inflict her on an unsuspecting public again.

[Kazanne]

..that's so true Kazanne

Thankyou Ammi,I don't want to add too much to this thread as I will get annoyed,I'm sure you know what I mean ,some things are just too close to the heart,needless to say,I think our judicial system is a joke,there really is NO punishment as such.This woman is scum,but much worse people are roaming round freely,after petty sentences.

[Mystic Mock]

The thing is us law abiding citizens don't get fake identities so why should somebody that had her own Daughter get kidknapped be given fake identities to help save there life? imo that's advertising that you can commit any crime you like and you will be rewarded with a **** prison sentence and a new rich home and look and name.

[MTVN]

The thing is us law abiding citizens don't get fake identities so why should somebody that had her own Daughter get kidknapped be given fake identities to help save there life? imo that's advertising that you can commit any crime you like and you will be rewarded with a **** prison sentence and a new rich home and look and name.

Generally speaking we don't need them but yes, you do get given one if necessary, witnesses who testify in important cases are sometimes given new identities for their safety

[joeysteele]

The thing is us law abiding citizens don't get fake identities so why should somebody that had her own Daughter get kidknapped be given fake identities to help save there life? imo that's advertising that you can commit any crime you like and you will be rewarded with a **** prison sentence and a new rich home and look and name.

Aside from the very valid point MTVN made as to those being witnesses in trials getting identity hidden or changed you are totally correct and it is obscene that what you say did and does occur, especially the last part of your post.

[InOne]

The thing is us law abiding citizens don't get fake identities so why should somebody that had her own Daughter get kidknapped be given fake identities to help save there life? imo that's advertising that you can commit any crime you like and you will be rewarded with a **** prison sentence and a new rich home and look and name.

Well she didn't only allow her to be 'kidknapped', she was also made to take anti-depressants to keep her in a slur so she didn't know what was going on. And this was all the time she was 'missing'.

[Kizzy]

Well she didn't only allow her to be 'kidknapped', she was also made to take anti-depressants to keep her in a slur so she didn't know what was going on. And this was all the time she was 'missing'.
Agreed.... There were so many offences, the poor girl was never going to recover from this...

[Mrluvaluva]

She has now been released, without a new identity (but a makeover), and wants to appear on The Jeremy Kyle show and take a lie detector test because she doesn't believe she has done anything wrong.

Link to article (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2125591/Karen-Matthews-released-prison-serving-HALF-sentence-kidnapping-daughter-wants-Jeremy-Kyle-show.html?ITO=1490).

[InOne]

Mother of God 0_0 That will be brutal

[Mrluvaluva]

It didn't take long for her cover to be blown:

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/4254283/Vile-mum-of-Shannon-Matthews-begins-new-life-with-a-makeover.html

[arista]

http://img.thesun.co.uk/multimedia/archive/01489/Karen_1489126a.jpg

[Lewis.]

The sun make me laugh so much -

“She had to serve only half her sentence and now she has been rewarded with a makeover and a shopping trip. It’s insane.”

It was hardly a shopping trip - a walk down to the local corner shop for some ciggies and a magazine :laugh:

[Kizzy]

How can she afford fags?... get her a fecking job the lazy waste of space.

[Jack_]

Ah of course...trust The Sun to be the ones to reveal her new identity. Same old, same old.

[Jordan.]

I really don't see the point in them hounding her now.

[MTVN]

It doesn't really seem like she's got a new identity then, if she's still calling herself Karen and was able to be found and photographed with ease already

[Tom4784]

Meh, she did her time and hopefully learned from it. The Daily Mail and The Sun complain about released criminals getting new identities but more often then not they're the reason why these people have to recieve new identities since their stupid incendiary articles fuel stupidity and vigilantism and put the people in question at risk.

Maybe if the Tabloids weren't so stupidly written the government wouldn't need to spend money on protecting these people and could put the money to better use.

[arista]

I really don't see the point in them hounding her now.


For the Sun its revenge
as she wanted the Sun to do help find her girl.
Which she had hidden to gain Cash

[joeysteele]

For the Sun its revenge
as she wanted the Sun to do help find her girl.
Which she had hidden to gain Cash

I really loathe The Sun and all it stands for but you are totally correct in what you say.

This woman, allowed her own child to be kept prisoner, allowed her to be doped and knew all the time where she was, she then helped orchestrate a police search for Shannon, she allowed her friends and neighbours to be brought into the events and the media too while all the time knowing the real whereabouts of her daughter and why her daughter was being kept prisoner this way too.

A new start for her why?, she has served her time,half of her sentence which was measly anyway and time served on remand taken into account too so where has she done that? I cannot see it and I am just grateful some panic didn't set in and that poor little girl didn't suffer some other horrible act to cover the whole thing up.

I for once am glad The Sun is hounding her, hopefully they will by such action help to make sure this vile rotten woman never gets near any children ever again, if she could allow this to be done to her own daughter, lord knows what she would have allowed to be done to some other parents children.

[Jack_]

For the Sun its revenge
as she wanted the Sun to do help find her girl.
Which she had hidden to gain Cash

The Sun is supposed to be a newspaper, not the sister of Matthews looking for petty 'revenge'.

You'd expect better from them...actually, no you wouldn't.

