New to Tattle Life? Click "Order Thread by Most Liked Posts" button below to get an idea of what the site is about:
Tyler Webb sentenced to nine years imprisonment after persuading victim to attempt suicide online
After meeting his victim - who cannot be named - in an online forum dedicated to mental health last year, Webb began talking to her on the Telegram messaging app, and in their first conversation, successfully persuaded her to self-harm.
Just heard this on the radio - what a vile individual. It's about time these horrible people were stopped from hiding behind the "letter of the law" - glad the law now covers this sort of abuse.This world is a scary place, glad that is such a long sentenceTyler Webb sentenced to nine years imprisonment after persuading victim to attempt suicide online
After meeting his victim - who cannot be named - in an online forum dedicated to mental health last year, Webb began talking to her on the Telegram messaging app, and in their first conversation, successfully persuaded her to self-harm.news.sky.com
Caroline Eshghi?
Woman who was beaten by mum wants historical sentence review
Caroline Eshghi, 57, was beaten, burned and starved as a child by her mother during the 1970s and 80s.
www.bbc.co.uk
Yes that's her. Thank youCaroline Eshghi?
Woman who was beaten by mum wants historical sentence review
Caroline Eshghi, 57, was beaten, burned and starved as a child by her mother during the 1970s and 80s.
The sentence of the boy who killed Bhim Kohli is going to be reviewed. Hopefully it will be increased:
www.bbc.co.uk
Bhim Kohli death: Boy's sentence for killing man, 80, to be reviewed
The Solicitor General concludes the 15-year-old's sentence could be referred to the Court of Appeal.
www.bbc.co.uk
Good!The sentence of the boy who killed Bhim Kohli is going to be reviewed. Hopefully it will be increased:
Bhim Kohli death: Boy's sentence for killing man, 80, to be reviewed
The Solicitor General concludes the 15-year-old's sentence could be referred to the Court of Appeal.
That was brutal.
Agreed …Good news.
Sounds like it happened around 3-4am while the unit was quiet and unsupervised.
I’ve seen some appalling crimes on these threads, but murdering a tiny vulnerable baby in a SCBU is probably the most evil and depraved thing I’ve ever heard.
It's really awful. My instinct is that this was the action of a very controlling man. I don't get the impression his partner had much involvement in the crime or had the ability to make herself and the baby safe.
Absolutely. The kind of man who would kill a tiny baby with his bare hands in front of the mother just to show how much power he has, how he can do absolutely whatever he likes, it’s his child and he can brutalise it if he wants. A true psychopath.
This case is on 24 Hours in Police Custody tomorrow and Monday night I believe. I'd never heard of it, but I suspect that after Monday night's show, the Police will get more victims coming forward. I really hope they do because he's only been convicted of one grape and various counts of sexual assault and voyeurism, however the Police found more than 6000 graphic videos of sexual assault and photographs of women on his devices. A large number of his victims won't even know what he did to them because he spiked his victims drinks.
archive.ph
Shockingly, because he pleaded guilty, he was only sentenced to 10 years and 8 months instead of a maximum of 18 years and 10 months. I understand the rationale behind lower sentences for guilty pleas, but in this case, the balance is clearly too skewed in favour of the criminal. A discount of almost 50 per cent is just too much.
As I said, I suspect this won't the last we hear of this man in relation to the women who he recorded. And I truly hope that he ends up spending far more time in prison. He doesn't deserve to see the light of day whilst he's still relatively young. He will definitely offend again if they can't get more convictions at this point.
‘Charming, cheeky’ — and possibly one of Britain’s most prolific rapi…
archived 5 Jul 2025 20:05:57 UTC
Shockingly, because he pleaded guilty, he was only sentenced to 10 years and 8 months instead of a maximum of 18 years and 10 months. I understand the rationale behind lower sentences for guilty pleas, but in this case, the balance is clearly too skewed in favour of the criminal. A discount of almost 50 per cent is just too much.
