Woman sentenced to minimum of 37 years for street stabbing

2456

Comments

  • JohnbeeJohnbee Posts: 4,019
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    All day the BBC have been trying to make me think that the problem was that the police did not check the computer and so were unaware that she had already offended.
    They carried on doing that despite the fact that what was the actual truth was that she phoned the police and said basically that:

    a) she suffered from paranoid schizophrenia
    b) she was very dangerous
    c) she had already killed someone
    d) she feared she was about to do it again

    It really does not matter how boneheaded some police employees are, the BBC will protect them so that can carry on with the boneheadedness.
    I expect the police thought that they could carry on drinking their cups of tea so that they remained safe. I expect the BBC think that we will all carry on supporting the police as long as the BBC carry on lying.
  • d'@ved'@ve Posts: 45,452
    Forum Member
    Johnbee wrote: »
    All day the BBC have been trying to make me think that the problem was that the police did not check the computer and so were unaware that she had already offended.
    They carried on doing that despite the fact that what was the actual truth was that she phoned the police and said basically that:

    a) she suffered from paranoid schizophrenia
    b) she was very dangerous
    c) she had already killed someone
    d) she feared she was about to do it again

    It really does not matter how boneheaded some police employees are, the BBC will protect them so that can carry on with the boneheadedness.
    I expect the police thought that they could carry on drinking their cups of tea so that they remained safe. I expect the BBC think that we will all carry on supporting the police as long as the BBC carry on lying.

    It's not the BBC! It's the Independent Police Complaints Commission!
    IPCC Commissioner Sarah Green said: "While our investigation found that no police officers or staff breached the code of conduct, it is of great concern that no PNC check was carried out which would have immediately alerted them to Edgington's violent history.

    Your general point is correct but you could at least have attacked the right organisation for 'protecting' the police. BBC website gives the complete picture http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-21653018 . ;)
  • jesayajesaya Posts: 35,597
    Forum Member
    What a tragic story and how awful for the family of the victim.

    I don't understand why the woman is going to be placed in a prison and not a secure mental hospital however. An urge to kill a complete stranger for no reason at all strikes me as a pretty good definition of being mentally ill. The decision to place her in prison puts others at risk; adds another burden on the prison officers that they are not trained or resourced to deal with; and does nothing to help the woman (if any help is possible).
  • cjsmummycjsmummy Posts: 11,079
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    What a mess.
  • 16caerhos16caerhos Posts: 2,533
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    She told the police herself that she was a danger before killing! This could have been prevented.
  • trunkstertrunkster Posts: 14,468
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Johnbee wrote: »
    All day the BBC have been trying to make me think that the problem was that the police did not check the computer and so were unaware that she had already offended.
    They carried on doing that despite the fact that what was the actual truth was that she phoned the police and said basically that:

    a) she suffered from paranoid schizophrenia
    b) she was very dangerous
    c) she had already killed someone
    d) she feared she was about to do it again

    It really does not matter how boneheaded some police employees are, the BBC will protect them so that can carry on with the boneheadedness.
    I expect the police thought that they could carry on drinking their cups of tea so that they remained safe. I expect the BBC think that we will all carry on supporting the police as long as the BBC carry on lying.

    What are you on about?? Why does the majority of the blame always get heaped on the police? Blame the judges and lax sentencing for her 1st crime.
  • trunkstertrunkster Posts: 14,468
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    16caerhos wrote: »
    She told the police herself that she was a danger before killing! This could have been prevented.

    Blame the judges and lax sentencing for her 1st crime and the so called experts who deemed she was fit for release.
  • ganderpoke66ganderpoke66 Posts: 2,128
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    jesaya wrote: »
    What a tragic story and how awful for the family of the victim.

    I don't understand why the woman is going to be placed in a prison and not a secure mental hospital however. An urge to kill a complete stranger for no reason at all strikes me as a pretty good definition of being mentally ill. The decision to place her in prison puts others at risk; adds another burden on the prison officers that they are not trained or resourced to deal with; and does nothing to help the woman (if any help is possible).

    She killed a random stranger for a very good reason, to get what she wanted, no better than someone who kills for a mobile phone.

    She wanted to be back in an institution, now she is.

    She should never have been released, why do Health Professionals steadfastly think that the set of circumstances that led her to kill can never happen again ?.

    Sane or insane, to kill your Mother and be released after only three years is absolutely scandalous.

    She comprehensively fooled every gullible quack, Social Worker and and trick cyclist, and she's meant to be Mental ?
  • SoupbowlSoupbowl Posts: 2,172
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    She killed a random stranger for a very good reason, to get what she wanted, no better than someone who kills for a mobile phone.

    She wanted to be back in an institution, now she is.

    She should never have been released, why do Health Professionals steadfastly think that the set of circumstances that led her to kill can never happen again ?.

    Sane or insane, to kill your Mother and be released after only three years is absolutely scandalous.

    She comprehensively fooled every gullible quack, Social Worker and and trick cyclist, and she's meant to be Mental ?

