Hello, new(ish) member here and my first post. Shame it's such a grim topic.
Until reading the screenshots of the BBC report on EJ, the fullest summation seemed to be in yesterday's Evening Standard online. I'll try to attach a screenshot.
Are we to believe that, despite the fact that there is clear evidence that he has habitually browsed this sort of material, because there was only one item found on his computer this absolves him of the crime? Also, citing EJ and IK's cosy set up as proof that he's come to his senses and turned over a new leaf is pretty flimsy.
None of my business, I know, but I do wonder what Andrew O'Hagan (the father of IK's teenage daughter) makes of all this. If I'm not mistaken, their daughter was (very sadly) born with a heart defect and a small degree of developmental difficulty. I don't know if this made her vulnerable, but it makes me uneasy to think about it.
I find EJ's sentence completely unfathomable. Justice has not been done here.
Until reading the screenshots of the BBC report on EJ, the fullest summation seemed to be in yesterday's Evening Standard online. I'll try to attach a screenshot.
Are we to believe that, despite the fact that there is clear evidence that he has habitually browsed this sort of material, because there was only one item found on his computer this absolves him of the crime? Also, citing EJ and IK's cosy set up as proof that he's come to his senses and turned over a new leaf is pretty flimsy.
None of my business, I know, but I do wonder what Andrew O'Hagan (the father of IK's teenage daughter) makes of all this. If I'm not mistaken, their daughter was (very sadly) born with a heart defect and a small degree of developmental difficulty. I don't know if this made her vulnerable, but it makes me uneasy to think about it.
I find EJ's sentence completely unfathomable. Justice has not been done here.
Attachments
-
77.8 KB
-
56.3 KB
Last edited: