The Ingham Family #41 Tattle says I should act my age. What’s my age again?

Status
Thread locked. We start a new thread when they have over 1000 posts, click the blue button to see all threads for this topic and find the latest open thread.
New to Tattle Life? Click "Order Thread by Most Liked Posts" button below to get an idea of what the site is about:
Another trip to morrisons to buy her more snacks to make up for it?
Very true , oh well that's next week's clikbait right there trouble is I can see a lot more choccy buying in the near future because lazy don't look a happy chappy and definitely not .living her best life lol!!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3
Wouldn't the Inghams bringing a case to court be incredibly stupid, as all they have is their youtube channel to earn money, since they decided filming their children acting surprised all the time is a full time job for both parents. Taking a case to court would bring up witnesses like Jess who have proof Chris inappropriately texted her, wanting to meet alone at night.

I don't think Jess seems the type to be intimidated by Ingham family fan bullies, from speaking out. Instead of information about Chris Ingham being on a few youtube channels, the proof of what he did would get more publicity.
Let’s say the CPS decided to take someone to court for harassing the Inghams. That is one singular issue. That, legally, has nothing to do with what Chris did, even if the harassment against the Inghams has come about due to chris and his actions.

Whether or not he acted inappropriately, in another country and law system (where what he did was a federal offence) is irrelevant. For that to be considered that would have to be another charge, which won’t happen in the uk because what he did do is not technically illegal. Morally and ethically wrong sure, but not illegal at this moment in time.

Sure you could try mount a defence of ‘he is a bad person’ if you were accused of harassing him and call the witnesses in the world, but that doesn’t stop the fact that he also ‘is’ receiving harassment, which if the cps determine to be something trial worthy, would go to court.

Of course, if it then came out in court that they had in fact had been harassing other people, then a case and/or charges could be brought forward for that, evidence/cps depending. But that would be a separate case.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 5
Wouldn't the Inghams bringing a case to court be incredibly stupid, as all they have is their youtube channel to earn money, since they decided filming their children acting surprised all the time is a full time job for both parents. Taking a case to court would bring up witnesses like Jess who have proof Chris inappropriately texted her, wanting to meet alone at night.
I don't think Jess seems the type to be intimidated by Ingham family fan bullies, from speaking out. Even if crazy CJ and her angry swearing has started bullying anybody who speaks against the Inghams. Instead of information about Chris Ingham being on a few youtube channels, the proof of what he did would get more publicity.
I'm not sure, but I do think the police must get up of these Youtubers (or anyone who puts their entire lives on the internet) complaining to them about 'bullying' 'harassment' 'trolls' and all that - especially when a lot of it is just someone saying they don't like their content or something. CJ and that lot seem to be the worst for it. As people have mentioned before, you can't put your whole life online (even stuff that shouldn't have been online, like all of that Facebook stuff where Sarah/Damo/Katrina were talking about his situation and slagging of their aunt) and expect everyone to like or agree with it and kiss your ass. Its also not the police's job to deal with petty fallouts.

It pisses me off because I'm sure there are people who are genuinely being harassed or trolled online (especially teenagers now that social media is a big part of their lives), who do genuinely need help or who have maybe not been able to get help in time or been taken seriously before they've committed suicide, or been attacked or worse. They need to stop wasting police resources.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 9
If any of you actually want to get clued up about harassment law, and also how the CPS deal with it, you can read this -


Yes, the cps will be the deciding factor in all of this. He will also be attached to guilty by association harassment if proven he is friends with any of them and as they have all openly admitted to it in the big truce it would surely put a spanner in the works for him?
CJ and the rest of them are definitely on some payroll here I am sure of it she does not see he is using her or she does and don't care.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 5
Let’s say the CPS decided to take someone to court for harassing the Inghams. That is one singular issue. That, legally, has nothing to do with what Chris did, even if the harassment against the Inghams has come about due to chris and his actions.

Whether or not he acted inappropriately, in another country and law system (where what he did was a federal offence) is irrelevant. For that to be considered that would have to be another charge, which won’t happen in the uk because what he did do is not technically illegal. Morally and ethically wrong sure, but not illegal at this moment in time.