[Mrluvaluva]

It doesn't really seem like she's got a new identity then, if she's still calling herself Karen and was able to be found and photographed with ease already

She doesn't have a new identity. They have just tried to change her appearance.

[InOne]

Is she back in Dewsbury or?

[Mrluvaluva]

"The mother of seven was freed from Foston Hall prison in Derbyshire and taken to a secret location believed to be within 30 miles of her former home in Dewsbury Moor, West Yorkshire."

That's the only thing I have read.

[InOne]

Well she's definitely gonna get recognised at some point :joker: Can see a brutal attack coming on

[Mrluvaluva]

She's already been warned if she goes anywhere near her old estate she's going to get her head kicked in.

[InOne]

They could go looking for her I think, doubt she'd be hard to track down. Wonder if the Jeremy Kyle thing will actually happen

[Mrluvaluva]

I agree. She will get recognised wherever they put her. They can't watch her forever though. You would have thought she would have wanted to lay low really. I doubt the authorities would allow her to go on JK.

[Marc]

http://img.thesun.co.uk/multimedia/archive/01489/Karen_1489126a.jpg

Still got an ugly mug on her.

[Jords]

Sick bitch :bored:

[Marc]

Lets all go find her and brutally beat her to death :amazed:

[Marc]

LOL jk.. or something along those lines :idc:

[Mrluvaluva]

I'd be sh.itting my pants if I were her.

[Me. I Am Salman]

"I want a big mac" LOL.

[Me. I Am Salman]

Saw this comment below the article

I think the reaction to her is over the top but I am in no way sympathetic towards her. She did a terrible thing which she was convicted for and served her time. I think the SUN are still bitter at being taken in by her. Ive read stories on serial killers with less hatred and disgust.

Agree with this 100%

[Jordan.]

I don't get why anyone would want to find her and beat her up :conf2: Yeah she was a complete bastard for what she did, but there's far worse people roaming the streets. Murderers, Paedophiles etc..

[joeysteele]

I don't get why anyone would want to find her and beat her up :conf2: Yeah she was a complete bastard for what she did, but there's far worse people roaming the streets. Murderers, Paedophiles etc..

I read what you said with interest Jordan and can see your point in some ways. I am not really in favour of vigilante action.

My own view is though,she has not served enough time for what she did, she knew her child was alive and where she was, she allowed her to be drugged and be held at an address away from her own home.
She then had an orchestrated farce played out with her friends, neighbours, police and media all involved in appeals and searches for her.

To have done less than 4 years,incuding remand time, of an 8 year sentence is simply wrong in my view and people who have children and hate children being harmed in any way will I am sure naturally feel massive anger and hatred to this woman.

She set out to pervert the cause of justice, lie after lie to the police when she knew all the time where Shannon was,as I said before it is something to be glad about that no further harm came to Shannon other than the kidnap and assault of her by giving her drugs to keep her from being too active.

She is as a Mother in my view, only a little better than the paedos and murderers you mention because, had panic set in and control of this lost ,little Shannon could have been a statistic in the worst possible scenarios of child crime.
Children cannot fight against adults,adults who harm children have to be more severely punished for their actions.
Parents who bring harm to their children are even lower,they are the very people a child should be able to feel totally 100% safe with not end up suffering the way Shannon did, with the full approval too that this monster of a Mother allowed her to.

People will be rightly infuriated at the weak sentence, the joke of the time served and also the fact she still doesn't show any real remorse whatsoever for her actions in this horrible crime.

I fear she will need to watch her back for near the rest of her life, I would hate to be her if one day someone or a group do come across her who know her actions and part in this crime against a child who was her own daughter too.

[Jords]

Yeah I say give her no more attention tbh

[Mystic Mock]

Ah of course...trust The Sun to be the ones to reveal her new identity. Same old, same old.

I think I will love The Sun forever after doing this.

[joeysteele]

I think I will love The Sun forever after doing this.

For me, it's one of the very 'few' and I mean few things The Sun has got right jf.

[Mystic Mock]

I don't get why anyone would want to find her and beat her up :conf2: Yeah she was a complete bastard for what she did, but there's far worse people roaming the streets. Murderers, Paedophiles etc..

She kidknapped her own Daughter and probably would have killed her if she wasn't caught in time.

[Jack_]

I think I will love The Sun forever after doing this.

:crazy:

Says more about you than anyone else.

[Mystic Mock]

:crazy:

Says more about you than anyone else.

Why? because I don't want psychos that haven't served there full sentence to live? well yeah im bad, more bad than this bitch that your defending.:joker:

[Jack_]

Why? because I don't want psychos that haven't served there full sentence to live? well yeah im bad, more bad than this bitch that your defending.:joker:

No, because your comments are reactionary and you take no consideration as to any potential side effects of vigilante action and what revealing her 'new identity' could lead to. It's all very well and good to sit there screaming and shouting 'death to paedos! death to rapists! death to kids who steal sweets!', preaching some sort of barbaric witch hunt, but I'm afraid in the long run it doesn't solve a thing, not to mention you just lower yourself to their level and we as a society endorse the very thing we're trying to eradicate...which is idiotic if you ask me.

