Maxine Carr:Victim or Villain?

arcadegame2004

Has Maxine Carr been treated fairly by the British and international media? I feel that while she deserved punishment for lying to the police about Huntley on the day of the murder (Conspiracy to pervert the course of justice equating to this), she has been demonised to an extent that is way out of proportion to the crime she committed. She was found "Not Guilty" of "assisting an offender" and the basis for this seems to be that the jury believed she new nothing of Huntley's involvement in the murder. She claimed in the trial to believe that the reason why Huntley had the washing-machine on was because he had had another woman around behind his back and wanting to hide evidence of that, e.g. messed-up bed, etc. She was in nearby Grimsby anyway visiting her mother on the day of the murder, so she couldn't have known. In any case I feel that to compare someone who lied to protect her lover to a latter-day Myra Hindley is utterly over the top. She played no part in the murder. The media accepts this and indeed I have heard this said repeatedly by the broadcast media. Nor did she help dispose of the bodies. Yet the British press has portrayed her as some kind of heinously evil witch, on par with Rose West almost.

I feel that she has been demonised and treated unfairly by the British Press. I know that putting her on trial alongside Huntley means that his association with her with always act as a shadow over her, making the crime committed by her seem infinitely worse. However, for this reason I feel that her trial should have been held at a different date. I mean, wouldn't you give your partner the benefit of the doubt in a similar situation?

Arcadegame,
Any chance you could paragraph every 4 lines or so, easier to read

On the topic, I get the impression that Carr is a very naive impressionable person who was led all the way by huntley.
That she was able in my view to be brainwashed to such an extent that she went along with all this is dangerous,it shows a person devoid of standards or morals.
The other impression I got allied to that was that she was "simple" ie a stupid /borderline thick person who knew no better or is not capable of knowing any better.
Those are qualities best avoided, and in her case , yes in my view they have made her a very, very bad person, both a victim and a villain.

mike65

Carr proberly rates about 4 on the 1-10 villany scale, and she is also a victim to a degree. Its a sad reflection that she proberly is in mortal danger...but I wont view her as a sad case who was under Huntleys spell. I dont think she was ever compared to Rosemary West/Myra Hindley (worth noting Hindley never killed either).
Delaying her trail would'nt have been right or made any difference. She did the crime she's served the time and will now have to live with the association to the Soham murders like it or not.

Mike.

BlitzKrieg

what annoys me is that the press are demanding that her new id be released to the public. For what justifiable reason apart from making her life worse then the prison she was released from is beyond me...

She is a villian for what she has done. But now she is turning into an object through which the british public want to express their anger. On a side note. The files with her new ID were recently stolen from the car of one of the people organising it. This is worrying i think.

Redleslie

This has nothing to do with politics.

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

Atomic

I have to agree that she's been treated heavy handedly. I read today that as part of her probabtion she isn't allowed leave the UK. I have to think that she has a fairly distintive look that would make her immeadiately recognisable to anyone in Britain or Ireland and possibly Oz. She needs to be sent to the US or some Commonwealth country to have any chance of a normal life.

Tommy Vercetti

As I understand it (and I'm open to correction) she was convicted of providing Huntley with a false alibi. I don't think it's unreasonable to assume that she did this because she either (a) loved him and didn't consider whether or not he was guilty; (b) she truly believed he was innocent or (c) she was intimidated by him. Now if it was a then let her rot in prison but it's probably more likely that she was intimidated by him - especially given the evidence in court that she's not the brightest woman in the world. So anyway I think the treatment of her has been wrong, she didn't kill those girls, nor did she assist in their killing in any way.

The british media need their scapegoat because it's too difficult to face up to the reality that Huntley was a dangerous man long before he murdered the two girls and he shouldn't have been walking the streets.

Redleslie

Originally posted by daveirl
Possibly, but where else should it be? Humanities?

News/media I suppose, I'm not really bothered, I'm just inhumanely hungover.

gandalf

Moving it to News/Media.

Why does every post of yours have a poll on it arcade !!!

Gandalf.

Paddy20

No.

I was just wondering why was this poll question restricted to the "British" press ?... who generally only pander too the lowest common denominator [ the public ] and tend to try and sell more copies by reflecting what the Editors think 'joe public' wants too hear, be it right or wrong.

Imo Maxine Carr is more a victim of circumstance than a villain. Such is mob justice as handed down throughout history to those who are not the brightest and therefore easily picked upon by the gormless masses.

flogen

I think you are viewing british press as tabloid only, there are plenty of decent broadsheets in the UK, but in Ireland they are much harder to find than the Sun and so on.

I think she is has be villanised where she isnt at fault. from what I know, she lied to the police, but she did not know what she was covering up. Otherwise, she did nothing wrong as far as I can see, or am I missing something??

Flogen

seamus

Originally posted by Tommy Vercetti
As I understand it (and I'm open to correction) she was convicted of providing Huntley with a false alibi. I don't think it's unreasonable to assume that she did this because she either (a) loved him and didn't consider whether or not he was guilty; (b) she truly believed he was innocent or (c) she was intimidated by him. Now if it was a then let her rot in prison but it's probably more likely that she was intimidated by him - especially given the evidence in court that she's not the brightest woman in the world. So anyway I think the treatment of her has been wrong, she didn't kill those girls, nor did she assist in their killing in any way.

The british media need their scapegoat because it's too difficult to face up to the reality that Huntley was a dangerous man long before he murdered the two girls and he shouldn't have been walking the streets.

