Father, 30, Charged with Murder after daughter, 4, dies.
 

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2014/...45_634x672.jpg


This is tragic
if only she stayed with the mother


[Father, 30, arrested after daughter, 4, found dead
at home following 'custody battle' he had won to keep child
The girl has been named locally as Alexa Wheatley
She had been living with father Carl Wheatley
in Hatfield since Christmas
Neighbour: Alexa joined him
after he won a custody battle with her mother
Her cause of death is not yet known
and a post mortem to held on Monday]


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...#ixzz2vrttWfSQ

As the cause of death is unknown it is clearly very premature of you to make such comments as she should have stayed with her mother. The cause of death may of had nothing to do with the father.

Agreed. And mothers almost always get custody in court battles - the fact that it was granted to the father in the first place strongly suggests to me that the living situation with her mother would have been far from ideal.

Tragically, accidents happen, and with no confirmation that her death was down to anything he did or some sort of negligence, passing any sort of judgement is massively jumping the gun.

I saw this in the paper today,did you read the link?
It starts like this
Father, 30, charged with murder after daughter, 4, found dead at home following 'custody battle' he had won to keep child

•Alexa Wheatley died in hospital after police were called to the house

•She had been living with father Carl Wheatley in Hatfield since Christmas
•Neighbour: Alexa joined him after he won a custody battle with her mother
•Her cause of death is not yet known and a post mortem to held on Monday
He's been charged with murder.

Giving that he has been charged with her murder then I'm doubting very much it was a tragic accident.

Although I do agree it's a bit too early to say she should have stayed with the mother.

Poor little girl, R.I.P.

The person that wrote that article also contradicts themselves within the heading and first few lines..

Maybe
but they do rush kids to Hospital
even if dead, as they keep trying to bring life back
as they drive off.

[Father, 30, charged with murder after daughter,
4, found dead at home
following 'custody battle' he had won to keep child]

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...#ixzz2w91oJK7u



I still say if she stayed with the mother
she would not have been killed,
why did he kill her - to punish his wife?

Evil Man

That's just the same article that you linked to earlier Arista

No the DM updated it
it never said Murder on the first day it went up

Have you never heard of mothers killing their children? It happens.

Besides being charged with murder is not evidence of guilt. It someone broke into your home and attacked you and you killed them in self-defence, with no witnesses, chances are you would initally be charged with murder, until the the facts of what had actually happened had been established and verified somehow.

Of course

But in this case the man was guilty
thats why Police have now charged him.

Oh well, if he has been charged, he must be guilty. Maybe we should all follow your lead, including the legal system, and dispence with such a thing as a trial and just find them guilty based on the fact they have been charged. How scary.

Perhaps he was arrested by Judge Dredd who as we all know, Is The Law. He was apparently trained by a great and mythical mentor - Judge Arista.

In arista's world, the police don't make mistakes and being charged with something is the same as being found guilty. All of this "trial" mumbo-jumbo just needlessly complicates things.

I'm not saying that this man didn't cause his daughters death... and to be fair, when I made my first post he hadn't even been charged, only arrested on suspicion (which is apparently enough for assuming murderer status)... I'm just saying that "innocent until proven guilty" seems to have gone completely out of the window in today's "trial by tabloid" culture.

The information that's been released on this is scant at best. None of us have any idea what's happened.

Alright there's no need to have a dig at arista, don't shoot the messenger...
He has been charged, that must mean that the weight of evidence is enough to charge him? That we know.

He isn't just presenting the info, he is giving his opinions and these are being challenged as they are finding people guilty without a trial. Many people are charged with crimes, but not convicted. It is up to the legal profession and the jury to decide whether the evidence in enough to convict him, not the police and not Arista.

So what, he's entitled to his opinion, he may be proved wrong who knows....bitching at him won't change his opinion will it?

Why is challenging a factually incorrect opinion bitching. Don't we challenge opinions all the time - it is part of debate. Or are certain posters immune from criticism?

Where is his stating his opinion as fact?...he was speculating, and you disagree with him I see that. Seeing as nobody could know the outcome yet that's all anyone can do isn't it?