As for 'psychos'...that's too broad a term. You could say bullies are 'psychos', but shall we kill them? I don't condone bullying in the slightest and think it should be punishable...but death? Then how far do you go, do we sentence those who steal to death? Those who swear? At what point do you stop?

Capital punishment is an awful, false attempt at 'justice'.

[Mystic Mock]

No, because your comments are reactionary and you take no consideration as to any potential side effects of vigilante action and what revealing her 'new identity' could lead to. It's all very well and good to sit there screaming and shouting 'death to paedos! death to rapists! death to kids who steal sweets!', preaching some sort of barbaric witch hunt, but I'm afraid in the long run it doesn't solve a thing, not to mention you just lower yourself to their level and we as a society endorse the very thing we're trying to eradicate...which is idiotic if you ask me.

As for 'psychos'...that's too broad a term. You could say bullies are 'psychos', but shall we kill them? I don't condone bullying in the slightest and think it should be punishable...but death? Then how far do you go, do we sentence those who steal to death? Those who swear? At what point do you stop?

Capital punishment is an awful, false attempt at 'justice'.

Look I hate bullies, but are you honestly comparing them to criminals?:joker: murderers serve no purpose in society so why should they live just to kill more innocent people? and paedos just need to be locked up for life, along with rapists.

[joeysteele]

She kidknapped her own Daughter and probably would have killed her if she wasn't caught in time.

Exactly and also allowed her daughter to be drugged too jf, I am just sorry the law didn't come down more heavily on her.

She would have got at least 12 to 15 years in prison from me with no early release either.
Someone sometime has to start defending and protecting children who suffer at the hands of adults and cannot themselves fight back,Shannon will be likely scarred for life by this, knowing why she is not with her Mother, the fact it was her Mother that was major part of it will make it even worse for her to understand why.

People would not be so angry if sentences given out for assault and harm to children were more severe and far more lengthy ones.
People committing fraud or money crimes get longer in prison and have to serve more of it too than this rotten Mother got for the devastaion she allowed to be brought to her own child.
I don't say that from anger, I say it from simple and pure facts.

[MTVN]

Wouldn't be surprised if she turns up on CBB in the summer

[Mystic Mock]

Exactly and also allowed her daughter to be drugged too jf, I am just sorry the law didn't come down more heavily on her.

She would have got at least 12 to 15 years in prison from me with no early release either.
Someone sometime has to start defending and protecting children who suffer at the hands of adults and cannot themselves fight back,Shannon will be likely scarred for life by this, knowing why she is not with her Mother, the fact it was her Mother that was major part of it will make it even worse for her to understand why.

People would not be so angry if sentences given out for assault and harm to children were more severe and far more lengthy ones.
People committing fraud or money crimes get longer in prison and have to serve more of it too than this rotten Mother got for the devastaion she allowed to be brought to her own child.
I don't say that from anger, I say it from simple and pure facts.
I agree with you completely Joey but this is the country that let James Bulger's killers out on early release, the law disgusts me sometimes.

[joeysteele]

Wouldn't be surprised if she turns up on CBB in the summer

I wouldn't be surprised if she herself wouldn't mind being on it MTVN.

[Mystic Mock]

Wouldn't be surprised if she turns up on CBB in the summer

Yeah I can just imagine her saying im famous for kiddknapping my own Daughter and drugging her, I also mislead The Police on there investigation.

I swear I would stop watching BB if they allowed her on.

[Mystic Mock]

I wouldn't be surprised if she herself wouldn't mind being on it MTVN.

Yeah she's trashy enough for Channel 5.

[joeysteele]

I agree with you completely Joey but this is the country that let James Bulger's killers out on early release, the law disgusts me sometimes.

The law is at fault in the main definately jf for its still poor sentencing on issues like this.

Not wanting to re-live that awful tragedy as to little Jamie, bless him,however it seems little has been learned since from his horrific case.

It is the law and sentencing structure that needs a massive overhaul on cases where children are harmed.
They cannot fight back at the time, that should warrant 10 years instantly,with no early release as a sentence for even harming them and that would be before the actual harm effect is added to the sentence then people would see justice being done and be less angry at these ridiculous early releases for such awful people.

[Mystic Mock]

The law is at fault in the main definately jf for its still poor sentencing on issues like this.

Not wanting to re-live that awful tragedy as to little Jamie, bless him,however it seems little has been learned since from his horrific case.

It is the law and sentencing structure that needs a massive overhaul on cases where children are harmed.
They cannot fight back at the time, that should warrant 10 years instantly,with no early release as a sentence for even harming them and that would be before the actual harm effect is added to the sentence then people would see justice being done and be less angry at these ridiculous early releases for such awful people.

You should be PM Joey, you would run the country much better than the last few have.

Another case that I still can't get over is Victoria Climbie, how the Aunt and her boyfriend didn't get into more trouble is beyond me, and Social Services should be ashamed of themselves, and the Doctor.

[InOne]

The thing is, all she did was knowingly get her daughter kidnapped, she didn't partake in the actual abuse I don't think, was the other guy. So probably why she got off lighter.

[joeysteele]

The thing is, all she did was knowingly get her daughter kidnapped, she didn't partake in the actual abuse I don't think, was the other guy. So probably why she got off lighter.

I take that on board InOne,as you generally make points that set me thinking however,I cannot remove from my mind that all the time she knew where Shannon was and her long path of deceit as it went on for longer and longer just extended Shannon's suffering and time imprisoned.

