Total revulsion

Surely, this topic would be talked about 'over the garden wall' which is essentially what this forum is.

I understand that the mother had had an absolutely tragic life herself, having been used and abused since her teens. One has to worry for her sanity when the awful realisation about what she has done comes to her.

Feel free .
But there have also been valid and informative comments about the legal niceties of the case - and IMHO valid opinions have been expressed in a reasoned way.
Do we have to restrict ourselves to opinions on "fluffy" issues then?

petallus yes, completely agree.

I don't know exactly why I don't feel comfortable with this thread.

I understand why it's necessary to have the chance to express moral outrage but there surely isn't much room for a range of views on this one as I am guessing we all feel the same, along with everyone else who knows about the case.

I suppose I almost feel I want to maintain a respectful silence on this one.

Although now I haven't.

It's to talk about stuff, pet, like all the others > "obv" (trying out a new abbreviation)

petallus What is the point of any thread on Gransnet and is it necessary for any or every thread to have a point?

And I put it in the In the news section as that is what it is.

I started it Petallus to express my feelings and hopefully to listen to and share those of others. Isn't that what Chat threads are about?

What's the point of this thread?

It is hard to understand how this man managed to take control of a number of women – you only have to look at his wife and listen to the bugged conversation he had with her to realise how downtrodden she is. I am not suggesting that excuses her complicity in this appalling action. Like many controlling bullies he clearly started to believe in his own invincibility. It is almost impossible to fake a faint convincingly, let alone twice. It is also quite hard to maintain the appearance of grief at all times – certainly chatting up the police liaison office did not add any further verisimilitude. Instead of all that overdone public sobbing he would have been far more convincing if he had maintained a dignified silence. Similarly, asking for a press conference where he publicise his apparent grief was yet more overkill. As for wanting to set up an auction of the teddy bears etc. left in the "shrine" outside the burned-out house, words fail me.

This happened not far from where I live which makes it even harder to stomach. Especially as, when I heard his first interview I actually felt sorry for him and believed that he wasn't involved. I have been told that one of the reasons why he was a suspect straight away was that the children had been put to bed wearing their shoes. But then read that, when he tried to 'rescue' them he couldn't open the window. Just how stupid can someone be?

It is manslaughter because there has to be an intent to kill for it to be murder. Sadly, sheer b.....y stupidity and pig ignorance is not a crime. People like this man do not think things through they just see the whole process from their own point of view. He wanted custody of his children by his mistress and he thought no further than that. He thought if he could incriminate her in the arson and save his children he would be a winner all the way, get a bigger better house, get custody, be a hero the lot.

If he had even begun to think it through he would have realised that with modern forensic methods it would be very difficult for him to disguise the fact that he was involved. Not realising that forensic examination can identify individual brands of petrol was one of his many mistakes, talking about it not realising the place where they were staying might be bugged was another.

Sadly stupidity got its reward. His children died, his surviving children stay with their mother and hopefully, given his past record he will now be given a long prison sentence. I understand there is honour among criminals and killing your own children like this puts you outside this code of honour. His time in prison may not be pleasant.

The sheer stupidity of such a scheme beggars belief. How could anyone have imagined that to be a course of action that would result in anything other than complete disaster – and the disaster was a truly terrible one?

What a horrible person he must be I do hope he never see's the light of day again,and how can a woman know the house her children are in is on fire had she no maternal feeling at all to allow this lowlife to do such a thing.I'm just wondering what reception they will get when they arrive in jail,certainly not a welcoming committee I'm sure.God bless those little one's.

What sort of minus figure must your IQ be not to see that setting fire to a house is a really dangerous thing to do? The tragedy was that the unfortunate children died and not the moronic father. I suppose the fact that he had to bolster his ego with two women and all those children speaks volumes.

Hopefully the sentence will reflect the disgust of everyone involved. I saw the clip on the news of him on Jeremy Kyle! }What an awful man! Throw way the key! {not usually part of the flog 'em and hang 'em brigade!!} Poor little souls to have him as a father.

And me!

Grace totally agree with everything you've said. I'm sickened.

I get the impression that he was extremely controlling. I believe the woman that left, the second live in lover, who he was trying to frame for the murder of the children was an orphan and very young when she met him, possibly early teens. It would be easy to understand how susceptible she would have been at that time and maybe he started off as a father figure and then one thing lead to another. Having now read about his past history, I'd say there was an element of fear with both the women and a good dose of low self esteem to have gone along with the set up in the first place. A very bad man!

I'm intrigued to know why they weren't also prosecuted for reckless arson, or arson with intent to endanger life, which can carry a life sentence. Will watch the progamme that's on later. What sort of person sets their house on fire with chidren in there?

That's an interesting comment greatnan. Some people think its better to have someone rather than no-one. Whilst can understand being lonely can't understand why anyone would countenance being with someone like this.

loathsome creature indeed, Greatnan

I am surprised that the charge was manslaughter - I would have thought that the 'man in the Clapham omnibus' rule would have applied - i.e. that any reasonable person would have been able to foresee the tragic consequences which might ensue from their actions.
What amazes me is that any woman would have been attracted to this ugly, loathesome little creature.

Some people simply have no concept of the consequences of their actions - drunk drivers who kill others in road accidents, drivers who endanger their own life and that of others doing 150 mph, people who smoke and then get lung cancer, or drink like George Best and wreck their livers . Let's face it, "dicing with death" is not clever or daring, it is STUPID and we have to face up to the consequences of our behaviour.
I note than neither parent seems to have been injured in the fire - just their innocent children

I was just giving my opinion as to why they were found guilty of manslaughter and not murder - that's all! I'm as disgusted by the actions of the parties involved as anyone else.