Friday, 24 February 2012

Why Do The Underclass Hide Behind Their Children?

Well, the answer’s obvious. Because it works….
When police visited the house, in Middlesbrough, they found it stinking of urine, with cat faeces on the floor and overflowing ashtrays, takeaway cartons, cans and drug items lying about - and a blood-stained duvet in the child’s bedroom.

However, despite the cruelty meted out to the child, the mother has been allowed to walk free from court today - for the sake of the child.
I also suspect a bit of ‘Pussy Pass’ in action here too:
The young girl’s mother and step-father were each given a one-year custodial sentence on Friday, but Judge Tony Briggs suspended the mother's sentence for two years with 18 months’ supervision, as the girl still wanted contact with her mother.
The stepfather was sent to detention.
Frankly, she’s more responsible than he is – she’s supposed to be a mother, for god’s sake! And it isn’t like this is a new situation, either:
She had a tragic history of having children removed from her care for neglect.

The victim stayed in her care despite the background because of significant improvements in the mother’s parenting skills.

Things went wrong with the arrival of the stepfather, who was once convicted of assaulting the mother - yet they are still together.

Sammy Booth, 14, said she was frightened of what would happen to her if Julie Cairns, 38, was locked up for leading officers on the 60mph pursuit.

The mother, who was four times the drink drive limit, drove up the wrong side of the road and sped across a mini-roundabout at 50mph in Dobcross, Oldham.

But her daughter wrote that Julie was 'loving, caring and always here for me' - and she escaped with just unpaid work.
Jesus! Never mind the people she could have killed!
Sammy, of Dobcross, near Oldham, Greater Manchester, also told the judge how her mum's drinking had affected her school work.

She added: 'I'm scared for my mum and I'm scared for myself, I worry what will happen if she's sent to prison. Where will I stay? What will happen to my pets? Will I be able to see my mum?'
Why don’t you ask your father these questions? Oh, of course. He’s not on the scene any more, is he?

Is there any shame on behalf of the mother, that she is apparently still viewed as ‘a brilliant mum’ by her daughter?
Julie, who pleaded guilty to dangerous driving, said: 'I must have been seeing red that night. At the time, I didn't know what was happening.

'Sammy is lovely. She's beautiful and she does everything she can for me. She has seen a better person in me. Drink is a poison and I'll never touch it again. I can't thank Sammy enough.'
Listen up, love. It’s not normal for your daughter of 14 to ‘do everything for you’, a grown woman. It should be the other way around!

Expect a rash of this, now the ‘Daily Mail’ has shown just how easily the judges can be swayed…


Tattyfalarr said...

Nothing whatsoever to do with what the child wants or needs.

Everything to do with the fact The State can't be arsed to look after the kids either.

Whatever the parent has done is irrelevant.

uk Fred said...

Or more likely, Tattyfalarr, that the state was only too keen to subsidise the parents breeding but insufficiently concerned to allow them to take an equally unconcerned attitude to the childrens upbringing. Add to this the fact that the state basically transfers money from those who will work to the feckless and workshy, and will not require the mother to name the father (or likely fathers) before distributing the fruits of other people's hard labour and you get the sort of society we have in 2012. Too many like this is one reason why Cameron was not able to win the last general election.

Captain Haddock said...

@ uk Fred ..

"Too many like this is one reason why Cameron was not able to win the last general election" ...

I fully agree Fred, in which case one might assume the dozy bugger would be doing something to address the situation .. instead of which, he simply dithers, caught like a rabbit in the headlights ..

If he can't be arsed enough to try & save himself .. I'm damned if I'm going to put myself out to help him ..

Leg-iron said...

Since the obesity epidemic, hiding behind children has become easy.

They are also very effective, if piled like sandbags around your house, at deflecting a nuclear blast.

Feed those cheeeldren, people! Think of the future.

We'd never run out of lard.

JuliaM said...

"Everything to do with the fact The State can't be arsed to look after the kids either."

Given the usual woeful outlook for kids in government care, it's hard to say that might not be for the best, either...

"Too many like this is one reason why Cameron was not able to win the last general election."

I can't see Cameron winning the next one, either. For the reasons Capt Haddock outlines.

"We'd never run out of lard."

We'd be forbidden to eat it, though. Only low-fat, low-calorie Soylent Green for us.