For that action alone,knowing full well she could have ended her own little daughter's suffering in an instant and the fact she did not or has never shown any remorse for that since either,then I would have thrown the book at her with an extremely long sentence.

Knowing my Parents and how they were with me when I was little, I will never be able to understand how any Mother could do this to her own little Daughter for 'any' reason,she should in fact have been the one protecting her from anything like this happening.

[InOne]

I take that on board InOne,as you generally make points that set me thinking however,I cannot remove from my mind that all the time she knew where Shannon was and her long path of deceit as it went on for longer and longer just extended Shannon's suffering and time imprisoned.

For that action alone,knowing full well she could have ended her own little daughter's suffering in an instant and the fact she did not or has never shown any remorse for that since either,then I would have thrown the book at her with an extremely long sentence.

Knowing my Parents and how they were with me when I was little, I will never be able to understand how any Mother could do this to her own little Daughter for 'any' reason,she should in fact have been the one protecting her from anything like this happening.

Yeah I wasn't defending her or anything, was just looking at it from the laws point of view. They seemed to miss most of the moral stuff out on this one.

[Kizzy]

The thing is, all she did was knowingly get her daughter kidnapped, she didn't partake in the actual abuse I don't think, was the other guy. So probably why she got off lighter.

They both got 8yrs I thought?...

[InOne]

They both got 8yrs I thought?...

Dunno what they both got, but he was the one who made her take anti-depressants, unless Karen visited the house and made her too

[joeysteele]

Yeah I wasn't defending her or anything, was just looking at it from the laws point of view. They seemed to miss most of the moral stuff out on this one.

You make the valid point that the law has been lenient and likely given her the benefit of the doubt that she may not have known that Shannon had been drugged etc too.

As I said, the law in my opinion is at fault on this again, chidren need to be protected, this Woman had the police making appeals for her daughter and searching for her too, while all the time knowing full well where she was and who she was with.

As you rightly say, they have missed out a lot of the moral stuff here,I just wish I had been the prosecuting barrister against her on this one, I would have really gone for her in court,to get the maximum sentence for all offences and not lost a second of sleep after doing so either.

[Ammi]

..what she did was dreadful and she's served her time
..that Sun article is awful..'vile'..'loathsome'..'monster'...they're just inciting violence towards her..like throwing her in a 'gladiator ring'..vigilantic acts are wrong..as all violence is..and the perpetrator is no better than the victim..if that's what they resort to

[Mystic Mock]

..what she did was dreadful and she's served her time..that Sun article is awful..'vile'..'loathsome'..'monster'...they're just inciting violence towards her..like throwing her in a 'gladiator ring'..vigilantic acts are wrong..as all violence is..and the perpetrator is no better than the victim..if that's what they resort to

Wrong she's about 5 years off serving her time.

And The Sun hasn't done anything wrong imo, infact the Governments that cover up there identities should be ashamed of themselves as your rewarding them for there crimes which makes the everyday person mad, which you can't blame them for that.

[Tom4784]

Wrong she's about 5 years off serving her time.

And The Sun hasn't done anything wrong imo, infact the Governments that cover up there identities should be ashamed of themselves as your rewarding them for there crimes which makes the everyday person mad, which you can't blame them for that.

The Sun's articles are the reason why the government has to pay for new lives for these people. If it wasn't for their stupid articles and borderline braindead audience then the government could put the money to better use but no, they have to protect them from morons that evolution forgot because they can't think for themselves and treat the tabloids like a guide to life.

[Ammi]

Wrong she's about 5 years off serving her time.

And The Sun hasn't done anything wrong imo, infact the Governments that cover up there identities should be ashamed of themselves as your rewarding them for there crimes which makes the everyday person mad, which you can't blame them for that.

..I don't agree that the sentence term doesn't mean just that JF..but that doesn't change my stance on vigilantes or any form of violence..to take the law into our own hands..society just wouldn't exist anymore..people who go around harming someone..because they hate something they've done..there wouldn't be any point in a law system at all..can you imagine what a terrifying world that would be

[Pyramid*]

Wrong she's about 5 years off serving her time.

And The Sun hasn't done anything wrong imo, infact the Governments that cover up there identities should be ashamed of themselves as your rewarding them for there crimes which makes the everyday person mad, which you can't blame them for that.


I agree. I see no point in sentences being handed out, for those convicted to only serve 'half/less than half' of the time they were given.

I'm fully aware that KM is regarded as, well, not the smartest tool in the box: but she was still smart enough to maintain the distraught, angst ridden, anguish filled mother: while being wrapped up in a carefully planned 'kidnap' for no other reason than to make money from it - not least, allowing and continuing to have her daughter 'shackled', drugged, hidden and treated in the way a stray dog would not be treated.

She had the smarts about here.....she wasn't 'that daft'.


..I don't agree that the sentence term doesn't mean just that JF..but that doesn't change my stance on vigilantes or any form of violence..to take the law into our own hands..society just wouldn't exist anymore..people who go around harming someone..because they hate something they've done..there wouldn't be any point in a law system at all..can you imagine what a terrifying world that would be

To be honest: if this is what 'society' accepts as adequate punishment for a mother who could do this to her child, deceive her family, her friends, - I'm not altogether sure society could ever actually be called that -well, not a civilised one anyway. The Law doesn't always get it right, it is an ass as the say.

