ICTChris Posted March 22, 2019 Author Share Posted March 22, 2019 I read an article about the guy in Bradford, Stephen Griffiths, who murdered several women and declared himself the 'Crossbow Cannibal'. He had a long history of violence, especially towards women, and in one of the reports at his trial his mother was notorious in their town for being "loose" and was supposedly a prostitute - which you could obviously link to Griffiths' violent behaviour to women and, subsequently, his murderous behaviour towards three sex workers. But Griffiths had a brother who was raised in the same house and has never been violent to anyone, as far as we know. "There is always something incalculable about human conduct" is how the author put it. You just can't explain everything we do or trace it to a root cause. Not everything has a meaning, some things just are. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted March 22, 2019 Share Posted March 22, 2019 2 minutes ago, ICTChris said: I read an article about the guy in Bradford, Stephen Griffiths, who murdered several women and declared himself the 'Crossbow Cannibal'. He had a long history of violence, especially towards women, and in one of the reports at his trial his mother was notorious in their town for being "loose" and was supposedly a prostitute - which you could obviously link to Griffiths' violent behaviour to women and, subsequently, his murderous behaviour towards three sex workers. But Griffiths had a brother who was raised in the same house and has never been violent to anyone, as far as we know. "There is always something incalculable about human conduct" is how the author put it. You just can't explain everything we do or trace it to a root cause. Not everything has a meaning, some things just are. If his mother had many partners the difference between him and his brother could easily be genetic. I believe in cause and effect for every event, sometimes it's unfathomably complex and undiscoverable, but there's a reason why things happen and why people are like who they are. Makes no difference to the evaluation of who's a good c**t or a bad c**t though. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NotThePars Posted March 23, 2019 Share Posted March 23, 2019 18 hours ago, welshbairn said: Yes, there's an idea that trying to explain why someone is how they are, absolves them of guilt. If you mention that a child abuser was badly abused as a child the reaction is that you're making excuses for them. Everyone is how they are because of reasons, and if you're an evil dangerous and incurable b*****d, that's what you are, whatever the causes, and you need locking up. Justice needs an element of vengeance as well if people aren't going to take it themselves, so treating all criminals like patients wouldn't work. Obviously conditions like schizophrenia are a different matter. You might find an explanation for someone's behaviour but it isn't an excuse seems to be the easiest way to frame it. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jacksgranda Posted March 24, 2019 Share Posted March 24, 2019 On 22/03/2019 at 08:21, Romeo said: On 21/03/2019 at 22:25, quickoverayard said: Under certain circumstances yes i do. I see no other fitting punishment for this. Nothing anyone says will change my mind. Where do you draw the line with the death penalty? When they're dead. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crroma Posted March 25, 2019 Share Posted March 25, 2019 Do any of the folk saying he should be named want to know his name and if so why? I'm happy enough they have caught and prosecuted him. Not the slightest interest in anything else.To satisfy a morbid curiosity 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
19QOS19 Posted March 25, 2019 Share Posted March 25, 2019 also max high 4 life . sanside apachesJust saw this. I imagine I'll know who you are to see then [emoji38] 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dumfriesblue Posted March 25, 2019 Share Posted March 25, 2019 26 minutes ago, 19QOS19 said: Just saw this. I imagine I'll know who you are to see then my grandad had the best ice creams in dumfries . bobs ices market square 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ICTChris Posted March 29, 2019 Author Share Posted March 29, 2019 Brian McConnachie QC was interviewed on BBC Scotland’s The Nine last night about representing people like Aaron Campbell. I’ve only seen a short clip but it looks an interesting interview. It’s worth noting that the judge specifically mentioned that Mr McConnachie was only following instructions in his sentencing remarks, presumably to indicate that people shouldn’t be angry with the lawyer. