[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by Sticks

Yet another death because of that woman Samantha Stobbart,

She is now directly responsible for the deaths of three people because she told lies and formed a relationship with an innocent man when she knew that it would enrage a dangerous man.

Why can't she be prosecuted for these wrongful deaths? I understand the parents of the boyfriend that Moat killed banner her from the funeral because rightly so they held her directly responsible for his death.

Are you serious?

[Shasown]

Originally Posted by Sticks

Yet another death because of that woman Samantha Stobbart,

She is now directly responsible for the deaths of three people because she told lies and formed a relationship with an innocent man when she knew that it would enrage a dangerous man.

Why can't she be prosecuted for these wrongful deaths? I understand the parents of the boyfriend that Moat killed banner her from the funeral because rightly so they held her directly responsible for his death.

An amazingly breathtaking point of view? You want to punish a woman for having gone out with a psycho? And moving on with her life later? Do you feel she should have had to put her own life on hold possibly going into hiding or even a nunnery, simply because she used to date Moat?

Do you think we should also punish other victims of domestic abuse for example? After all maybe their breathing or blinking was the cause of the abuse.

Arent you one of those "christians"? You know forgiveness and love, turn the other cheek-BS? How far do you intend to go with this blame culture? Maybe we should do the parents of children who are abused, murdered or kidnapped by others on the grounds they failed to adequately provide (security) for their child?

[billy123]

Originally Posted by Sticks

Yet another death because of that woman Samantha Stobbart,

She is now directly responsible for the deaths of three people because she told lies and formed a relationship with an innocent man when she knew that it would enrage a dangerous man.

Why can't she be prosecuted for these wrongful deaths? I understand the parents of the boyfriend that Moat killed banner her from the funeral because rightly so they held her directly responsible for his death.

Sticks you just lost all credibility with that post.
I can only guess such an off post is a product of personal experience which im sorry for if that is the case but to think an ex no matter how much of a looney she is could ever be the cause and result of a crackpot like moat is bordering on insane.

Originally Posted by Jack_

Very sad news. RIP & thoughts with his family



Oh please get a grip. Just because somebody dares to make a dark humoured joke, it doesn't mean they advocate, or as you laughably put it, 'glorify' the actions of the perpetrator. In fact, it's completely the opposite. If someone makes a joke at the expense of a murderer, they are taking the piss out of the murderer...I fail to comprehend how that's 'glorifying' their actions.

And regardless, a joke is a joke. Nothing more, nothing less. A flippant remark does not equate to advocating criminal behaviour.

Please stop trying to bait myself and Patrick in numerous posts of yours...thanks.

Time for a rethink lad i have often put up with your sillyness and naiveness but its time you woke up jack,
Joking about murder and rape isnt funny once you grow up you will realise that it isnt a joke.
dark humour is deeply upsetting to the victims of rape,torture, and murder of everyone that actually knew these people.
Jack you are a good person you just need to wise up.

[Livia]

Originally Posted by Sticks

Yet another death because of that woman Samantha Stobbart,

She is now directly responsible for the deaths of three people because she told lies and formed a relationship with an innocent man when she knew that it would enrage a dangerous man.

Why can't she be prosecuted for these wrongful deaths? I understand the parents of the boyfriend that Moat killed banner her from the funeral because rightly so they held her directly responsible for his death.

You cannot provoke someone into killing someone else. There is only one person responsible for the deaths to which you refer, and that is Moat.

[Livia]

Originally Posted by Jack_

Very sad news. RIP & thoughts with his family



Oh please get a grip. Just because somebody dares to make a dark humoured joke, it doesn't mean they advocate, or as you laughably put it, 'glorify' the actions of the perpetrator. In fact, it's completely the opposite. If someone makes a joke at the expense of a murderer, they are taking the piss out of the murderer...I fail to comprehend how that's 'glorifying' their actions.

And regardless, a joke is a joke. Nothing more, nothing less. A flippant remark does not equate to advocating criminal behaviour.