Taking the law into our own hands may not be the answer either - but I can understand the 'notion/the idea' of people venting verbally as to what they'd like to do to her: actually carrying that out, is another matter.

Mind you: she didn't object to her own daughter being abused, drugged and now having her (the daughter - and her other childrens lives) being thrown in to turmoil:- far as I'm concerned: part of such sentences for such crimes committed by a parent - should include sterilisation. That's a whole different debate though.

[joeysteele]

I can see where everyone is coming from but it always amazes me how these people who are what they say, not particularly educated so or are not the sharpest tool in the box, (as Pyramid* pointed out though), can do an amazing acress type performance as the stricken,panicking Mother all through the time this went on with Shannon supposedly missing.
The main person playing that part in all the days this went on was Karen Matthews, she knew where her Daughter was, she knew her daughter was being kept imprisoned because no way could Shannon ever be risked being seen in public, she even allowed The Sun to put up a reward for the finding of her Daughter, offered at £20,000 then increased to £50,000.
I can totally understand The Sun wanting to get their own back on this one, she even fooled them with her performance.I cannot stand The Sun by the way.

I hate vigilante action too, however the law has to be made to start giving out sentences that mean something to protect children particularly.
How could Shannon fight back? How could she have a chance to make a run for it?
After being doped up and kept prisoner by people she should have been able to trust completely.

If this had been a film, Karen Matthews would have been nominated for an oscar for her performance all through it, she has never once expressed any remorse for what she allowed to be done to her own little Daughter.
The sentence was way too short, she did near a year on remand, then got 8 years,she got out in less than 4, what message does that send out.

I can understand people saying she has served her time and it comes from people I respect the views of massively on here but for this crime, to me anyway, she has not even done half of it let alone served the right time for what she allowed to be done to Shannon.
As I say, I would have sent her down for around 15 years for this,no early release either,that would be for the lies, the role she had in allowing Shannon to be 'kidnapped' for not making sure Shannon was really safe,that no drug of any kind being forced on her,
For misleading the media, the Police, her friends and neighbours and indeed the whole Country,accepting appeals for money to help find Shannon etc;where does this list end? Lord knows.

No wonder some people are still angry, the anger though is because even worse than allowing and being involved in a child being kidnapped and inprisoned like Shannon was,which was a pretty rotten enough crime to commit anyway but for any Mother to allow that to happen to her own little Daughter heaps loads more coals onto that fire,

This woman has not served anywhere near enough time for her role in this crime, thankfully Shannon got away from it with her life still, but look at the people involved that Shannon should have been able to run to in order to feel safe and be protected, not get this done to her.
Who though, could have stopped it right at the very start or a day or so later to ease that Childs suffering, none other than the childs Mother Karen Matthews but she didn't and neither has she expressed remorse for this vile act either.
As a Mother she was responsible for Shannon, as part of this crime, she is the main one responsible for it being played out for so long and for all the suffering and imprisonment her child went though.
Sorry, but for me, less than 4 years in prison from an 8 year sentence doesn't come anywhere near close to serving her time for this rotten crime against a totally 'defenceless' child,a simple word but the main one here,'defenceless'.

Also what this Mother also achieved was that in cases like this in the future, the Parents and families of children missing will likely come under even greater scrutiny and suspicion themselves,which could hold up vital time in finding children missing.
This woman has tarnished Motherhood and is not fit to be a Mother,she is not fit to be around any child for that matter and if people think she can be then some other Mothers are rightly going to be furious at that.

The position Karen Matthews finds herself in can only have the blame for it laid at the door of one person and that is Karen Matthews herself.
Only she could have stopped this ever happening in the first place and being the child's Mother, the idea of it should never have even been considered by her, even for a second.
Less than 4 years served from an 8 year sentence for all the crimes against Shannon and trying to pervert the cause of justice too,ridiculous.
They may as well have given her a pat on the head and a sugar lump, to me she got off very lightly indeed.

[Pyramid*]

I can see where everyone is coming from but it always amazes me how these people who are what they say, not particularly educated so or are not the sharpest tool in the box, (as Pyramid* pointed out though), can do an amazing acress type performance as the stricken,panicking Mother all through the time this went on with Shannon supposedly missing.
The main person playing that part in all the days this went on was Karen Matthews, she knew where her Daughter was, she knew her daughter was being kept imprisoned because no way could Shannon ever be risked being seen in public, she even allowed The Sun to put up a reward for the finding of her Daughter, offered at £20,000 then increased to £50,000.
I can totally understand The Sun wanting to get their own back on this one, she even fooled them with her performance.I cannot stand The Sun by the way.

I hate vigilante action too, however the law has to be made to start giving out sentences that mean something to protect children particularly.
How could Shannon fight back? How could she have a chance to make a run for it?

After being doped up and kept prisoner by people she should have been able to trust completely.

If this had been a film, Karen Matthews would have been nominated for an oscar for her performance all through it, she has never once expressed any remorse for what she allowed to be done to her own little Daughter.
The sentence was way too short, she did near a year on remand, then got 8 years,she got out in less than 4, what message does that send out.