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dee Man Posted March 29, 2019 Share Posted March 29, 2019 18 minutes ago, ICTChris said: Brian McConnachie QC was interviewed on BBC Scotland’s The Nine last night about representing people like Aaron Campbell. I’ve only seen a short clip but it looks an interesting interview. It’s worth noting that the judge specifically mentioned that Mr McConnachie was only following instructions in his sentencing remarks, presumably to indicate that people shouldn’t be angry with the lawyer. Nothing to do with this case obviously, but a "gangland lawyer" in Melbourne has recently had a court order suppressing her name lifted after she was exposed as a police informant, passing on details of her clients and helping to get them convicted. Makes you wonder if this is a common occurrence. https://www.news.com.au/news/national/police-still-fear-retaliation-against-lawyer-who-informed-on-gangland-clients/news-story/3d4f3d37705e376305b91c5c2328ced1 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted March 29, 2019 Share Posted March 29, 2019 1 hour ago, Dee Man said: Nothing to do with this case obviously, but a "gangland lawyer" in Melbourne has recently had a court order suppressing her name lifted after she was exposed as a police informant, passing on details of her clients and helping to get them convicted. Makes you wonder if this is a common occurrence. https://www.news.com.au/news/national/police-still-fear-retaliation-against-lawyer-who-informed-on-gangland-clients/news-story/3d4f3d37705e376305b91c5c2328ced1 Not commenting on her morality but that story splashing pictures of her while saying she's at risk of assassination is well dodgy. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dee Man Posted March 29, 2019 Share Posted March 29, 2019 (edited) 4 minutes ago, welshbairn said: Not commenting on her morality but that story splashing pictures of her while saying she's at risk of assassination is well dodgy. Apparently it was a well known who it was amongst the Melbourne underworld when she was only known as Lawyer X to the general public. Edited March 29, 2019 by Dee Man Too many 'who it was'... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The OP Posted March 29, 2019 Share Posted March 29, 2019 3 hours ago, ICTChris said: Brian McConnachie QC was interviewed on BBC Scotland’s The Nine last night about representing people like Aaron Campbell. I’ve only seen a short clip but it looks an interesting interview. It’s worth noting that the judge specifically mentioned that Mr McConnachie was only following instructions in his sentencing remarks, presumably to indicate that people shouldn’t be angry with the lawyer. He is known for being pretty brutal when cross-examining rape victims but I'd suppose he would argue he has a duty to aggressively defend his clients. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brother Blades Posted March 29, 2019 Share Posted March 29, 2019 He is known for being pretty brutal when cross-examining rape victims but I'd suppose he would argue he has a duty to aggressively defend his clients. Yes, and he would be completely correct in doing so. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The OP Posted March 29, 2019 Share Posted March 29, 2019 Just now, Brother Blades said: Yes, and he would be completely correct in doing so. Only if you subscribe to the view that an adversarial justice system is better than an inquisitorial justice system and, even then, his method of insulting and accusing rape victims before questioning them to destroy their confidence is not really within the realms of fair play. People use him in these sorts of cases because they know he will push the rules to their absolute limit. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergeant Wilson Posted March 29, 2019 Share Posted March 29, 2019 19 minutes ago, The OP said: Only if you subscribe to the view that an adversarial justice system is better than an inquisitorial justice system and, even then, his method of insulting and accusing rape victims before questioning them to destroy their confidence is not really within the realms of fair play. People use him in these sorts of cases because they know he will push the rules to their absolute limit. Exactly, brutal and aggressive questioning is more about impact on the witness and showboating to the jury and gallery. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Florentine_Pogen Posted April 4, 2019 Share Posted April 4, 2019 Campbell now appealing his sentence. WTF ? 🤷♂️ 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snifter Pee Rot Posted April 4, 2019 Share Posted April 4, 2019 Maybe he's aggrieved he got 7 years longer than Luke Mitchell? He should never get out and nor should Mitchell. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IainMorton Posted April 4, 2019 Share Posted April 4, 2019 (edited) 1 hour ago, Florentine_Pogen said: Campbell now appealing his sentence. WTF ? I don’t agree with the sentence either, he needs a bullet in his sick brain. Edited April 4, 2019 by IainMorton 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jacksgranda Posted April 4, 2019 Share Posted April 4, 2019 On 29/03/2019 at 10:29, The OP said: He is known for being pretty brutal when cross-examining rape victims but I'd suppose he would argue he has a duty to aggressively defend his clients. The Andy Halliday of the legal world. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lofarl Posted April 4, 2019 Share Posted April 4, 2019 Why not appeal? Exactly what has he got to lose here? Yes the public will be outraged but its not as if he will care a jot. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.