As I said, I suspect this won't the last we hear of this man in relation to the women who he recorded. And I truly hope that he ends up spending far more time in prison. He doesn't deserve to see the light of day whilst he's still relatively young. He will definitely offend again if they can't get more convictions at this point.
Could have put it in a spoiler. Programme's not even been shown yet. Thanks a bunch!
The case has been in the papers already as he was convicted in March this years; so it is not a spoiler. As I said, I hadn't heard about the case before but as it has been fully in the public domain, I don't know who may or may not have heard about it who's reading this thread. The first sentence of my post clearly says that the case will be on 24 hours tomorrow. From the length of my post, it's clear that I must be talking about the content of the programme. If you didn't want to know, then you should have stopped reading after my first sentence.
I'm sorry that I've spoilt the programme for you, but this is a discussion of a case that has already been reported on. I imagine that part of the reasoning behind the reporting is precisely so that more people, that is potential victims, are aware of the programme and are encouraged to report their own cases. This is similar to the very recent case of the serial rapist Zhenzao Zou, where there are also multiple victims who may be unaware that he attacked them. If there's ever a programme about his case, people can talk freely about it without using spoilers.
I think 99% of the cases featured on 24 Hours in Police Custody will have been previously been reported on, whether locally or nationally.
Personally, I don't read about grape cases as standard so have very little awareness of them. I had absolutely no knowledge of this case at all.
And I'm not even complaining because you posted after the programme aired but I won't be able to watch it until the following weekend - I've actually only just finished watching last week's two parter. I wasn't aware or that case either - I'm very out of touch these days but always make time for certain TV crime shows, this being one. People have talked about that on this thread this week and there's not been a peep from me because the programme has aired.
But posting an in-depth discussion of the synopsis and ending BEFORE a programme is shown on TV is the very definition of a spoiler. And yet somehow it's my fault for reading it? Ok, sure
I only skimmed it anyway but saw enough.
Look, I really don't want to police the thread (no pun intended) but I would politely ask that you please use the spoiler tags in future, just like everyone does on the 24 Hours in Police Custody thread in the TV section, as a matter of courtesy and respect especially, as you said, you don't know who is reading the thread and who is aware of what cases.
Personally, I don't read about grape cases as standard so have very little awareness of them. I had absolutely no knowledge of this case at all.
And I'm not even complaining because you posted after the programme aired but I won't be able to watch it until the following weekend - I've actually only just finished watching last week's two parter. I wasn't aware or that case either - I'm very out of touch these days but always make time for certain TV crime shows, this being one. People have talked about that on this thread this week and there's not been a peep from me because the programme has aired.
But posting an in-depth discussion of the synopsis and ending BEFORE a programme is shown on TV is the very definition of a spoiler. And yet somehow it's my fault for reading it? Ok, sure
I only skimmed it anyway but saw enough. Look, I really don't want to police the thread (no pun intended) but I would politely ask that you please use the spoiler tags in future, just like everyone does on the 24 Hours in Police Custody thread in the TV section, as a matter of courtesy and respect especially, as you said, you don't know who is reading the thread and who is aware of what cases.
To be fair surely the first line would have told you it was a spoiler and then you could stop reading?I think 99% of the cases featured on 24 Hours in Police Custody will have been previously been reported on, whether locally or nationally.
Personally, I don't read about grape cases as standard so have very little awareness of them. I had absolutely no knowledge of this case at all.
And I'm not even complaining because you posted after the programme aired but I won't be able to watch it until the following weekend - I've actually only just finished watching last week's two parter. I wasn't aware or that case either - I'm very out of touch these days but always make time for certain TV crime shows, this being one. People have talked about that on this thread this week and there's not been a peep from me because the programme has aired.