    I'm sorry to say they are all to often fooled. It is the general public who have to wear the risk.
  • yorkiegalyorkiegal Posts: 18,929
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    She killed a random stranger for a very good reason, to get what she wanted, no better than someone who kills for a mobile phone.

    She wanted to be back in an institution, now she is.

    She should never have been released, why do Health Professionals steadfastly think that the set of circumstances that led her to kill can never happen again ?.

    Sane or insane, to kill your Mother and be released after only three years is absolutely scandalous.

    She comprehensively fooled every gullible quack, Social Worker and and trick cyclist, and she's meant to be Mental ?

    how sad that the only way she could get herself back to a place where she felt safe, an institution, was by murdering someone. I can see how she came to be in that situation. It's so hard to get help these days on the NHS. I'm not condoning what she did, because she knew what she was about to do, but she did try very hard to get someone to stop her from doing it.
    One of the BPD symptoms that I have is that when I set my mind to something it is almost impossible for me to move off that track. I get caught up in a vicious cycle. For me that relates to hurting myself rather than hurting another person.
  • trunkstertrunkster Posts: 14,468
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    She killed a random stranger for a very good reason, to get what she wanted, no better than someone who kills for a mobile phone.

    She wanted to be back in an institution, now she is.

    She should never have been released, why do Health Professionals steadfastly think that the set of circumstances that led her to kill can never happen again ?.

    Sane or insane, to kill your Mother and be released after only three years is absolutely scandalous.

    She comprehensively fooled every gullible quack, Social Worker and and trick cyclist, and she's meant to be Mental ?

    It really riles me how the so called expert quacks,social workers and trick cyclists manage to escape all blame for this fiasco. Instead it's all the police fault, I see that ambulance chasing police hating maggot of a lawyer Rubenstein soon appeared.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 489
    Forum Member
    yorkiegal wrote: »
    how sad that the only way she could get herself back to a place where she felt safe, an institution, was by murdering someone. I can see how she came to be in that situation. It's so hard to get help these days on the NHS. I'm not condoning what she did, because she knew what she was about to do, but she did try very hard to get someone to stop her from doing it.
    One of the BPD symptoms that I have is that when I set my mind to something it is almost impossible for me to move off that track. I get caught up in a vicious cycle. For me that relates to hurting myself rather than hurting another person.

    I feel really bad for people diagnosed with BPD. In my opinion its a cop out for the psychiatrists, it's a stigmatising label, I don't think it helps anyone to be diagnosed with this.

    Eglington did not kill because she has BPD though, she killed she is entirely selfish and acted like a psychopath, it was premeditated.

    She probably thought that she woud just go back to the hospital and her illness would be blamed again, perhaps she will eventually go back to the hospital, but this time she has a long sentence.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 489
    Forum Member
    trunkster wrote: »
    It really riles me how the so called expert quacks,social workers and trick cyclists manage to escape all blame for this fiasco. Instead it's all the police fault, I see that ambulance chasing police hating maggot of a lawyer Rubenstein soon appeared.

    I blame the shrinks and the judges
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 489
    Forum Member
    and to a lesser extent the rehabilitation services and the police, none have covered themselves in glory
  • SoupbowlSoupbowl Posts: 2,172
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Surely if a convicted killer with a history of psychosis is released into society someone must be accountable. Who was managing this girls care in society? who decided that she was not a risk to the public?
  • yorkiegalyorkiegal Posts: 18,929
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Soupbowl wrote: »
    Surely if a convicted killer with a history of psychosis is released into society someone must be accountable. Who was managing this girls care in society? who decided that she was not a risk to the public?

    She should have been on an enhanced care plan with regular interaction with her local psychiatric services, which would probably mean a keyworker from the community mental health team. However they are very underfunded and over stretched.
    I wonder if perhaps the fact that the first person she killed was her mother, led them to believe this was an isolated incident due to family issues rather than class her as a risk to the general public at large. Someone messed up that's for sure.
  • QueenMaudeQueenMaude Posts: 536
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    3 years was a ridiculously short sentence, isomeone with that kind of mental illness or maliciousness should simply be given a harsher sentence in a secure hospital. It's so messed up in the UK a mentally ill person can be released after 3 years for killing someone and in the states mentally ill people can face death row, even one inmate I read about who is a paranoid schizophrenic, pulled both his own eye balls out comes from a family with schizophrenia.... Yet he was found fit to stand trial and was convicted of murder in the first degree. Can there be a happy medium somewhere?! Btw very interesting article on that lad on the Gawker website.
  • di60di60 Posts: 5,432
    Forum Member
    yorkiegal wrote: »
    She should have been on an enhanced care plan with regular interaction with her local psychiatric services, which would probably mean a keyworker from the community mental health team. However they are very underfunded and over stretched.
    I wonder if perhaps the fact that the first person she killed was her mother, led them to believe this was an isolated incident due to family issues rather than class her as a risk to the general public at large. Someone messed up that's for sure.

