GUILTY UK - Vanessa George & 4 others for child sex abuse ring, Plymouth, 2009

New Posts

P

Parmenides

New Member
Joined
Mar 26, 2006
Messages
181
Reaction score
16
"Vanessa George, a mother of two, will appear in court today charged with seven offences, including two of sexual assault by penetration and two of sexual assault by touching. She was also charged with making, possessing and distributing indecent images of children."

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/crime/article6471327.ece

Something strange here. Let's face it, women do not have any interest in *advertiser censored*, let alone child *advertiser censored*. And women do not commit sex abuse either. Looks like this lady is taking the rap for some male predator. LE needs to look at the men in her life.
 
Parmenides said:
"Vanessa George, a mother of two, will appear in court today charged with seven offences, including two of sexual assault by penetration and two of sexual assault by touching. She was also charged with making, possessing and distributing indecent images of children."

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/crime/article6471327.ece

Something strange here. Let's face it, women do not have any interest in *advertiser censored*, let alone child *advertiser censored*. And women do not commit sex abuse either. Looks like this lady is taking the rap for some male predator. LE needs to look at the men in her life.
Click to expand...

Bolding is mine. I have to disagree with you on both of the bolded points. As we have seen in the Sandra Cantu case, women can be sexual abusers.

As far as women being interested in *advertiser censored*, I imagine more are than would care to admit it. Purely my opinion.
 
Parmenides said:
"Something strange here. Let's face it, women do not have any interest in *advertiser censored*, let alone child *advertiser censored*. And women do not commit sex abuse either. Looks like this lady is taking the rap for some male predator. LE needs to look at the men in her life.
Click to expand...

There was a time I would have agreed with you, but not so much anymore. Women seem to be delving more and more into crimes we used to think only men would commit.
 
amandab said:
Bolding is mine. I have to disagree with you on both of the bolded points. As we have seen in the Sandra Cantu case, women can be sexual abusers.

As far as women being interested in *advertiser censored*, I imagine more are than would care to admit it. Purely my opinion.
Click to expand...

I completely agree with you.
 
amandab said:
Bolding is mine. I have to disagree with you on both of the bolded points. As we have seen in the Sandra Cantu case, women can be sexual abusers.

As far as women being interested in *advertiser censored*, I imagine more are than would care to admit it. Purely my opinion.
Click to expand...

Women are absolutely capable of being abusers and *advertiser censored* is a multi billion dollar industry that is supported by men and women. There are women posting in the *advertiser censored* forums, commenting on videos, there are companies that are target women and couples as their customers.
 
amandab said:
As far as women being interested in *advertiser censored*, I imagine more are than would care to admit it. Purely my opinion.
Click to expand...

I know it's just your opinion, and I respect that. And I know it's a modern theory that women are secretly interested in *advertiser censored*. But let's take a reality check. If women were interested in *advertiser censored*, there would be *advertiser censored* magazines aimed at women - simple economics, demand and supply. But while there are tons of magazines and mega-gigabytes of male-oriented *advertiser censored*, there is nothing, nada, zilch for women. Evidently, women are not interested in *advertiser censored*. QED. Or am I missing something?

And getting back to the important issue. I cannot believe this woman - a MOTHER - would do the things she is being accused of. Either some horrible mistake has been made, or there is a man behind it.
 
Parmenides said:
"Vanessa George, a mother of two, will appear in court today charged with seven offences, including two of sexual assault by penetration and two of sexual assault by touching. She was also charged with making, possessing and distributing indecent images of children."

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/crime/article6471327.ece

Something strange here. Let's face it, women do not have any interest in *advertiser censored*, let alone child *advertiser censored*. And women do not commit sex abuse either. Looks like this lady is taking the rap for some male predator. LE needs to look at the men in her life.
Click to expand...
I thought at first you were being sarcastic but apparently not...........Do a search here at WS alone......I can think of at least 4 fairly recent stories,reported & discussed on here NOT COUNTING the Cantu case, that blow your opinion out of the water!
 
Parmenides said:
And getting back to the important issue. I cannot believe this woman - a MOTHER - would do the things she is being accused of. Either some horrible mistake has been made, or there is a man behind it.
Click to expand...

