Travel6 mins ago
The Philpotts charged...
50 Answers
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by rowanwitch. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.This is purely MY opinion.
The father is a publicity hungry type - he has been on TV (including the Jeremy Kyle show) several times before this incident. It is known that they were wanting to be given a larger house. I think they started the fire with the intention of destroying it so they could be re-homed AND rescue their children so that they would appear heroes.
It seems their planwent sadly wrong
The father is a publicity hungry type - he has been on TV (including the Jeremy Kyle show) several times before this incident. It is known that they were wanting to be given a larger house. I think they started the fire with the intention of destroying it so they could be re-homed AND rescue their children so that they would appear heroes.
It seems their planwent sadly wrong
Agree with the above, a daft idea that went badly and tragically wrong - for whatever reason.
Someone wrote here a few days ago that this wasn't the first time that such a ploy is used by folk to try and upgrade their council property, most trying being on the lower end of the intelligence measures.......
If they are guilty, then they have to live with what they managed to achieve and long may they rot at HM's pleasure.
Someone wrote here a few days ago that this wasn't the first time that such a ploy is used by folk to try and upgrade their council property, most trying being on the lower end of the intelligence measures.......
If they are guilty, then they have to live with what they managed to achieve and long may they rot at HM's pleasure.
There are also petrol fumes that float around petrol but cannt easily be seen.
These fumes can ignite very easily and spread a fire.
Until the case comes to court we are all guessing as it may be one of them or another, or they may have got a "friend" to start the fire.
Of course as this is an ongoing court case we have to be careful what we say, in fact I would not surprised if this topic was pulled.
These fumes can ignite very easily and spread a fire.
Until the case comes to court we are all guessing as it may be one of them or another, or they may have got a "friend" to start the fire.
Of course as this is an ongoing court case we have to be careful what we say, in fact I would not surprised if this topic was pulled.
I think if they had started the fire when ALL of their children were out of the house then they would definately have looked guilty. I agree with some of the comments above.
IF they did start it deliberately they would have thought that having the kids in there would deflect blame away from them. And yes - being the hero wouldn't harm his celebrity status.
But the above is relevant if they are actually innocent.
Get the feeling they are going to be the new McCanns of the news world fir the next few weeks.
IF they did start it deliberately they would have thought that having the kids in there would deflect blame away from them. And yes - being the hero wouldn't harm his celebrity status.
But the above is relevant if they are actually innocent.
Get the feeling they are going to be the new McCanns of the news world fir the next few weeks.
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.