The case of the torture and death of Baby P, two years ago, is still shocking.
The 17-month-old child had been abused over a period of months during which his back and ribs had been broken along with other horrific injuries. I still cannot bring myself to read all of the details.
The fact the social services had failed to either notice, or act on his behalf - even though he was on the Child Protection Register - was criminal.
The fact his mother had stood by while her boyfriend had dealt the abuse was also criminal. Both her and her lover have now been convicted of causing or allowing the death of the child. It is worth remembering their actions were not a 'heat of the moment loss of control' but deliberate and systematic abuse of a small child.
A judge ordered their identities should be protected because they were involved in a second trial where the boyfriend was found guilty of the rape of a two-year-old girl, while Baby P's mother was acquitted of child cruelty after it was alleged she witnessed the rape but did nothing to stop it.
Last night the judge removed the anonymity order and today the media has been busy discussing the pros and cons of whether they should have been publicly named.
A Professor of Psychology, even insisted during a radio interview, they should remain anonymous because they had probably themselves been abused as children and therefore were not totally responsible for their actions.
What total Cock!!
If they did not know the basic difference between right and wrong, then they should not have been allowed to have control of a child - far less have been living openly within our society.
Justice needs to be seen to be done and now we all know who was responsible for Baby Peter's death.
It is worth remembering that if his death had been caused by a vicious dog, the law would have ordered the immediate destruction of that dog.
His death was, instead, caused by people he should have been able to trust as his protectors.
Maybe it is time to change the law with regard to people!!