Sure you could try mount a defence of ‘he is a bad person’ if you were accused of harassing him and call the witnesses in the world, but that doesn’t stop the fact that he also ‘is’ receiving harassment, which if the cps determine to be something trial worthy, would go to court.

Of course, if it then came out in court that they had in fact had been harassing other people, then a case and/or charges could be brought forward for that, evidence/cps depending. But that would be a separate case.
If the inghams were to attempt to gain a prosecution on the grounds of harassment they wouldn’t get a CPS lawyer in the country to run a case if there’s a sniff that Chris responded in kind, let alone actively harassed them... by what ever means.

If Chris wanted it to stick he shouldn’t have engaged with it at all, that includes knowingly watching the likes of Nikki and Wendy relentlessly trolling on dozens of accounts.

The CPS will look at this and consider a complete waste of public funds.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 6
Let’s say the CPS decided to take someone to court for harassing the Inghams. That is one singular issue. That, legally, has nothing to do with what Chris did, even if the harassment against the Inghams has come about due to chris and his actions.

Whether or not he acted inappropriately, in another country and law system (where what he did was a federal offence) is irrelevant. For that to be considered that would have to be another charge, which won’t happen in the uk because what he did do is not technically illegal. Morally and ethically wrong sure, but not illegal at this moment in time.

Sure you could try mount a defence of ‘he is a bad person’ if you were accused of harassing him and call the witnesses in the world, but that doesn’t stop the fact that he also ‘is’ receiving harassment, which if the cps determine to be something trial worthy, would go to court.

Of course, if it then came out in court that they had in fact had been harassing other people, then a case and/or charges could be brought forward for that, evidence/cps depending. But that would be a separate case.
Well I meant that the Inghams would have more publicity about the behaviour of Chris. Like how many others don't take cases to court, for fear of certain information being made public about them, so they pay an out of court settlement to avoid information being read out in court.
At the moment their dumb fans try to call the victims liars, which always happens and why many victims are scared to come forward, but if that information was read out in court, then their dumb fans would look more nasty for bullying the people Chris had tried to meet alone.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3
That things huge! So the mini and one cars going to parked on the road?
 
That caravan is massive but seems small inside?
I wouldn’t want to be the one tying to manoeuvre it across Europe & it’s various 3 star camp sites.
I’m guessing granny drove it home as Chris doesn’t have the licence for it yet?
Also wondering how they parked it? Look at where the tow bar is. (Ignore his beautiful face 🤢) Is it possible they cleared out the garage?!
1EE57D89-5DEE-4456-B683-501F686D3515.jpeg
 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: 10
Four bunks: one for each of the girls, one for Creepy. Lazy gets her dream come true: a couch and a bed all in one!
 
  • Haha
  • Like
Reactions: 6
It's a twin axle one as well so that will be heavy. Costs a fortune in fuel to pull the thing as well, that's why we got rid of ours.

I don't think they will be able to keep it on their drive, there is probably a caveat in the deeds. There is in ours.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1
Wonder where all the other kids at private school are going on holiday this summer. Bet it won’t be in a caravan towed with their car 😂

It's a twin axle one as well so that will be heavy. Costs a fortune in fuel to pull the thing as well, that's why we got rid of ours.

I don't think they will be able to keep it on their drive, there is probably a caveat in the deeds. There is in ours.
Yeah. New build estates have stuff like not keeping vans with logos/ writing on if they aren’t in garages etc and all sorts. Can’t imagine the neighbours will be happy.

It’s not a suprise anyway, they went caravan shopping with Isla the other day didn’t they? For bits and bats.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4
It's a twin axle one as well so that will be heavy. Costs a fortune in fuel to pull the thing as well, that's why we got rid of ours.

I don't think they will be able to keep it on their drive, there is probably a caveat in the deeds. There is in ours.
That's really interesting. Sounds very likely on a new build estate like theirs, wonder if they thought about that.

It was placed up on bricks or something, does that mean it's there to stay or would they do that every time it's parked?


They filmed direct into the neighbour's living room when Issy was looking at the caravan, completely out of order, but their decor was 10x nicer than the Inghams.
 
  • Wow
  • Like
Reactions: 6
Status
Thread locked. We start a new thread when they have over 1000 posts, click the blue button to see all threads for this topic and find the latest open thread.