Please stop trying to bait myself and Patrick in numerous posts of yours...thanks.

There is a time and a place. When you grow up you will understand that.

[Sticks]

She knew this guy was a psycho which was why she told lies to Moat. She told Moat that her boyfriend was a police officer, so Moat then went on a vendetta against police officers and then ended up killing himself.

It was her lies that drove Moat to kill her boyfriend and shoot this police officer

Should she have stayed single and not move on you ask? Well how about this question, as she knew that if she went out with anyone else, they would be put at risk from this person, what right had she to put other people at risk?

She initially formed a relationship with Moat in the first place of her own free choice. To quote an old saying, "She made her bed so she needed to lie in it" She needed to take responsibility for her actions, even if that meant having to stay single.

Remember the family of the boyfriend who was murdered banned Samantha from the funeral because they hold her personally responsible for his death, one for forming the relationship and putting him in the firing line and two for lying to Moat and saying he was a police officer. Will you criticise the family of the boyfriend who was murdered?

If you think she should have been free to form other relationships, in spite of the consequences, then there is still the issue of her lies about her boyfriend to Moat. These lies lead Moat to shooting PC Rathband.

If anyone ever said a little lie never hurt anyone, then this case disproves that totally. Had Samantha not told lies, PC Rathband would still be alive today.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by Sticks

She knew this guy was a psycho which was why she told lies to Moat. She told Moat that her boyfriend was a police officer, so Moat then went on a vendetta against police officers and then ended up killing himself.

It was her lies that drove Moat to kill her boyfriend and shoot this police officer

Should she have stayed single and not move on you ask? Well how about this question, as she knew that if she went out with anyone else, they would be put at risk from this person, what right had she to put other people at risk?

She initially formed a relationship with Moat in the first place of her own free choice. To quote an old saying, "She made her bed so she needed to lie in it" She needed to take responsibility for her actions, even if that meant having to stay single.

Remember the family of the boyfriend who was murdered banned Samantha from the funeral because they hold her personally responsible for his death, one for forming the relationship and putting him in the firing line and two for lying to Moat and saying he was a police officer. Will you criticise the family of the boyfriend who was murdered?

If you think she should have been free to form other relationships, in spite of the consequences, then there is still the issue of her lies about her boyfriend to Moat. These lies lead Moat to shooting PC Rathband.

If anyone ever said a little lie never hurt anyone, then this case disproves that totally. Had Samantha not told lies, PC Rathband would still be alive today.

I have never heard such misogynistic drivel in my life...and believe me thats saying something!

[Sticks]

My argument would be the same if we had a "Fatal Attraction" type scenario with gender roles reversed, hardly misogynistic.

Plus there is still the issue of the lies told, which is gender neutral , Moat could have killed a female police officer, so enraged at the police he was.

[Ammi]

..Are we privvy to their lives and conversations..do we know what lies were told, what deceptions if any took place...people sometimes feel the need to lay blame in grief and if the family prohibited her from attending the funeral, it is no proof of a guilt..only that they were laying blame, maybe because Moat was 'untouchable'...that doesn't make them right...people blame in grief, they need to find a focus for their emotions..it's natural.
Ultimately everyone is responsible for their own actions and her boyfriend may have had the facts and wanted to be with her regardless. We don't know, nor do we need to know..the person responsible for this, all of it, is beyond reproach and that must be accepted.

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by Sticks

She knew this guy was a psycho which was why she told lies to Moat. She told Moat that her boyfriend was a police officer, so Moat then went on a vendetta against police officers and then ended up killing himself.

It was her lies that drove Moat to kill her boyfriend and shoot this police officer

Should she have stayed single and not move on you ask? Well how about this question, as she knew that if she went out with anyone else, they would be put at risk from this person, what right had she to put other people at risk?

She initially formed a relationship with Moat in the first place of her own free choice. To quote an old saying, "She made her bed so she needed to lie in it" She needed to take responsibility for her actions, even if that meant having to stay single.