But posting an in-depth discussion of the synopsis and ending BEFORE a programme is shown on TV is the very definition of a spoiler. And yet somehow it's my fault for reading it? Ok, sure
Look, I really don't want to police the thread (no pun intended) but I would politely ask that you please use the spoiler tags in future, just like everyone does on the 24 Hours in Police Custody thread in the TV section, as a matter of courtesy and respect especially, as you said, you don't know who is reading the thread and who is aware of what cases.
and I’m normally the spoiler police on other threads.If I had posted on the 24 Hours in Police Custody thread, then yes, this would be a spoiler: a spoiler for the tv programme but not for the discussion of the facts of a case that were reported openly earlier this year. However, I did not post in the tv thread: I posted in the Real Crime section. I generally don't watch 24 hours but, if I had posted about this case in that thread as a heads-up to people about the case, then, indeed, I would have put my discussion behind a spoiler, and if I hadn't, you'd be well within your rights to complain.I think 99% of the cases featured on 24 Hours in Police Custody will have been previously been reported on, whether locally or nationally.
Personally, I don't read about grape cases as standard so have very little awareness of them. I had absolutely no knowledge of this case at all.
And I'm not even complaining because you posted after the programme aired but I won't be able to watch it until the following weekend - I've actually only just finished watching last week's two parter. I wasn't aware or that case either - I'm very out of touch these days but always make time for certain TV crime shows, this being one. People have talked about that on this thread this week and there's not been a peep from me because the programme has aired.
But posting an in-depth discussion of the synopsis and ending BEFORE a programme is shown on TV is the very definition of a spoiler. And yet somehow it's my fault for reading it? Ok, sure
Look, I really don't want to police the thread (no pun intended) but I would politely ask that you please use the spoiler tags in future, just like everyone does on the 24 Hours in Police Custody thread in the TV section, as a matter of courtesy and respect especially, as you said, you don't know who is reading the thread and who is aware of what cases.
You say that you don't necessarily watch the shows as they air, so if you'd opened this thread tomorrow evening, would you still have expected me to post behind a spoiler? I mentioned the programme in the very first sentence of my post and given that you were already aware of the case, i don't know why you continued to skim my post as it would have been obvious by its length that I was posting details that would probably be in the programme. I suggest that, yes, it is your fault that you continued to skim my post, and picked up more information than you would have wanted to know once you realised that I was talking about a case to be shown tomorrow. And even if I'd revealed more in the first paragraph, as I say, this thread is about the case itself and not the programme. It comes with the territory that at times you may get information about a case before it airs.
I will continue to discuss the details of cases openly that have been concluded as and when I become aware of them. If they come to my attention because they are going to be on tv, I will do as I have done in this case, and mention that at the beginning of my post.
Perhaps you should put me on ignore if you think that that my approach will be an ongoing problem for you.
Maybe it’s just me but to complain a serious programme detailing serious crimes has been ‘spoiled’ for you is just icky…it’s not the latest installment of some reality show!
I think I’d also add that there is something that makes me feel uncomfortable about there being a ‘spoiler’ in relation to discussions about these crimes: they are not entertainment, they are people’s painful lives. I’m not sure why it would spoil watching a programme like 24 Hours in Police Custody to know the perpetrator was convicted - it’s not Poirot.
Edited to add: I didn’t see your comment @ChampagneBox but I agree entirely.
Edited to add: I didn’t see your comment @ChampagneBox but I agree entirely.
At no point did I say the programme had been "spoiled" for me. I would use the word "spoiler" about someone discussing the contents of ANY TV show prior to it airing. Christ, you'd be skinned alive on Digital Spy for doing that.
There are not always convictions either.
Anyway, I'm obviously completely in the wrong by simply asking for the courtesy of using the spoiler tags, which are an option, on a thread that's not in the TV forum, and for having eyes
so I'll just leave it there and use the ignore feature as suggested.
There are not always convictions either.
Anyway, I'm obviously completely in the wrong by simply asking for the courtesy of using the spoiler tags, which are an option, on a thread that's not in the TV forum, and for having eyes
so I'll just leave it there and use the ignore feature as suggested.
Last edited: