GUILTY UK - Kayleigh Haywood, 15, Ibstock, Leicestershire, 13 Nov 2015 - #2

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Hi
I've just joined and been following this thread with interest. Thought I'd say hello!!
 
I live in the village where this happened... It's been truely awful
 
Hi there,

I'm new around here, but have been reading for quite some time, thought I'd say Hi. :)
 
Welcome Lolabear, Missoni, and all the other new members here. Great to see you.


:welcome4: :welcome6:
 
Hi everyone [emoji4] I'm really bad at finding things on here. I have not heard about the becky case could anyone lead my in the right direction to find it plzzz [emoji4]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
NZkiwi said:
Hi everyone [emoji4] I'm really bad at finding things on here. I have not heard about the becky case could anyone lead my in the right direction to find it plzzz [emoji4]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

It was the case of Becky Watts, a 16 year old who went missing in February. The trial for her murder just ended, and lots of us on this case followed it - and have taken her into our hearts.

Here is the link to the very first thread when she was missing. You should be able to find the others from there.

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sh...s-16-Bristol-England-19-February-2015-1/page2
 
TheTruthWillOut said:
There is the Land Registry (£3.00 charge) but the "owner" would be the mortgage lender I would think, so wouldn't help? I doubt these houses have been purchased outright by either men.

Could be wrong though.
Click to expand...

I'm familiar with the Land Registry and it would show the owner as the registered proprietor and any mortgage as a charge on the property.

Example here: https://eservices.landregistry.gov.uk/www/wps/QDMPS-Portlet/resources/example_register.pdf (owners on page 3, mortgage circled red on page 4)

I could easily obtain copies if I knew the addresses as I have a Land Registry login for work, but I believe the public can purchase these for £3 each as you say anyway.
 
Reminder that we do NOT sleuth family members' social media pages and we do not bring direct quotes here from them. Please brush up on TOS.

The Rules

The Rules: Etiquette & Information
Not Allowed

Social media pages that fall in the following categories are OFF LIMITS.

Family members of either a victim or a suspect
Friends of either a victim or a suspect
Most any other individual

Don't link to these pages, nor make reference to information you find on them.
Click to expand...

:tyou:
 
Cherwell said:
Great post, Tortoise. Legislation imposes a one-size-fits-all rule, which isn't natural. We are all individuals, and we can't be defined by the number of birthdays we've had.
Click to expand...

Legislation on the legal age to have sex is there to protect and safeguard our children, pure and simple, whether one agrees with it or not. Thankfully, many people follow the law and sadly, there are many that don't.
What it is in other countries matters not, it's 16 in the UK.
All my children have been brought up to understand sex is against the law under 16 and anyone wanting to engage it with them before that age, would be committing an offence too. I am by no means a prude, as a parent it is my job to protect them until they're of an age to make their own decisions on adult matters. And I don't feel they missed out on anything IF they followed my advise.
I will continue to pass the same advise to my future grandchildren too.
 
1pinklilies said:
Legislation on the legal age to have sex is there to protect and safeguard our children, pure and simple, whether one agrees with it or not. Thankfully, many people follow the law and sadly, there are many that don't.
What it is in other countries matters not, it's 16 in the UK.

All my children have been brought up to understand sex is against the law under 16 and anyone wanting to engage it with them before that age, would be committing an offence too. I am by no means a prude, as a parent it is my job to protect them until they're of an age to make their own decisions on adult matters. And I don't feel they missed out on anything IF they followed my advise.
I will continue to pass the same advise to my future grandchildren too.
Click to expand...

Of course, I'd rather my children waited until they were 16 to have sex (and to my knowledge they did), but with a law such as this, it does infer that ALL children are the same and have the same levels of maturity, have the same lifestyles and backgrounds.

My concern isn't so much that some young people have sex before they are 16 - I'm more concerned that many 16 year olds are not ready for sex at that age, but the legal protection is gone for them, with regards to 'grooming'. I'm sure many 16 and 17 year olds could be groomed in the same way a 13 or 14 year old is, if they are some way behind their peers in terms of mental age and maturity.

I'm not sure if I'm making much sense, but trying to say that a law which dictates it is illegal for a person of 15 years and 364 days of age to have sex, yet removes the legal protection a day later, isn't perfect. Not sure what the answer is - perhaps each case being decided on its own merits might be better, although I agree there does have to be a starting point. Having spent 12 years working with teenagers, the age of 16 seems to be flouted on such a regular basis, I'm not sure the law is worth as much as it was in the past.