Remember the family of the boyfriend who was murdered banned Samantha from the funeral because they hold her personally responsible for his death, one for forming the relationship and putting him in the firing line and two for lying to Moat and saying he was a police officer. Will you criticise the family of the boyfriend who was murdered?

If you think she should have been free to form other relationships, in spite of the consequences, then there is still the issue of her lies about her boyfriend to Moat. These lies lead Moat to shooting PC Rathband.

If anyone ever said a little lie never hurt anyone, then this case disproves that totally. Had Samantha not told lies, PC Rathband would still be alive today.

She told lies to Moat, most probably to keep him away from her. You're opinion on this is pretty unbelievable, no one is responsible for those people deaths other than Moat, I can not believe you're trying to put the blame on one of his victims.

[Sticks]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

She told lies to Moat, most probably to keep him away from her. You're opinion on this is pretty unbelievable, no one is responsible for those people deaths other than Moat, I can not believe you're trying to put the blame on one of his victims.

Suppose someone goes out wearing expensive jewellery in a flash suit / dress to a rough part of town and are mugged.

The mugger may be the one committing the offence, but the victim in this case, by their actions would have been partly the author of their own misfortune, would they not?

[MTVN]

Originally Posted by Sticks

Suppose someone goes out wearing expensive jewellery in a flash suit / dress to a rough part of town and are mugged.

The mugger may be the one committing the offence, but the victim in this case, by their actions would have been partly the author of their own misfortune, would they not?

So would you say a woman who wears a revealing outfit would be responsible if she ended up getting raped?

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by Sticks

Suppose someone goes out wearing expensive jewellery in a flash suit / dress to a rough part of town and are mugged.

The mugger may be the one committing the offence, but the victim in this case, by their actions would have been partly the author of their own misfortune, would they not?

No, they would not.

[Sticks]

Originally Posted by MTVN

So would you say a woman who wears a revealing outfit would be responsible if she ended up getting raped?

Number one, in my hypothetical I was trying to be gender neutral by saying suit - slash dress

On the specific issue, out of interest we used to have an evangelist whose wife would often say something along the lines of "if you are not selling don't advertise" Probably basing her remark on what ladies wear out and about in Newcastle. This was a woman voicing an opinion that other women should be more circumspect in what they wear.

The question reminds me of the film The Accused with Jodie Foster, which dealt with the same question. If a woman dresses provocatively should she be responsible if something like that happened. The opinion generated by the film was that she should not be held responsible. In an ideal world we can hold to that, and that should be how it should be

However this is not an ideal world, as the wife of the evangelist would observe.

Things we do have consequences. Sometimes we have to limit ourselves and our freedoms because of this fallen world. If you go out wearing jewellery then you make sure you stay away from certain areas and take certain precautions in order to stay safe. You do not behave in a cavalier and reckless way, even if you have a right to and are not breaking any law.

Back on the real world example, if Samantha had not told lies and if Moat had still killed the boyfriend, and she still survived, then he would not have gone after the first police officer he found on a vendetta.

The consequence of her lies, has not lead to another death

[Ammi]

I think what saddens me most is that these 'heroes' do not appear to get the help they need. It appears David Rathband's life was layered with loss after loss, since his attack from Moat....his sight, his job, his marriage, his family...any one of these alone would require huge support to cope with...and yet these things appear to happen too often. I wonder if the care and support was there to help him adjust and come to terms with his life...I wonder if the outcome could have been prevented...nothing could ever reverse Moat's actions that day, but with enough help and resources, maybe he would have found a reason to live.

[Jack_]

Originally Posted by bobnot

Time for a rethink lad i have often put up with your sillyness and naiveness but its time you woke up jack,
Joking about murder and rape isnt funny once you grow up you will realise that it isnt a joke.
dark humour is deeply upsetting to the victims of rape,torture, and murder of everyone that actually knew these people.
Jack you are a good person you just need to wise up.

