The Philpotts found guilty

[#1]

Did you ever doubt it?
But what should be the punishment?

[#2]

New Forum Rule  - graphic descriptions of medieval punishments are not allowed as they may upset the more sensitive among us 

[#3]

I never had any doubt that they are guilty.
They should never see the light of day again!

[#4]

Should get life with maximum possible tarrif.
With luck genuine villains will make life hell for them.

[#5]

I wash my cars more often !

[#6]

An eye for an eye.
Burn them like they burnt their kids.

[#7]

What surprised me was it was only a majority verdict.

[#8]

http://www.darwinawards.com/ ;

[#9]

[quote="BBC News"] The jury at Nottingham Crown Court returned unanimous decisions on Mosley and Mick Philpott while Mairead Philpott was convicted by a majority.

[#10]

I never thought parents could ever do this to their own children and had you asled me previously if I thought these people were guilty I'd have said no and been quite wrong apparently.. That said, the legal system has been proven wrong in the past with many people being released after the revalation of dodgy evidence from the police etc. I don't think there is any point people saying "I think, i always thought, i knew it" etc (even though I've done it myself especially with Jimmy Saville lol) as it makes no difference really. Whats done is done and 6 young children lost their lives. When you think of that, suddenly having an opinion on the parents seems pointless - six children have lost their lives.
WHOEVER did it, they're sick and should be burned at the stake as was the way centuries ago but whatever happens to the person(s) who murdered those children, it will never bring them back.
RIP kids, such a tragic loss.

[#11]

Quote from: nadger

What surprised me was it was only a majority verdict.

While I agree, I'm not as surprised as you.
My own experience of sitting on a jury was; we were presented with a 100% guilty, caught red-handed sting type operation. We retired with the judge wanting a unanimous verdict.
It took us longer to elect a jury foreman than it did the five minutes to reach a 10 - 2 decision. We had, and this is the point of this post, one lady jury member who simply didn't want the process of what we were doing on her conscience and wouldn't have found Cripin guilty. She refused to participate in the short discussions and sat alone.
The other dissension was from a member with some legal training, who pointed out, correctly as it turned out, that the prosecution evidence was flawed, and predicted (again correctly) that the case would go to re-trail.
Within half-hour, we were taken back into court to be told that there had been much discussion in judges chambers and that we were being dismissed. We were apologised to and further told that our jury service was terminated.
The actual trial had been long and tedious as the evidence had to be translated into two different languages as well as English for both prosecution and defence lawyers. The hardest job on the jury was trying to stay awake. It did go to re-trial, but I've no idea what the outcome was.

[#12]

@Petlew:- thanks for posting your experience on Jury Duty, good explanation on how a majority verdict could be reached. Like Nadger was also surprised it was only a majority verdict.
I’ve never been called for Jury Duty.

[#13]

Quote from: Petlew

It took us longer to elect a jury foreman than it did the five minutes to reach a 10 - 2 decision. We had, and this is the point of this post, one lady jury member who simply didn't want the process of what we were doing on her conscience and wouldn't have found Cripin guilty. She refused to participate in the short discussions and sat alone.

Was Dr Crippen guilty? There is DNA evidence to suggest he was not guilty.

[#14]

You might be right I don't know. Please insert any other name of renowned genuinely guilty convicted killers for illustration purposes you wish. I perhaps pulled Cripin out of thin air in error. Shall we try Peter Sutcliffe instead, the lady jury member wouldn't have found him guilty either.

[#15]

Quote from: journeys

I’ve never been called for Jury Duty.

I've been called twice in fact, once as described above and once last year. I have one of the very few reasons to be excused (their term) jury service. In that Mrs P is totally disabled and as her sole carer jury service would be untenable for me as she needs almost 24 hour care.
My application for exclusion was accepted "this time" which I guess implies I could be called again before I'm seventy.
Failure to appear for jury service could entail you being charged with contempt of court and a summons being issued for your arrest.