Very good point - we were digressing from the story at hand. I agree - this is an AWFUL situation. In reading the article, police think that some of the victims may never be able to be identified from the pictures that were taken of them.

How awful for the parents of children at that nursery - OMG.
 
Parmenides said:
I know it's just your opinion, and I respect that. And I know it's a modern theory that women are secretly interested in *advertiser censored*. But let's take a reality check. If women were interested in *advertiser censored*, there would be *advertiser censored* magazines aimed at women - simple economics, demand and supply. But while there are tons of magazines and mega-gigabytes of male-oriented *advertiser censored*, there is nothing, nada, zilch for women. Evidently, women are not interested in *advertiser censored*. QED. Or am I missing something?
And getting back to the important issue. I cannot believe this woman - a MOTHER - would do the things she is being accused of. Either some horrible mistake has been made, or there is a man behind it.
Click to expand...

There are companies that make *advertiser censored* for women. Google *advertiser censored* for women and you will find estimates of 1 in 4 to 1 in 3 viewers being female. I would guess it is closer to 1 in 8 since I don't think the pool they questioned was large enough, the idea that women are not consumers of *advertiser censored* is completely outdated. I am guessing you missed the list of the 2009 Feminist *advertiser censored* Awards?

I respect that it is not on your radar screen or in your environment but MOTHERS neglect, beat, abuse, endanger, and murder their children everyday. I highly doubt an operational uterus renders them incapable of exploiting them sexually. The belief that it does makes it easier for them to hide, more challenging for their victims to speak out against, and it more likely that a male accomplice/cohort will take the blame completely.
 
Ok looks like I'm in a minority here, and no thanks I'm not going to google *advertiser censored* for women, I'll take your word for it. Also you are right, I missed the feminist *advertiser censored* awards. I thought feminists were trying to stamp out *advertiser censored*??? What a crazy world we live in.

But getting back to the case in hand, surely some folks out there must agree with me that the men in her life ought to be looked at? I understand material was found on the computer at her home. Well, wouldn't her husband have had access to that? How can they possibly know it was her and not him?
 
Parmenides said:
I know it's just your opinion, and I respect that. And I know it's a modern theory that women are secretly interested in *advertiser censored*. But let's take a reality check. If women were interested in *advertiser censored*, there would be *advertiser censored* magazines aimed at women - simple economics, demand and supply. But while there are tons of magazines and mega-gigabytes of male-oriented *advertiser censored*, there is nothing, nada, zilch for women. Evidently, women are not interested in *advertiser censored*. QED. Or am I missing something?

And getting back to the important issue. I cannot believe this woman - a MOTHER - would do the things she is being accused of. Either some horrible mistake has been made, or there is a man behind it.
Click to expand...

I know plenty of women that love *advertiser censored* (not the illegal kind) The thing is most women like the same type of *advertiser censored* that men like...ones that feature beautiful women. Even straight women watch lesbian *advertiser censored*. It doesn't have to be geared towards women for women to be buying and enjoying it.

That being said, I hope this woman rots under the jail. There is nothing more sickening than a child molester. Being a "mother" does not mean that she is not capable of child abuse, it just means that she doesn't have to look as far for children to abuse.
 
Parmenides said:
Ok looks like I'm in a minority here, and no thanks I'm not going to google *advertiser censored* for women, I'll take your word for it. Also you are right, I missed the feminist *advertiser censored* awards. I thought feminists were trying to stamp out *advertiser censored*??? What a crazy world we live in.

But getting back to the case in hand, surely some folks out there must agree with me that the men in her life ought to be looked at? I understand material was found on the computer at her home. Well, wouldn't her husband have had access to that? How can they possibly know it was her and not him?
Click to expand...

Even if her her husband/partner is responsible for the stuff on her computer, WHY was she charged with sexual assault by penetration and sexual assault by touching?
 
DANG!

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/crime/article6477451.ece

A man spat at the 39-year-old mother of two, who was protected by a glass screen surrounding the dock. Another cried out as if in pain and was helped from the court
Click to expand...