With regards to the simple premise of a set age to be mature enough to do things, it reminds me of my son saying yesterday "I could join the Army at 16 and be taught how to use a gun, but I wouldn't be allowed to buy a copy of Grand Theft Auto and fire pretend guns". Not mature enough to deal with a fantasy shooting game, but mature enough to be trained to kill for real.
 
1pinklilies said:
Legislation on the legal age to have sex is there to protect and safeguard our children, pure and simple, whether one agrees with it or not. Thankfully, many people follow the law and sadly, there are many that don't.
What it is in other countries matters not, it's 16 in the UK.
All my children have been brought up to understand sex is against the law under 16 and anyone wanting to engage it with them before that age, would be committing an offence too. I am by no means a prude, as a parent it is my job to protect them until they're of an age to make their own decisions on adult matters. And I don't feel they missed out on anything IF they followed my advise.
I will continue to pass the same advise to my future grandchildren too.
Click to expand...

Yes, of course, but I'm sure you understand the points I made. No one suggested that it's OK to break the law. I was also alluding to age differences.
 
I just caught up with this thread and I have a question.

I don't believe that LH thought she was 19 either. I also think that is just what he told his parents. As many people have stated, he saw her facebook and she made it quite obvious on there that she was likely in highschool.

What if Kayleigh did lie to him but told him she was 16. I remember when I was 15, saying you were 16 made you feel so much older and "cooler". Lots of girls would say they were 16. So in that case (assuming Luke really didn't know what the SB guy did to her after) did Luke really commit any crime? If he was under the impression she was 16, that would mean he thought it was completely legal for him to be with her and by the way he was talking to his parents about her before the horrible event occurred, it seemed that maybe he really did want to try to pursue a real relationship with her. If he thought she was 16, even though legal he still may have felt embarrassed to tell his parents he was interested in a 16 year old so he lied and said she was 19.

For those of you that saw her facebook did she say anywhere on it that she was specifically 15 years old?
 
Sorry for the double post but I am sort of starting to feel bad for LH and I really don't know if I should be or not.

I saw the facebook news pages where people from their town (some who knew them some who didn't) were calling both LH and SB all sorts of vile names. But they really should not both be treated equally and as sick monsters if one of them really is (SB) the crimes he is charged with are the worst of the worst and then LH whose crimes are very bad if he is guilty and knew she was 15. But if he really didn't and thought she was 16 and legal, I don't feel the public should be making the same death threats and all sorts of name calling the same way they are to SB. I don't know if that makes any sense sorry I'm just kind of in shock at all of this and don't really know what to think.
 
LillyP said:
I just caught up with this thread and I have a question.

I don't believe that LH thought she was 19 either. I also think that is just what he told his parents. As many people have stated, he saw her facebook and she made it quite obvious on there that she was likely in highschool.

What if Kayleigh did lie to him but told him she was 16. I remember when I was 15, saying you were 16 made you feel so much older and "cooler". Lots of girls would say they were 16. So in that case (assuming Luke really didn't know what the SB guy did to her after) did Luke really commit any crime? If he was under the impression she was 16, that would mean he thought it was completely legal for him to be with her and by the way he was talking to his parents about her before the horrible event occurred, it seemed that maybe he really did want to try to pursue a real relationship with her. If he thought she was 16, even though legal he still may have felt embarrassed to tell his parents he was interested in a 16 year old so he lied and said she was 19.

For those of you that saw her facebook did she say anywhere on it that she was specifically 15 years old?
Click to expand...

I don't remember seeing her age on the facebook page but to me she looked and sounded a lot younger than 19.

There was somebody on the tribute facebook page saying that they said at the court hearing that police had messages from her telling him she was 19. Don't know how true that is because they don't normally give out that kind of detail at this stage.
 
ok thank you :) To me she looks younger then 19 also but I just thought it might be plausible that he thought she was really 16. Who knows.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Fairfield County Jane Doe (1993)?

Members online

... and 106 more.
Total: 595 (members: 107, guests: 488)

Online statistics

Members online
107
Guests online
488
Total visitors
595
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
608,341
Messages
18,237,958
Members
234,347
Latest member
Allira93
Back
Top