11 year old murdered

[MargeB]

Tragic, tragic event, I feel awful for the parents.

During the investigation, the police said they would 'come down very hard' on any perpetrator (not sure when the police are called to come down hard on anyone, but anyway). They seem to be less proud of themselves now that another high profile child killing can be attributed to basic police incompetence (think of Holly and Jessica incident). Isn't it time someone shook up the police service?

During the investigation of the missing boy, while he was probably still alive, the police failed to visit the home of the proposed offender, even though he was on bail for 8 sex offences involving children.

(I know the 'police didn't carry out the act', but if they had acted correctly he may well be alive today).

[january_bug]

Fair enough.  :-)  As you may have been able to tell from previous posts, I'm not a big fan of having people patronise me!  Anyway, I wasn't having a go at you, and you weren't at me, so I definitely don't want to fall out! :-)

[january_bug]

Um, I THOUGHT I just posted a response to Buddy, saying that I hadn't meant to have a go and that I don't want to fall out.  It's just that I'm not a huge fan of being patronised. 

Anyway, the post didn't appear when I looked back, but if this is a double, then I apologise.  Or perhaps Big Ed has banned me after yesterday's hiccups! :-(

[MargeB]

jeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeez!

Scottish newspapers now reporting that the killer attended a school screening of a student made film (that was also at the Edinburgh Film Festival) of kids from that school pretending to be dead in those woods!

[georgit79]

What?! That is just too 'scary movie' for my liking.

[MargeB]

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/01092005/344/death-film-probed-rory-police.html

[Buddy]

I personally think this should be closed as it has drifted from the original thread.This could go on and on e;g the killer attended a premier - yeah a valid point.

But someone mentioning the videos they got and were away to watch and then being asked the next morning what they were like.

It was constructive - now flogging a dead horse - looking for stories to put on.

Ever heard of we all agree - it was heinous.

Enough is now enough in my opinion.

If there is more constructive news then by all means someone open a thread.

[MargeB]

Thanks for the post, but I'd disagree with you there Buddy. The thread is not about whether or not the crime was heinous (I think we're were already clear on that), we are discussing what went wrong and how it can be avoided. The thread was brought back on track very promptly. If anyone wants to add their views or other thoughts, please feel free. I don't see a shred of 'dead horse' flogging.

[january_bug]

Hear hear MargeB! It's your thread, and I don't see you going in for tea! When you want to, that's fair enough! :-)

I've never known threads get "closed", only left open, or removed for being offensive in some way.  Nothing here is offensive.  In fact, even you, MargeB, apologised for something potentially offensive, that wasn't offensive.  :-)

This is a really wide issue, and a debate that I've read with interest every day.  I was interested to read of the new reports in the press, if not least because it shows how the tiniest things can be expanded on by the press.  Heaven help anyone that's ever seen the Texas Chainsaw Massacre and then nips down to B&Q to buy something to trim their hedge with!  If we go down the "nipping it in the bud" route (mentioned earlier) as I call it, that would probably be banned.  Mind you, guns are banned and that's a good thing!

Oooh - 17:45, gotta go and try to sell people their Last Will and Testament!  Cheery!

[Buddy]

January is right enjoy your wee moment of glory.The pair of you make quite a double act - wouldnt like to come up against either of you for merely stating the facts

O and continue to enjoy discussing your films the both of you - its very enlightening.

I shall await a more serious current thread, that hasnt been flogged,when there is something pertinent to say.

Dont please respond to me girlies - cos as far as I am concerned this thread is serving no purpose apart from your wee chats.BTW January where did u get Bug from - somehow v apt mmm!Suspect a wee lassie whose parental contol has just been taken off for her birthday!!

[MargeB]

pal, get off the thread, thanks. A wee 11 year old lad lost his life to some weirdo, and we were having a grown up discussion about how the system fails, a discussion from which we all profit and from which I for one am learning. I have no time at all for small minded troublemakers like yourself who attribute genuine question-asking to 'megalomania'. Pick up your toys, put them in your little box, and go home. Thanks.

[january_bug]

MargeB, my "female" friend, are we still ok to talk then?  I personally do find it strange that someone else wants to control a conversation on a public forum.  I dont' believe it's really in the rules that we have to stay on topic, by anyone's definition other than the original questioner!

This story about the dead man having been to a film screening, I would love to hear what a psychologist would say on the matter.  I'd also be interested to know if it was a one off, or if he had a thing for similar films.  If there was a pattern, that could/should have been picked up upon, it seems that your original thoughts may have been more compelling than I originally found them.  (And of course in that case, I apologise!).  We both (all) know that hindsight is a wonderful thing, but it would be very sad, and maybe even worrying, to know that there was something that the police should have picked up upon. 

Of course, easy as it is to say/type this, any failure may not be down to any personal incompetence, but simply down to over-stretched resources.  Either way, it's a great tragedy. 