Four charges included an allegation of sexual penetration on two infant girls and an indecent assault on an infant boy. In addition, she faces three separate charges of making, possessing and distributing indecent pictures of children.
Click to expand...
 
Also from the link above:

The charge list:

1. Between January 1, 2007 and June 8, 2009 at Plymouth in the county of Devon, she [assaulted] a girl aged under 13, namely about one year old, as shown in recovered image 140, exhibit number SCL1.

2. Between the same dates at Plymouth she intentionally touched a girl under 13, namely an infant girl, as shown in the exhibit, and the touching was sexual.

3. Between January 1, 2007 and June 6, 2009 at Plymouth, intentionally touched a boy under 13, namely an infant boy, and the touching was sexual.

4. Between the same dates at Plymouth took an indecent photograph of a child.

5. Between January 1, 2007 and June 8, 2009 at Plymouth, intentionally [assaulted] a girl under 13, an infant girl.

6. On June 6, 2009, possessed indecent photographs of children

7. Between January 1, 2007 and June 8, 2009, at Plymouth, distributed indecent photographs of a child.
Click to expand...
 
Lovejac said:
Also from the link above:
Click to expand...
Seems like they have VERY solid evidence she did what she is accused of.
I bet LE has been VERY careful with this investigation so Im quite sure they are 100% shes not "taking the fall"for a husband or boyfriend.Even if it was a "shared interest"with a partner this woman knew what she was doing & did it of her own free will!!!!!!!!!
 
Parmenides said:
"Vanessa George, a mother of two, will appear in court today charged with seven offences, including two of sexual assault by penetration and two of sexual assault by touching. She was also charged with making, possessing and distributing indecent images of children."

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/crime/article6471327.ece

Something strange here. Let's face it, women do not have any interest in *advertiser censored*, let alone child *advertiser censored*. And women do not commit sex abuse either. Looks like this lady is taking the rap for some male predator. LE needs to look at the men in her life.
Click to expand...


I totally disagree! Women can and do sexually abuse children and many women do enjoy *advertiser censored*.
 
Parmenides said:
"Vanessa George, a mother of two, will appear in court today charged with seven offences, including two of sexual assault by penetration and two of sexual assault by touching. She was also charged with making, possessing and distributing indecent images of children."

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/crime/article6471327.ece

Something strange here. Let's face it, women do not have any interest in *advertiser censored*, let alone child *advertiser censored*. And women do not commit sex abuse either. Looks like this lady is taking the rap for some male predator. LE needs to look at the men in her life.
Click to expand...

Respectfully, I totally disagree with you. Women are pedophiles and they certainly watch *advertiser censored*. CNN just had a segment on a few months back talking about more and more women are watching *advertiser censored* than ever before.

Evil has no specific gender.

Just in the recent past Melissa Huckaby raped Sandra Cantu with a foreign object before she murdered her.

And in another case a week or so ago a 40 woman was arrested for sexual abuse of two little girls. She had sexually abused them for over a year.

No what they need to do imo, is go by the evidence.......get the conviction and send her away for the rest of her pathetic life. She is a predator and a danger to other children.

imo
 
Parmenides said:
Ok looks like I'm in a minority here, and no thanks I'm not going to google *advertiser censored* for women, I'll take your word for it. Also you are right, I missed the feminist *advertiser censored* awards. I thought feminists were trying to stamp out *advertiser censored*??? What a crazy world we live in.

But getting back to the case in hand, surely some folks out there must agree with me that the men in her life ought to be looked at? I understand material was found on the computer at her home. Well, wouldn't her husband have had access to that? How can they possibly know it was her and not him?
Click to expand...

Didn't this happen at the day care where she was employed? I think that is how they know it was her and not him. She was trusted with children's well being. :banghead:

You never know about people. Can't trust a female day care worker, a female Sunday school teacher, a mommy, etc...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 182 more.
Total: 4,263 (members: 183, guests: 4,080)

Online statistics

Members online
183
Guests online
4,080
Total visitors
4,263
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
591,688
Messages
17,957,531
Members
228,586
Latest member
chingona361
Back
Top