You need to clarify your option (a) there. I think you must mean "loved him and didn't care either way if he was guilty or not", which essentially means that she would be a very callous person, with no regard for the lives of the kids.
I personally believe that she acted as most of the rest of us would. Think about it, two local kids whom you and your partner knew quite well go missing. You're chatting about it, and your partner tells you that he/she was alone at the time, and the kids had called in to say hi, would you mind saying he/she was with you? Of course, after all, this is the person you love and have lived with, shared intimacy. You know they couldn't possibly be capable of this. You're not making any difference, in fact you're saving your partner and the police from the hassle of what will be a fruitless investigation, which would obviously arise if they found out he/she was alone at the time.
As soon as she realised that everything was in fact, not smelling of roses, she owned up. Probably took a lot of guts.
The fact is, the part she played was inconsequential. The girls were already dead. The police had to spend a week longer investigating. The famlies had a week extra of unsurity. Boo-fucking-hoo. What is that compared to how much this woman's life has been destroyed by the McMedia™?

flogen

you summed it up perfectly seamus, thats exactly the way I see things.

She only lied because she thought her partner (whom she loved) was innocent, but would look guilty without any evidence otherwise. I am certain that if he had of told her what he had done, she wouldnt have covered for him. Maybe I'm wrong, but there is nothing to show that she is so calous to ignore the death of two girls for her partners freedom

Flogen

df001i6876

Originally posted by seamus
You need to clarify your option (a) there. I think you must mean "loved him and didn't care either way if he was guilty or not", which essentially means that she would be a very callous person, with no regard for the lives of the kids.
I personally believe that she acted as most of the rest of us would. Think about it, two local kids whom you and your partner knew quite well go missing. You're chatting about it, and your partner tells you that he/she was alone at the time, and the kids had called in to say hi, would you mind saying he/she was with you? Of course, after all, this is the person you love and have lived with, shared intimacy. You know they couldn't possibly be capable of this. You're not making any difference, in fact you're saving your partner and the police from the hassle of what will be a fruitless investigation, which would obviously arise if they found out he/she was alone at the time.
As soon as she realised that everything was in fact, not smelling of roses, she owned up. Probably took a lot of guts.
The fact is, the part she played was inconsequential. The girls were already dead. The police had to spend a week longer investigating. The famlies had a week extra of unsurity. Boo-fucking-hoo. What is that compared to how much this woman's life has been destroyed by the McMedia™?

carr got what was comeing too her, if i had my way she would still be lock up .She new somethink if she had not supplyed a alibi.they would have found the children sooner Ian huntley .should be hung by the neck until he dieds. and carr should watch. love is a funny thing.

flogen

love is a funny thing.

so is bad punctuation/spelling, but lets not get into that.

Carr confessed once she knew the truth, until then she though she was providing an alibi just because Huntley said he didnt have one, but was innocent. Love is a funny thing, it can lead you to deny what someone is capable of, as this case did.
Now Ive heard people saying she knew, but I dont know if thats true or not, I havent seen anything to say she admitted it was.

Flogen

df001i6876

Originally posted by flogen
so is bad punctuation/spelling, but lets not get into that.

Carr confessed once she knew the truth, until then she though she was providing an alibi just because Huntley said he didnt have one, but was innocent. Love is a funny thing, it can lead you to deny what someone is capable of, as this case did.
Now Ive heard people saying she knew, but I dont know if thats true or not, I havent seen anything to say she admitted it was.

Flogen

forgive me for my bad spelling . i wish i could do the same for mad max.they say loves a drug that blind the best off people. arrr then i am just a thick old scouser xminer brain dead./? mad max lives . thats a good nickname don't you agree.

df001i6876

Originally posted by df001i6876
forgive me for my bad spelling . i wish i could do the same for mad max.they say loves a drug that blind the best off people. arrr then i am just a thick old scouser xminer brain dead./? mad max lives . thats a good nickname don't you agree.

I'll ware me reading glass the next time to make shaw me spelling up to scratch. now were have i put them goggles.

flogen

forgive me for my bad spelling . i wish i could do the same for mad max.they say loves a drug that blind the best off people. arrr then i am just a thick old scouser xminer brain dead./? mad max lives . thats a good nickname don't you agree.

less of this crap, please. If your going to reply, do so as part of the discussion at hand.

Flogen

df001i6876

I have already oo ok that right keep the insults for mad max.

seamus

Carr was convicted of attempting to pervert the course of justice. If it had been proven that she did in fact know he killed the kids when she provided the alibi, she would have been brought on a much more serious charge. Ergo, she didn't know.

df001i6876

Originally posted by seamus
Carr was convicted of attempting to pervert the course of justice. If it had been proven that she did in fact know he killed the kids when she provided the alibi, she would have been brought on a much more serious charge. Ergo, she didn't know.

or mad max is that right , well i never new that . do you think she could be lying . now thats between her and scumbag ian twisted brain.that man should hang.

flogen

df001, enough of your Mad Max ramblings, once more and you'll get a ban.

Flogen

MrPudding

Originally posted by df001i6876
or mad max is that right , well i never new that . do you think she could be lying . now thats between her and scumbag ian twisted brain.that man should hang.

As far as we know Maxine did not know anything of the murders. She has served a longer sentence for being stupid than some people serve for actually killing people. Where is the justice there?

On the subject of Huntly be hung. Why? What is the point? I object to capital punishment for a number of reasons. One of them is after the sentence is carried out that is it. What is the point? I know for a fact if I was given the choice of life in prison without hope of release, constantly having to watch my back and being unable to interact with any humans except those guarding me who hate every fibre of my being and would like nothing better than to let the general population of the prison in to kick me to death or getting hung, gassed or whatever I would choose death.

In cases of truly heinous crime, capital punishment is a let off.

This is my "appeal to the revenge rather than punishment" people. My other reasons for opposing capital punishment center around the fact that I simply think it is wrong.

MrP