I'm sure that if it was self defence then she would have screamed it from the rooftops. I think people sometimes forget that women can be perpetrators of domestic violence too.
Really are you? Well if you're sure I am convinced. :rolleyes:
Really are you? Well if you're sure I am convinced. :rolleyes:
the number of stab wounds doesn't suggest a struggle based on self-defence, nor does the cock and bull story about being set upon by an imaginary group of men.
Just reading through this thread and seeing all the left wing tree huggers defending a vile murderer makes you realise what kind of society we live in. I wonder if you'll change your minds if you're the victim of such a crime or someone close to you is (or does your lack of sympathy and care for others extend to relatives too?). But of course, you live in la la land where crimes don't happen. Keep quoting how many years the judge passed as if that's of any relevance, the judges are as out of touch as you are. We want a complete system overhaul and real punishment for real crime. That would certainly have a positive effect on society whereas your self righteous "uman" rights progaganda serves only the perpetrators of crime, whom we will do well to care less about.
the number of stab wounds doesn't suggest a struggle based on self-defence, nor does the cock and bull story about being set upon by an imaginary group of men.
Possibly, still I don't know. I dislike speculating on this stuff as i don't know the facts. That's my point.
Possibly, still I don't know. I dislike speculating on this stuff as i don't know the facts. That's my point.
there are three facts that are common knowledge though
1. the victim received 42 stab wounds
2. the killer made up a story to cover her tracks
3. she was found to be a liar and convicted of murder
i'm not sure how much more speculating need go on, because whatever the missing circumstances amongst all that are, the facts kind of speak for themselves.
there are three facts that are common knowledge though
1. the victim received 42 stab wounds
2. the killer made up a story to cover her tracks
3. she was found to be a liar and convicted of murder
i'm not sure how much more speculating need go on, because whatever the missing circumstances amongst all that are, the facts kind of speak for themselves.
Only if you are ignorant enough to believe all things happen without context.
there are three facts that are common knowledge though
1. the victim received 42 stab wounds
2. the killer made up a story to cover her tracks
3. she was found to be a liar and convicted of murder
i'm not sure how much more speculating need go on, because whatever the missing circumstances amongst all that are, the facts kind of speak for themselves.
I read that she also had a history of being violent towards previous boyfriends as well.
there are three facts that are common knowledge though
1. the victim received 42 stab wounds
2. the killer made up a story to cover her tracks
3. she was found to be a liar and convicted of murder
i'm not sure how much more speculating need go on, because whatever the missing circumstances amongst all that are, the facts kind of speak for themselves.
You're knocking on dead wood mate. It won't sink in and she thinks "it might have been self defence". :rolleyes:
there are three facts that are common knowledge though
1. the victim received 42 stab wounds
2. the killer made up a story to cover her tracks
3. she was found to be a liar and convicted of murder
i'm not sure how much more speculating need go on, because whatever the missing circumstances amongst all that are, the facts kind of speak for themselves.
You forgot
4. she was sentenced at court to a minimum term of fourteen years.
It's long past time to rerun the trial. Tracie Andrews was found guilty and sentenced.
The defence did argue provocation. The jury didn't buy it.
She appealed, and lost the appeal. Now she's served the tariff and the matter is in the hands of the probation board, which does not have the power of the inclination to revisit sentences.
The fact that she stabbed him 42 times suggests that it was a very brutal and violent killing.
as i mentioned earlier did she? depends on what you read,
as i also said matters not the amount as the result was still the same, but some people are using that amount on a reason she should be kept inside
15, 30, 42 does it matter? probably not but does if your relying on this as evidence, i can't find a court report so like others i DON'T KNOW
i think the amount of wounds is an important detail, because most victims aren't even likely to be fighting back after the first few surely, so to continue stabbing displays either a savagery, or calculating coldness that suggests she was hell bent on killing him.
15, 30, 42 does it matter? probably not but does if your relying on this as evidence, i can't find a court report so like others i DON'T KNOW
That Mail Online article is an interesting read. I wouldn't believe a word she says though about the victim being violent towards her... she made up a story about a road rage attack, so she's probably making up this abuse story too, to try and get out of prison as early as she can.
What if he wasn't? You think a guy who murdered 13 women should ever be released?
I personally don't, no. But to be fair, there are those on here who make an argument about the person "no longer being a danger to the public", as well as them having "expressed remorse".
Whilst I disagree with the principle, I don't see why it can't apply to someone who has killed many as opposed to those who have killed just one.
That Mail Online article is an interesting read. I wouldn't believe a word she says though about the victim being violent towards her... she made up a story about a road rage attack, so she's probably making up this abuse story too, to try and get out of prison as early as she can.
