Vicky Haigh

I think the starting point in the law should be that children have a right of access to their siblings, to both parents, each of their grandparents and through them to their extended family of aunts, uncles and cousins. Doing anything to deny or impede this right of access without the official agreement of a court should leave a person open to prosecution.

There are far too many cases such as this one where children get used as pawns.
 
Grey said:
I think the starting point in the law should be that children have a right of access to their siblings, to both parents, each of their grandparents and through them to their extended family of aunts, uncles and cousins. Doing anything to deny or impede this right of access without the official agreement of a court should leave a person open to prosecution.

There are far too many cases such as this one where children get used as pawns.
Click to expand...

Amen to that.
 
:cool: If I din't know her background, but knowing who she was and what she's done wouldn't share a can of coke with the woman
 
Last edited:
LUKE said:
I don't think so.
Click to expand...

I hate to agree with some of the comments posted by Mail readers, but as one of them rightly stated - what if this was a father who had committed the offences? I strongly doubt anyone would be coming out stating that the sentence was too harsh.

A lot of the sentiment appears to be around it being terrible that a child has lost a mother - much better to have no mother at all than one that uses the child like this.
 
LUKE said:
I don't think so.
Click to expand...

I'm not denying the woman is highly volatile - and what she has done is not defensible. BUT I am suprised it is as much as 3 years when you compare it to other crimes which result in people losing their lives or being raped/assaulted.
 
The accusations she made against her husband were vile and she was willing to see him to time and destroy his good name.The fact that her daughter was terrified of her speaks volumes.
Deserves to spend time inside in my opinion.
 
LUKE said:
The accusations she made against her husband were vile and she was willing to see him to time and destroy his good name.The fact that her daughter was terrified of her speaks volumes.
Deserves to spend time inside in my opinion.
Click to expand...

Damn right, she'll be out in a year in any case.
 
jinnyj said:
I'm not denying the woman is highly volatile - and what she has done is not defensible. BUT I am suprised it is as much as 3 years when you compare it to other crimes which result in people losing their lives or being raped/assaulted.
Click to expand...

Others closer to both this case and due process as a whole will know better than me on this one, but would the tariff have been as high as three years on account of a previous record that's been anything other than unblemished?

Some of you will remember her tainting (would nobbling be too strong a term?) of Ooh Aah Camara ahead of the Albany Stakes at Royal York in 2005;

http://www.britishhorseracing.com/r...sciplinary/disciplinaryDetail.asp?item=083752

I think the penalties imposed by the BHA were all she picked up and that no further criminal prosecution ensued, but at the same time I wonder if the details of this incident would have been known and considered for character-assessment purposes as part of the recent trial.

gc
 
Last edited:
Back
Top