    I felt very sad to read your first post on this thread, as my daughter was diagnosed with BPD and I found it impossible to get her help via the NHS that she so desperately needed at the time. I researched on the Internet and I found this site really helpful, although American, it did lead me to resources in the UK, I dont know if you have heard of them?

    http://bpdcentral.com/

    Regarding the OT - I am limited to what I can say, but I am very heavily in dispute with the mental health authority involved in this case, and their handling of the mental health needs of two very elderly relatives suffering with Alzheimer's. It is my very strong humble opinion that the main concern of all the 'authorities' involved in the case of Nicola Edgington, will be to cover their own backsides, and 'limit' their part in the 'damage' caused via their legal teams and PR advisors.

    My heart bleeds for the Hodkins family, I know what it is like to suffer at the incompetence of those that carry the word 'Trust' in their title. I hope the family do go on and sue the backsides off those responsible for their loss, not for the money it will bring, but to very publically name and shame those who allowed, and then failed to "care" for the murderer "in the community".

    I wish you all the best yorkiegal :) and all others suffering with BPD.
  • DavetheScotDavetheScot Posts: 16,623
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    QueenMaude wrote: »
    3 years was a ridiculously short sentence, isomeone with that kind of mental illness or maliciousness should simply be given a harsher sentence in a secure hospital. It's so messed up in the UK a mentally ill person can be released after 3 years for killing someone and in the states mentally ill people can face death row, even one inmate I read about who is a paranoid schizophrenic, pulled both his own eye balls out comes from a family with schizophrenia.... Yet he was found fit to stand trial and was convicted of murder in the first degree. Can there be a happy medium somewhere?! Btw very interesting article on that lad on the Gawker website.

    She wasn't given 3 years, she was detained indefinitely under the Mental Health Act. Basically, she'd be released when the doctors thought she was ready. I doubt if the judge had any real option.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 1,147
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    spacecube wrote: »

    One has to feel great sympathy for the Hodkin family, quite rightly they feel let down by the justice system and mental health services.


    What can be the explanation for this seemingly total incompetence of the justice and mental heatlh services?

    I am sorry, but mental health service people are a complete menace, I have just come off of section 2 after being in the hospital a week, if I put here how I managed to have got actually sectioned for what had gone wrong, no one would believe me. I tried to joke about it in the hospital, what more could I do, but I was crying inside. I had been sectioned in the past years ago, things were very stressfull at the time, this time , I had no idea how someone could get sectioned over the reason behind why I was. The people in the hospital were basically alright, the people who decided I should be sectioned after I could simply not get rid of them, were just a bunch of arseholes basically.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 1,147
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Maybe if I'd been a danger to the public I would of been okay :eek:
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 2,376
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    jackie1979 wrote: »
    I wouldn't like to be her cell mate with her unpredictable mood swings.

    Why is she in jail ?

    I'd have put her down immediately .

    What use is she to society ?
  • SoupbowlSoupbowl Posts: 2,172
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    trunkster wrote: »
    Blame the judges and lax sentencing for her 1st crime and the so called experts who deemed she was fit for release.

    This is a good summary.
  • Deep PurpleDeep Purple Posts: 63,255
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Johnbee wrote: »
    All day the BBC have been trying to make me think that the problem was that the police did not check the computer and so were unaware that she had already offended.
    They carried on doing that despite the fact that what was the actual truth was that she phoned the police and said basically that:

    a) she suffered from paranoid schizophrenia
    b) she was very dangerous
    c) she had already killed someone
    d) she feared she was about to do it again

    It really does not matter how boneheaded some police employees are, the BBC will protect them so that can carry on with the boneheadedness.
    I expect the police thought that they could carry on drinking their cups of tea so that they remained safe. I expect the BBC think that we will all carry on supporting the police as long as the BBC carry on lying.

    They should have carried out a PNC check, but whether that would have made much difference in the long run we'll never know.

    You cant lock people up for saying what she did, because it is not uncommon.

    There are many out there with similar illnesses who at times are a danger to themselves, and others. Luckily, we dont get this outcome too often, although this is not unique.

    I can remember many mentally ill people considered a danger being arrested under the Mental Health Act. They are taken to a place of safety and assessed by a Dr and Social Worker.

    Nearly everytime the verdict is they are only suffering from a personality disorder, and then released.

    There are very few people that get sectioned, and lack of places has to be one reason.

    This woman had already killed once, and her very early release is what should be looked at.
  • Philip WalesPhilip Wales Posts: 6,373
    Forum Member
    I'm sure yet again we will get the social workers coming up and saying it's not our fault etc etc, it's about time the Social Services sector was completely over hauled. How can people (kids for want of a better word) barely out of university/college have so much power over other people. Lets start getting more mature and generally more sensible people in Social Work, more about common sense and less about exams and qualifications.

    I can't remember the name of that awful women, who was head of the social services, that looked after "Baby P" who was sacked, then got her job back on appeal, she should of held her head in shame!
Sign In or Register to comment.