I'm also going to search for any more information about the Judge who granted the man bail.  I'd be interested to know what level of judge (s)he was and what amount/type of experience etc.  We all make mistakes, and I'm sure the judge in question feels terrible about what has happened, assuming of course that the dead man was the young boy's murderer. 

PS - 2, maybe 3 posts out of 46, where I simply apologised for straying from the conversation and we mentioned a DVD.  In the light of the topic of conversation, I really don't feel that what we (you and I MargeB, old girl! :p) did was exactly a crime!!!

[january_bug]

Also Buddy - you asked me not to respond directly, so I shall leave you to super-sleuth your way through the AB backfiles to find the answer to your question to me.  I have adequately explained my name elsewhere.  My age and my parents have nothing to do with you either, by the way. 

[curiosity]

Firstly to acknowledge the tragic & horrific nature of this & sympathise with the people affected. Secondly, this debate has raised quite a few issues. I work with young people, many of whom have been abused and have personality problems. As Janbug says the workers are targets sometimes. As professionals we have been informed, that since Huntley, a new system is in place under the Child Protection Procedures, which is if any allegation is made against you (even if there is no way on earth that it is true, there were witnesses etc. etc.) Your name goes onto the register, this has to be declared at future job applications etc. This has only been in place since April and already a colleague on another unit has had this happen, totally unfounded, investigated etc. and untrue, but still the reigister entry. He is horrified. It caused much debate at work, but with young kid's at school I asked if something happened to their child, wouldn't they have preffered this system was in place? I must say the majority are adament that they should not be treat in such a way.

[MargeB]

Well, the argument against such a system is that it may be open to abuse, as you suggest. So a system that could be in place to protect people is being threatened by those who make false allegations. Overall, it has to be considered that those who make false allegations are significancly increasing the risk to children.

[curiosity]

yes, Marge you're right the system that they've tried to put in place has it's prisoners unfortunately. The main argument was from colleagues that the entry has no explanation of what the circumstances of the entry were, and people think that there's no smoke without fire generally. Linking to Dom Tuks post are we an untrusting nation? (not sure now under which subject, but a good read)

[january_bug]

My criminal law is pretty out of date I'm afraid and I was rubbish at it at the time, but something tells me that rape is the only crime where you are assumed guilty and must prove your innocence.  (I will check this later, or perhaps someone can clarify).  We all know that there are many false accusations of rape.  Rape is a crime that many feel so strongly about, because the victim survives physically, but mentally their life may be ruined. 

My point is that child molestation is something that people generally feel even more strongly about, and so I also believe/agree that the system will be open to much abuse andmany false accusations. 

I suspect that this is a problem we will be unable to "cure" in society, and so parents present and future will just have to try to protect their children. 

With my next suggestion, I am in no way trying to blame Rory's mother for his death, but let me just say this:  I have heard that many schools are trying to encourage walking 'crocodiles', supervised by parents who don't work in the mornings, to get the children to school safely and healthily.  If more schools would put in place these schemes, those parents who genuinely need (at the moment) to drive their children to school and drop them a way away from the main gates because of the conjestion, would be able to let their children walk, and the children would be safer.  I realise this won't work in rural schools.  I also reiterate, that I have no idea whythe mother in this tragic case didn't drop her son right outside the school gate, but I'm sure she had excellent reasons and anyway, the "why" here is irrelevant.  I'm just thinking that the walking schemes might generally help children... and also my point tries to show that, along with the schools and the police, parents do still have a responsibility for the safety of their children. 

[libertie]

Many issues have been raised about this case ie failure of the school to notify the parents of Rory's non attendance and the police not acting quickly enough to investigate Harris! It is not policy in West Lothian for primary schools to do this, and in fact if they had done so in this case it is unlikely that a full scale search would have begun right away! Having said that, the Education Authority is now reviewing its policy on this.  It also has to be remembered that this school is in the middle of a quiet residential area. Local children - my own included, when young - mostly all walk to and from school without adult supervision.  Rory's mum, herself a primary school teacher dropped him off a short distance from the school where it was convenient to do so!  The sad fact is that no matter how much we would like to allocate blame for this awful murder our children will always be vulnerable and that really the only person we should be blaming is the sad excuse for a human being that did it!!

[january_bug]

I agree libertie!  I just don't think the school have the resources to ring every parent whose child hasn't turned up, to check the parent knows where the child is.  Although, if it's the parents' responsibility to tell the school when the child is NOT coming in, and to do so on the morning, then any child not on that list, and not marked present on the register, could be assumed to be lost on the way to school.  It's better to be safe that sorry. 

But you're of course right, even if he had been reported missing to the parents, there's nothing to say he'd have been found in time.  The culprit is the one to blame... even with a simple "but for" test, he is the only one whose removal from the chain of events would GUARANTEE that Rory would not have been murdered.  Anybody else's actions (or lack there of) may have increased a risk, or delayed a discovery, but it still might have happened anyway.