Of course it's a joke. If you define the word 'joke' you'll find that it's not intended to be serious or malicious, there's a big, quite obvious difference. Some people like dark humour, and I think if we weren't able to poke fun at some of life's more darker sides, then the world would be a very miserable place. Comedy has no boundaries, at least it shouldn't do. There is no correlation between telling a joke and making a malicious, hurtful, insulting remark.

This was said a few months back in response to the controversy surrounding Frankie Boyle's material, and it sums what I was saying up quite well:

'We need humour which explores the dark side of life otherwise we reduce comedy to the contents of a Christmas cracker, a horrendous proposition.'

Originally Posted by Livia

There is a time and a place. When you grow up you will understand that.

I'm fully aware of that. Please refer me to the part of this thread where I cracked a joke about any part of this story, that'd be very helpful. Because as far as I remember, I entered this thread having not posted in it, to find that bobnot had directed a personal insult at both myself and Patrick, without having even posted in the thread prior to this.

It's nice of you to make out that I've cracked a joke when I haven't though. Quite amusing.

[arista]

Originally Posted by MTVN

So would you say a woman who wears a revealing outfit would be responsible if she ended up getting raped?

This Thread is in a Tangle


Sticks has it in for the woman.

Thats it.

[Shasown]

Originally Posted by Sticks

She knew this guy was a psycho which was why she told lies to Moat. She told Moat that her boyfriend was a police officer, so Moat then went on a vendetta against police officers and then ended up killing himself.

It was her lies that drove Moat to kill her boyfriend and shoot this police officer

Should she have stayed single and not move on you ask? Well how about this question, as she knew that if she went out with anyone else, they would be put at risk from this person, what right had she to put other people at risk?

She initially formed a relationship with Moat in the first place of her own free choice. To quote an old saying, "She made her bed so she needed to lie in it" She needed to take responsibility for her actions, even if that meant having to stay single.

Remember the family of the boyfriend who was murdered banned Samantha from the funeral because they hold her personally responsible for his death, one for forming the relationship and putting him in the firing line and two for lying to Moat and saying he was a police officer. Will you criticise the family of the boyfriend who was murdered?

If you think she should have been free to form other relationships, in spite of the consequences, then there is still the issue of her lies about her boyfriend to Moat. These lies lead Moat to shooting PC Rathband.

If anyone ever said a little lie never hurt anyone, then this case disproves that totally. Had Samantha not told lies, PC Rathband would still be alive today.

What complete and utter rubbish you have wrote there Sticks, I take it you didnt like Miss Stobbarts attitude when she appeared on some local current affairs program down there?

If the justice system we have at the moment was run effectively and updated to a point where victims interests and human rights became the top of the agenda this whole sorry story and others like it wouldnt occur with such sickening regularity.

Moat was put inside for violence, shortly before he was released the police and criminal justice system informed Miss Stobbart he was being released, she asked if there was any way she could be protected from him, those requests were turned down.

When Moat communicated with her she told him her latest beau was a cop in the hope that would make the mad bastard sod off. It would with most normal people.

Not exactly the best technique with out and out psychos but hey, she isnt a criminal psychologist is she?

Mind you Mr Moat had recently been in the presence of criminal psychologists etc. Why didnt they pick up on the fact he was a complete and utter fruit loop with a high degree of hate towards authority in general and plod in particular? Oh thats right they did, however the prison service did nothing about informing the police he was a danger to Miss S or to plod untill after goold old Raoul had been released and cleared Durham. The police themselves failed to act on the Prison Service warnings, thats why they self referred the matter to the Independent Police Complaints Commission.

Blaming her for turning Raoul into a raging anti police psycho is a big leap not so much of faith but of fantasy, you would be as well blaming his mum for christening him Raoul, I mean come on raoul, isnt the the name used by the skinny little bloke on the diving board in the irn bru ads.

