Sugar Cane, Venables and Dirty Laundry

Good morning readers,

This post will be a bit of a collection of weekend antics and news stories I have come across through my husband to be, Matthew Wright (I SO am not attracted to him in any way...it's because I often refer to his talking points. I just wanted to point this out).

So on Friday night, in a bid to catch up with the girls (and lift my dampened spirits), I headed over to Sugar Cane bar in Clapham Junction for a few cocktails and chat. Tasty drinks, yummy food and fun tropical decor made this a really pleasant night out. I'd love to go again.

On Wrighty this morning, there were several interesting talking points as per usual. The most interesting for me I suppose was that of the child killer Venables, and whether it was naive of officials not to anticipate reoffending. You can read a report on the alleged child pornography accusations made against Venables in the Times Online here.

I'm not sure I can comment on the matter as I don't think that I have been able to formulate an opinion that isn't contradictory as yet. I do think that his childhood offence meant that he had a propensity to commit further offences of a similar type BUT I don't think that the media should be speculating about the offence he may or may not have committed. An interesting point was made in the article that discussions of Venables' alleged crime could jeopardise future legal proceedings and that if his past was revealed, it would be impossible for him to have a fair trial. Some would argue that the horrific crime he committed in the past excludes him from 'fairness' though on the flip side, this could affect public faith in the criminal justice system if proceedings are prejudiced in this way (by revealing his old identity and past convictions).

Sorry if that made no sense, I just have so many thoughts whizzing through my head on this one...

So onto a more light hearted find from the Sunday Times, Camilla Long, a Guest Contributor to the 'newspaper' wrote about why couples fight or argue in public. Especially when on public transport, this can be rather unsettling and slightly irritating for other commuters. It's almost like those people who insist on telling their life stories LOUDLY on their mobile telephones for the entire bus, train or tube (overground) to hear. Is this for attention? Because undoubtedly, people (especially myself) will often pretend not to listen but cave in eventually because their iPod battery chose that moment to die or that they're bored of staring listlessly out of the window, at the floor, or if on a tube, at the crotch of the person standing over you or into the eyes of the perverse looking man (or woman) undressing you with their eyes.

'Coupley' fights can be amusing sometimes. Thankfully I haven't seen many but the most extreme and shocking one I did see was a man pushing his girlfriend up against the window of H&M Oxford Street shouting in her face about money or something equally as trivial (as trivial as money could be in the 'current climate'. Sorry for the flippant remark!), much to the obliviance (is this a word?) of the self-absorbed shoppers there!

You can read and giggle at Camilla's article here.

That's your lot for today. Till next entry, enjoy the sun and frost.

CBC

xx

Edit: I have been reading the law blogs and come across a post about Venables with lots of commentary which anyone interested might find informative so read the Magistrate's Blog!