I can understand people saying she has served her time and it comes from people I respect the views of massively on here but for this crime, to me anyway, she has not even done half of it let alone served the right time for what she allowed to be done to Shannon.
As I say, I would have sent her down for around 15 years for this,no early release either,that would be for the lies, the role she had in allowing Shannon to be 'kidnapped' for not making sure Shannon was really safe,that no drug of any kind being forced on her,
For misleading the media, the Police, her friends and neighbours and indeed the whole Country,accepting appeals for money to help find Shannon etc;where does this list end? Lord knows.

No wonder some people are still angry, the anger though is because even worse than allowing and being involved in a child being kidnapped and inprisoned like Shannon was,which was a pretty rotten enough crime to commit anyway but for any Mother to allow that to happen to her own little Daughter heaps loads more coals onto that fire,

This woman has not served anywhere near enough time for her role in this crime, thankfully Shannon got away from it with her life still, but look at the people involved that Shannon should have been able to run to in order to feel safe and be protected, not get this done to her.
Who though, could have stopped it right at the very start or a day or so later to ease that Childs suffering, none other than the childs Mother Karen Matthews but she didn't and neither has she expressed remorse for this vile act either.
As a Mother she was responsible for Shannon, as part of this crime, she is the main one responsible for it being played out for so long and for all the suffering and imprisonment her child went though.
Sorry, but for me, less than 4 years in prison from an 8 year sentence doesn't come anywhere near close to serving her time for this rotten crime against a totally 'defenceless' child,a simple word but the main one here,'defenceless'.

Also what this Mother also achieved was that in cases like this in the future, the Parents and families of children missing will likely come under even greater scrutiny and suspicion themselves,which could hold up vital time in finding children missing.
This woman has tarnished Motherhood and is not fit to be a Mother,she is not fit to be around any child for that matter and if people think she can be then some other Mothers are rightly going to be furious at that.

The position Karen Matthews finds herself in can only have the blame for it laid at the door of one person and that is Karen Matthews herself.
Only she could have stopped this ever happening in the first place and being the child's Mother, the idea of it should never have even been considered by her, even for a second.
Less than 4 years served from an 8 year sentence for all the crimes against Shannon and trying to pervert the cause of justice too,ridiculous.
They may as well have given her a pat on the head and a sugar lump, to me she got off very lightly indeed.

Just to pick up on the point about The Sun and those who are saying rags like 'The Sun' etc are what leads to people requiring new identities etc.

No it is not. It it the unjustness of the sentence that causes that - and the resultant public outcry - it is the only way the public can voice their displeasure at those who pass the sentences. The Sun (and whatever other 'paper' - whether broadsheet or rag top) - they report on the news. This was (and now is) news.

It might not be the type of news we all agree with - but it's news regardless. Given that the Sun DID put up a hefty amount of money - the whole reason for the disgusting act to start off with - I see nothing wrong with them reporting on her release. Why should they not? She should be afforded no more privacy than any other released prisoner - regardless.

You do the crime, you do the time. Well, she in fact only did half the time that she was sentenced to on the inside: let her enjoy the remainder of 'her time' on the outside.

One more point - amazing to see how refreshed and trouble free she looks in comparison to all the previous photos shown of her - during Shannon's disappearance and all the photos that were available of her days 'pre Shannon's disappearance'. Prison hasn't exactly been a rigour for her by the looks of things. She's not aged beyond her years, she doesn't look ragged, she doesn't look stress, worried.

Yep, looks like Prison really had a detrimental affect on her physical healthy for starters (sarcasm there in case it was missed).... she looks far better than ever she did and though she's benefitted from a good long, all expenses paid, all inclusive holiday.

Oh wait......

[Kazanne]

They both got 8yrs I thought?...

Put like that it's pretty harsh !!that is the tariff some get for horrific murders.

[Kazanne]

Just to pick up on the point about The Sun and those who are saying rags like 'The Sun' etc are what leads to people requiring new identities etc.

No it is not. It it the unjustness of the sentence that causes that - and the resultant public outcry - it is the only way the public can voice their displeasure at those who pass the sentences. The Sun (and whatever other 'paper' - whether broadsheet or rag top) - they report on the news. This was (and now is) news.

It might not be the type of news we all agree with - but it's news regardless. Given that the Sun DID put up a hefty amount of money - the whole reason for the disgusting act to start off with - I see nothing wrong with them reporting on her release. Why should they not? She should be afforded no more privacy than any other released prisoner - regardless.

You do the crime, you do the time. Well, she in fact only did half the time that she was sentenced to on the inside: let her enjoy the remainder of 'her time' on the outside.

One more point - amazing to see how refreshed and trouble free she looks in comparison to all the previous photos shown of her - during Shannon's disappearance and all the photos that were available of her days 'pre Shannon's disappearance'. Prison hasn't exactly been a rigour for her by the looks of things. She's not aged beyond her years, she doesn't look ragged, she doesn't look stress, worried.

Yep, looks like Prison really had a detrimental affect on her physical healthy for starters (sarcasm there in case it was missed).... she looks far better than ever she did and though she's benefitted from a good long, all expenses paid, all inclusive holiday.

Oh wait......