Now that sort of pisstake is enough to make any slightly off kilter geordie hardman with a reputation for not being very bright but being able to lift heavy weights throw his toys out of the cot and shoot up the Toon.

[Sticks]

She told a lie

She said her boy friend was a police officer

Raol then after killing her boyfriend and shooting her went out to shoot a police officer because she had told him her new boyfriend was a police officer.

That is what happened

Ergo her lie has now lead to the death of PC David Rathband

[Angus]

Originally Posted by Sticks

Suppose someone goes out wearing expensive jewellery in a flash suit / dress to a rough part of town and are mugged.

The mugger may be the one committing the offence, but the victim in this case, by their actions would have been partly the author of their own misfortune, would they not?

You seriously need to have a word with yourself since your reasoning seems quite bizarre. The only person responsible for a crime is the criminal who commits it. Your reasoning is the typical "blame the victim" mentality that allows such scum to be given soft sentences by the bleeding heart, out of touch judiciary.

[Sticks]

Originally Posted by arista

This Thread is in a Tangle

It did drift slightly off topic for a moment

Originally Posted by arista

Sticks has it in for the woman.

Thats it.

That is not accurate of my position, this is about a specific individual whose actions have been deemed responsible for the death of at least one innocent man by his family, namely the boyfriend.

My earlier recollection about what women wear was quoting what another senior woman had said.

[Shasown]

Originally Posted by Sticks

It did drift slightly off topic for a moment



That is not accurate of my position, this is about a specific individual whose actions have been deemed responsible for the death of at least one innocent man by his family, namely the boyfriend.

My earlier recollection about what women wear was quoting what another senior woman had said.

Before making ludicrous accusations why dont you go read the report from the coroner who dealt with Moats Inquest.

In it you will find mention of the fact that Moat blamed the police for taking his children from him, destroying his business, setting him up for numerous charges, in fact if it had of been raining anytime raoul didnt want it to be, that would have been the police fault. He had a long deep standing hatred of the police from long before the final week of his life.

But hey lets not let any facts get in the castigation of Miss Stobbart that you feel necessary. After all the family of her murdered boyfriend's reaction in grief absolutely proves it was all her fault. Burn the Witch

[billy123]

Originally Posted by Jack_

There is no correlation between telling a joke and making a malicious, hurtful, insulting remark.

And right there is where you need to have a word with yourself.
You are so very wrong and when you grow up you will realise it.

[Ammi]

Moat seemed to have an obsession with Sam Stobbard, first he shot her then said he would kill the hospital staff if she died. He was completely insane and I don't believe she could have done anything to stop him...I think if he had seen her ask a stranger in the street for the time, he would have shot them too..he was a lunatic and one the world is best rid of. I can understand that her boyfriends family didn't want her at the funeral, the whole association with Moat would have been too painful and possibly infame some emotions. They probably made the right decision, under the circumstances. If he hadn't have met her, he would be alive, if she hadn't have met Moat..if..if..if...but that isn't blame, it isn't her fault, it's a tragic string series of events and she was caught up in it too.
He hated the police and blamed them for everything. That's what pathetic ****heads like him do, he was a violent maniac so he ended up in prison where he belonged..of course that was the police's fault..no acceptance for his crimes and the consequence of losing Sam Stobbard. He breaks the law..it's someone else's fault, the police. Imo, none of this is her fault, she was as much a victim of his twisted, warped world as everyone else. He was a madman and he was going to kill and he would find a reason for it in his twisted sick mind

[Jack_]

Originally Posted by bobnot

And right there is where you need to have a word with yourself.
You are so very wrong and when you grow up you will realise it.

Please quit the condescending, patronising, baiting attitude.

I'll give an example as to the difference:

If I were to say to his family 'haha! he's dead! unlucky', then that'd be insulting and downright malicious. But if I were to crack a joke, i.e something said flippantly, that took the piss out of Moat himself, then that's a joke and not malicious. I'm sorry but there is a big difference, and I find it funny how you completely disregarded the rest of my post and the quote that I included.