Actually Lee Harveys Mum said they had a "stormy" relationship
and the knife itself was supposed to be a Swiss Army knife, small blade? but we are getting mixed reports from one side etc,
so hence my comment about the judge etc would have all the details on knife, amount of wounds, witness evidence, and if they decide she should stay for another 2-3-10 years then so be it
i have also read about her "bad" early life but i have never been one for blaming a start in life to a crime like this or your past to dictate your future, yes it can, ie you watch a programme like that Poor Kids and they were a credit despite some of the crap they had to suffer, whereas others will blame at every turn anything, i am not qualified to say what does and doesnt make someone bad, so again i have to rely on the "experts"
I havn't a view either way whether she should be released or not, will leave that to those who sentenced her and those who now decide excatly how long that should be.
When i was in hospital i picked up a book by the victims Mother, longest title i have ever seen on a book, and i am not sure how to explain it but if ever a book shouldn't have been written and by her this was it, it was an "uncomfortable" read not because of what Tracie Andrews had done as that went without saying, but it had me turning against the Mother, not sure who helped her write it but was the most ill advised piece of writing ever, and did the exact opposite to what i suppose it was written for.
It had me questioning her Sons role in his sad demise, and other doubts that this book had placed, a bit like watching a relative doing an appeal and you know they look guilty, and sadly it did nothing for the memory of her son.:o
I agree with you regarding the book. I can't explain it either. I found it quite distasteful and felt rather unsympathetic towards the family.
Comments
Really are you? Well if you're sure I am convinced. :rolleyes:
Can't you comprehend basic english?
the number of stab wounds doesn't suggest a struggle based on self-defence, nor does the cock and bull story about being set upon by an imaginary group of men.
Hahahaha, Can't you?
I said "One" it's right there in what you quoted.
Excellent post
Possibly, still I don't know. I dislike speculating on this stuff as i don't know the facts. That's my point.
You have one hell of a weird idea of 'self defence'. :rolleyes:
there are three facts that are common knowledge though
1. the victim received 42 stab wounds
2. the killer made up a story to cover her tracks
3. she was found to be a liar and convicted of murder
i'm not sure how much more speculating need go on, because whatever the missing circumstances amongst all that are, the facts kind of speak for themselves.
The fact that she stabbed him 42 times suggests that it was a very brutal and violent killing.
Only if you are ignorant enough to believe all things happen without context.
I emboldened the 'one' to try and get through but i'm just knocking on wood with you.
READ #270 and then read #278.....but keep reading and read again and again until it sinks in.
what context would justify the facts of tracie andrews' crime?
Irony. Anyway I couldn't care less. Do carry on.
4. she was sentenced at court to a minimum term of fourteen years.
The defence did argue provocation. The jury didn't buy it.
She appealed, and lost the appeal. Now she's served the tariff and the matter is in the hands of the probation board, which does not have the power of the inclination to revisit sentences.
Do you regard every murder as possible self defence? If not, why have you singled out this one?
as i mentioned earlier did she? depends on what you read,
as i also said matters not the amount as the result was still the same, but some people are using that amount on a reason she should be kept inside
http://privatewww.essex.ac.uk/~alan/family/Restricted/Tim4dec96.html
a report from the same paper that now says 42, back in 2002 says 30
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-114312/Britains-shameless-woman.html
15, 30, 42 does it matter? probably not but does if your relying on this as evidence, i can't find a court report so like others i DON'T KNOW
i think the amount of wounds is an important detail, because most victims aren't even likely to be fighting back after the first few surely, so to continue stabbing displays either a savagery, or calculating coldness that suggests she was hell bent on killing him.
That Mail Online article is an interesting read. I wouldn't believe a word she says though about the victim being violent towards her... she made up a story about a road rage attack, so she's probably making up this abuse story too, to try and get out of prison as early as she can.
I personally don't, no. But to be fair, there are those on here who make an argument about the person "no longer being a danger to the public", as well as them having "expressed remorse".
Whilst I disagree with the principle, I don't see why it can't apply to someone who has killed many as opposed to those who have killed just one.
Actually Lee Harveys Mum said they had a "stormy" relationship
and the knife itself was supposed to be a Swiss Army knife, small blade? but we are getting mixed reports from one side etc,
so hence my comment about the judge etc would have all the details on knife, amount of wounds, witness evidence, and if they decide she should stay for another 2-3-10 years then so be it
i have also read about her "bad" early life but i have never been one for blaming a start in life to a crime like this or your past to dictate your future, yes it can, ie you watch a programme like that Poor Kids and they were a credit despite some of the crap they had to suffer, whereas others will blame at every turn anything, i am not qualified to say what does and doesnt make someone bad, so again i have to rely on the "experts"
I agree with you regarding the book. I can't explain it either. I found it quite distasteful and felt rather unsympathetic towards the family.