I agree with the part where you say it is the paltry sentences that causes such outcry,lots of people are STILL angry at the paltry sentences given out to the killers of little James Bulger and that imo is the reason they are still at risk if found,although one of them is now safe in prison,I think if people are given a sentence that fits the crime we would sleep a little better at nights,some good points made there Pyramid.

[Pyramid*]

No, because your comments are reactionary and you take no consideration as to any potential side effects of vigilante action and what revealing her 'new identity' could lead to. It's all very well and good to sit there screaming and shouting 'death to paedos! death to rapists! death to kids who steal sweets!', preaching some sort of barbaric witch hunt, but I'm afraid in the long run it doesn't solve a thing, not to mention you just lower yourself to their level and we as a society endorse the very thing we're trying to eradicate...which is idiotic if you ask me.

As for 'psychos'...that's too broad a term. You could say bullies are 'psychos', but shall we kill them? I don't condone bullying in the slightest and think it should be punishable...but death? Then how far do you go, do we sentence those who steal to death? Those who swear? At what point do you stop?

Capital punishment is an awful, false attempt at 'justice'.

She didn't get 'a new identity'. She's had a change of hair colour and style, and put some make up on. It's something many people do on a weekly basis. Let's not blow it out of proportion.

If The Sun didn't post pictures, they would have been printed by some other publication house/company as well as plastered all over the internet by randoms.

[Pyramid*]

I agree with the part where you say it is the paltry sentences that causes such outcry,lots of people are STILL angry at the paltry sentences given out to the killers of little James Bulger and that imo is the reason they are still at risk if found,although one of them is now safe in prison,I think if people are given a sentence that fits the crime we would sleep a little better at nights,some good points made there Pyramid.

I do too Kazanne. I don't care what anyone else thinks: there is a point in very young years that children know right from wrong - and they know that if they can feel phyiscal pain on one hand, and they can feel 'emotional fear' on another - they then know what that feels like - so to inflict that on a.n.other - especially physical pain - they know EXACTLY what they are doing.

KM bangs on about her being put in a position by some person that she refuses to name, that she 'couldn't say' what was happening at the time - inferring that she was being forcibly coerced into this - indicating that she herself was being put in 'fear'.

Funny she never thought to consider that she herself was doing the exact same thing - but to her own flesh and blood. Now before anyone retorts with "perhaps this unknown person had said they would actually kill Shannon if KM blabbed"..... I could accept that - but given that she is 'still' (allegedly) refusing to name said person/people???

So keen she is for notorieity to continue that she wants to go on Jeremy Kyle. So much for rehabilitation - afterall - she's had plenty of JKyle shows to watch and see exactly who goes on them.

[Kazanne]

I do too Kazanne. I don't care what anyone else thinks: there is a point in very young years that children know right from wrong - and they know that if they can feel phyiscal pain on one hand, and they can feel 'emotional fear' on another - they then know what that feels like - so to inflict that on a.n.other - especially physical pain - they know EXACTLY what they are doing.

KM bangs on about her being put in a position by some person that she refuses to name, that she 'couldn't say' what was happening at the time - inferring that she was being forcibly coerced into this - indicating that she herself was being put in 'fear'.

Funny she never thought to consider that she herself was doing the exact same thing - but to her own flesh and blood. Now before anyone retorts with "perhaps this unknown person had said they would actually kill Shannon if KM blabbed"..... I could accept that - but given that she is 'still' (allegedly) refusing to name said person/people???

So keen she is for notorieity to continue that she wants to go on Jeremy Kyle. So much for rehabilitation - afterall - she's had plenty of JKyle shows to watch and see exactly who goes on them.

Terrible,terrible woman,not fit to be called a mum,I wonder if Shannon ever wishes to see her?

[joeysteele]

In spite of all my words on this so far, I do agree with Ammi that a society where vigilantes were more evident would not be a good thing at all.

The point that jf and InOne and myself seem to be making is that the law is thing at fault here. Pyramid* and kazanne too.
Sadly the current likely maximum sentence for kidnap is around 8 years,however for me Shannon was also assaulted, by being given drugs to keep her more sedate shall we say.

Karen Matthews should have made sure that never happened and as to the 8 years max sentence for kidnap, in her case and the others involved for that matter, that 8 years should have meant that, 8 years served.

My main fear now is, can this woman be allowed anywhere near a child again,if as a Mother she could allow to happen to one of her own children, what happened to Shannon then she has to be, at the very least, to be seen to be unfit to be anywhere near a child in the future.

Thankfully,this case didn't result in loss of life to Shannon, but how near may it have been, what if Shannon had tried to run away.
(Little James Bulger,bless him, was mentioned above, that poor little lad, I when I first read that story was horrified).

When is the UK going to learn that children need protecting,in Shannon's case it is beyond belief that it could seem some may even need protecting from their own Mothers too.
That's almost as bad a scenario as vigilantes.

[Pyramid*]

Terrible,terrible woman,not fit to be called a mum,I wonder if Shannon ever wishes to see her?

See, I think this would be a difficult call for Shannon - because for all the world - regardless: KM is the mother that she grew up to know for so many years - and whilst she may not like what the mother did/was involved in that affected her (Shannon) - it's equally understandably that there is - as bizarre - as it may sound - still love for the person - (separating that from the person's actions)

In spite of all my words on this so far, I do agree with Ammi that a society where vigilantes were more evident would not be a good thing at all.

