Accused parents will not be attending funeral

[anotheoldgit]

http://www.dailymail....T-attend-funeral.html

Was this the correct decision, taking into consideration that one is innocent until proven guilty?

[emmie]

maybe not, but i suspect the lynch mob will be out in force on the day, and that the police don't want a riot on their hands.

[furrypusscat]

One assumes that the police must have compelling evidence against them. No-one knows if there have been admissions during interview!!!

[hc4361]

There was a good discussion on here a while back about it.

Many thought a private funeral for family only including the parents, not publicised in any way, would be a good compromise.

It would be wrong to allow them to attend such a public funeral as there would be plenty of 'vigilantes' trying to have a go at them. There would need to be more police than mourners.

[hc4361]

I don't assume any such thing, furry.

[sp1814]

If they turned up, it would become a media frenzy. Probably better that they don't attend...

However, if it transpires that the couple are completely innocent - then it would be absolutely tragic. To lose your kids AND not be able to say 'goodbye' to them.

Horrible.

[sir.prize]

Not pleasant at all. But due to the inconclusive situation, it could be arranged to delay the funerals until a later date.

[bednobs]

the article does not say definitively if they asked and were refused, or whether they have decided not to attend. if the former, wrong decision, if the latter, right decision

[chaptazbru]

Why is everybody sticking up for them, that man is pure rif raf. I bet they did it !!!!!

[sp1814]

chaptazbru - keeping my fingers crossed that you're not sitting on the jury when I decide to commit a capital crime...

:-)

[ladybirder]

And so he might be chapta, but it doesn't make him a murderer.

[chaptazbru]

We'll see .....

[ummmm]

If they did do it Chap, do you think they intended to kill their children?

[ladybirder]

I'm sure chapta will answer for herself but the answer has to be No. The children were a source of revenue for them.
As has been said, if it was them, it was a stupid plan by even more stupid people, gone wrong.

[ummmm]

I don't understand this revenue thing. Children are very expensive...benefits don't cover the cost of a child.

[EvianBaby]

If they were not given permission to attend then it's probably for their own protection.

[naomi24]

No, I don't think it is the correct decision.

[ladybirder]

I wouldn't know ummmm but life can't be that difficult or why would they have so many children?
You don't think they deliberately did it do you?

[ummmm]

No, I don't think so. I think, if they did do it, it was an act of pure stupidity with devastating consequences.

People on benefits don't live a life of luxury (unless they're on the fiddle) I think they just get used to it.

[rowanwitch]

Possibly a private graveside visit will be arranged If I were a reporter I'd hang around for a couple of days after the funeral just in case