Merry Christmas everyone
They definitely do. It’s all front. Extremely loyal but they definitely feel the pain.What were they saying this time? I often think over what they really must think to what Savanna has done. They are obviously very very loyal and I can picture the Dad [Dan] saying to his brood, 'it doesn't matter what we do, we must stick together - always'. Perhaps a lot of their behaviour during and since the trial is a front. Perhaps they do question, argue and cry about what has gone on with each other but won't show how they really feel to the rest of the world. They must discuss the pain and suffering Savanna caused to Star and to them as a family surely?! However, despite this they won't give up on her. To look at the Nan for example on FB, she looks 'normal', nice even and I think surely to god as a Mother, as a Nan, she questions what the hell Savanna did and how evil she was. Or perhaps they don't, perhaps not all of the family want to know the 'in's and out's' of what she did and bury their heads in the sand as if it didn't happen. I know we won't ever know but I often play it out in my mind.
That and silent night always gets meThe feelings of 'if only' are so hard. I cried in church this afternoon when we sang Away in a Manger.
It is unfathomable.
It probably didn't happen as she'd have been done for contempt of court of she was using abusive language and/or threats in a court, especially crown court trial.I thought it was said that SB would shout abuse in the cells while on breaks
I was going to say this too , I don't think its true. It wouldn't look good on savanna to be shouting abuse at frankie in court as that would show she has a temper and can get angry.It probably didn't happen as she'd have been done for contempt of court of she was using abusive language and/or threats in a court, especially crown court trial.
as for holding cells they are normally under the court so the public wouldn't hear anything from the cells, unless she was shouting walking up in the stairs into the box.
I've been to prison , and I deserved to go. I was a drug addict.The law of the land applies equally to all citizens apart from a few exceptions such as insanity. So it would be dangerous to start an arbitrary differentiation between people convicted of crimes. Who would make such a decision, the judge? That would give judges too much power. It would be challenged to high heaven. It would also be very subjective to pick who should serve prison sentences and who should not based on needs, intelligence, abuse, vulnerability etc. All these variables will have different degrees of severity so where would you draw the line between those who go to prison and those who don’t? It would be impossible to implement.
Besides, what message would it send to those who commit crimes, if I can show in court I suffered from DV or am vulnerable etc then I can commit crimes and not go to jail. The ramifications for society of such an approach would be disastrous.
Screw means prison officer. (Sorry I should explained when I wrote that, I forget that lots of people don't know 'the lingo' lol)What do you mean with screw? BTW in comparison to other European countries the British punishments are high.
Was there ever an explanation given why we never heard a psychological evaluation of Brockhill? Is it possible that she refused to let them psychoanalyse her?
Im pretty sure they don’t. Not 100% sure. I suppose friends and relatives may be allowed to give them certain things? Though not necessarily.What happens in prison at Christmas? Do they get gifts , is jail decorated etc?