The point that jf and InOne and myself seem to be making is that the law is thing at fault here. Pyramid* and kazanne too.
Sadly the current likely maximum sentence for kidnap is around 8 years,however for me Shannon was also assaulted, by being given drugs to keep her more sedate shall we say.

Karen Matthews should have made sure that never happened and as to the 8 years max sentence for kidnap, in her case and the others involved for that matter, that 8 years should have meant that, 8 years served.

My main fear now is, can this woman be allowed anywhere near a child again,if as a Mother she could allow to happen to one of her own children, what happened to Shannon then she has to be, at the very least, to be seen to be unfit to be anywhere near a child in the future.

Thankfully,this case didn't result in loss of life to Shannon, but how near may it have been, what if Shannon had tried to run away.
(Little James Bulger,bless him, was mentioned above, that poor little lad, I when I first read that story was horrified).

When is the UK going to learn that children need protecting,in Shannon's case it is beyond belief that it could seem some may even need protecting from their own Mothers too.
That's almost as bad a scenario as vigilantes.

It could so easily have turned out so very different. Shannon taking a bad reaction to whatever drugs she was given, given a lethal dose - even accidentally - taking a fit, hyperventilating through fear resulting in death etc.

I know this didn't happen but it does give rise to the dangers KM placed Shannon in nevertheless.

[joeysteele]

See, I think this would be a difficult call for Shannon - because for all the world - regardless: KM is the mother that she grew up to know for so many years - and whilst she may not like what the mother did/was involved in that affected her (Shannon) - it's equally understandably that there is - as bizarre - as it may sound - still love for the person - (separating that from the person's actions)



It could so easily have turned out so very different. Shannon taking a bad reaction to whatever drugs she was given, given a lethal dose - even accidentally - taking a fit, hyperventilating through fear resulting in death etc.

I know this didn't happen but it does give rise to the dangers KM placed Shannon in nevertheless.


Absolutely, it is why I would like to see in these crimes,with 'intent' added to the charge as an offence too like it sometimes does come up in some other cases.

If someone is going to kidnap a child and keep them hidden away from society no matter for how long that may be, then there is intent against that child and should the child wish to leave and/or try to leave then that 'intent' could lead to really horrific results.

[Pyramid*]

Absolutely, it is why I would like to see in these crimes,with 'intent' added to the charge as an offence too like it sometimes does come up in some other cases.

If someone is going to kidnap a child and keep them hidden away from society no matter for how long that may be, then there is intent against that child and should the child wish to leave and/or try to leave then that 'intent' could lead to really horrific results.

Add to that the very real long lasting psychological impact upon the child in question and the reparcussions that in all likeliehood, will follow her/haunt her for a long, long time.

It simply was not long enough a time - together with the fact that (we assume) that KM can continue to have more children should she wish to.

[Kazanne]

In spite of all my words on this so far, I do agree with Ammi that a society where vigilantes were more evident would not be a good thing at all.

The point that jf and InOne and myself seem to be making is that the law is thing at fault here. Pyramid* and kazanne too.
Sadly the current likely maximum sentence for kidnap is around 8 years,however for me Shannon was also assaulted, by being given drugs to keep her more sedate shall we say.

Karen Matthews should have made sure that never happened and as to the 8 years max sentence for kidnap, in her case and the others involved for that matter, that 8 years should have meant that, 8 years served.

My main fear now is, can this woman be allowed anywhere near a child again,if as a Mother she could allow to happen to one of her own children, what happened to Shannon then she has to be, at the very least, to be seen to be unfit to be anywhere near a child in the future.

Thankfully,this case didn't result in loss of life to Shannon, but how near may it have been, what if Shannon had tried to run away.
(Little James Bulger,bless him, was mentioned above, that poor little lad, I when I first read that story was horrified).

When is the UK going to learn that children need protecting,in Shannon's case it is beyond belief that it could seem some may even need protecting from their own Mothers too.
That's almost as bad a scenario as vigilantes.

Joey,you don't know the half of it (about James) and probably never will do,you'de be more than horrified,Karen M should have served at least 8+ years,she seems to have had quite a cushy time,why do crimes seem to be less significant if they are done by women or kids? I'm sure Baby Peters torturer,he is free isn't he ? what is all that about?not sure about his 'mother' Britain needs to grow some balls and lets have life for cold bloodied murders a very stiff sentence for kidnapping and such ,and less sentencing for money crimes as it seems the money crimes carry a stiffer sentence than any!!

[joeysteele]

Joey,you don't know the half of it (about James) and probably never will do,you'de be more than horrified,Karen M should have served at least 8+ years,she seems to have had quite a cushy time,why do crimes seem to be less significant if they are done by women or kids? I'm sure Baby Peters torturer,he is free isn't he ? what is all that about?not sure about his 'mother' Britain needs to grow some balls and lets have life for cold bloodied murders a very stiff sentence for kidnapping and such ,and less sentencing for money crimes as it seems the money crimes carry a stiffer sentence than any!!

100% agree, and especially to the money crimes part too, it's likely a reason why people like Matthews don't get to serve longer sentences because of people kept in prison for money matters rather than violent or physical crimes.