I want my family back but they hate me

Nicki

Kayalana99 wrote: »

Are you really saying that because I love my children enough to stand by their side no matter what that they are more likey to break the law as I WONT abandon them? What a load of tosh......

If one of my children got done for something that was threatening to my other children then I would be forced to ask them to leave home - that doesn't mean I don't love them or wouldn't help them find a place and get set up - jobs whatever.

No, what I am saying is that if your child starts off committing a serious drug offence, comes out of prison with the attitude that what they did was no big deal and life has treated them unfairly, and your response to that is to agree with them, then they are more likely to reoffend, than if your response is to say, "actually, it WAS a big deal, what you personally did was unacceptable, and until you are able to see that, then I am afraid I will not let you move back into my home with your teenage sibling(s) who may be unduly influenced by you".

Scuffer doesn't need accommodation as he is already living with an aunt and his family know this. But again, no I wouldn't be "setting up" the convicted drug dealer financially until I was sure as a parent that I wasn't financing more of the same.

Tiddlywinks

I know the difference between empathy and sympathy - no confusion here, so no need for yet another lecture - most posters are just offering tea and sympathy. The OP needs the facts of life as an 'ex con' and as a wayward son.

He asked for help in reuniting with his family... in order to do that he needs to understand their issues and how his actions have impacted on them. He clearly doesn't, otherwise why the snippy comment about his parents thinking they are important.

Kayalana99

Nicki wrote: »

No, what I am saying is that if your child starts off committing a serious drug offence, comes out of prison with the attitude that what they did was no big deal and life has treated them unfairly, and your response to that is to agree with them, then they are more likely to reoffend, than if your response is to say, "actually, it WAS a big deal, what you personally did was unacceptable, and until you are able to see that, then I am afraid I will not let you move back into my home with your teenage sibling(s) who may be unduly influenced by you".

Scuffer doesn't need accommodation as he is already living with an aunt and his family know this. But again, no I wouldn't be "setting up" the convicted drug dealer financially until I was sure as a parent that I wasn't financing more of the same.

I know he doesn't need accommodation - it was you that brought up the point about a home to stay, you don't have to say 'it's ok dear I understand' but as an above poster has already said who has been in that situation she gave her son a hard time but that still didn't stop her showing that she wasn't going to give up on him.

He's been in jail for 22 months I think he knows how much of a deal it was.

Tiddlywinks

Kayalana99 wrote: »

He's been in jail for 22 months I think he knows how much of a deal it was.

The trouble is that he 'gets' what a big deal it was for HIM... he doesn't seem to understand how his actions have screwed up his family's lives as well.

He only appears sorry for having been caught and having gone to prison but not sorry for what he has done to his family.

Nicki

Kayalana99 wrote: »

He's been in jail for 22 months I think he knows how much of a deal it was.

That's exactly the point. He thinks he got an unfairly long sentence, and has said so on several occasions. His description of what he did and what he was carrying are designed to make people think better of him because he can't get round the fact that he has a conviction, but the sentence he got shows there was more to it than what he is saying on here. So, putting those two things together, no I don't think he does realise that for most people what he did is a very big deal and unfortunately the responses he has got validating that viewpoint won't help him there.

And until he does realise it, and can be open about exactly what he did and how he has learned from it, he's going to have problems with his family and problems finding work, because most people can put two and two together and realise that you don't serve 22 months of a 43 month sentence for minor involvement with drugs of the kind he describes, so he is going to be met with suspicion rather than understanding if he continues in this way.

Kayalana99

Nicki wrote: »

realise that you don't serve 22 months of a 43 month sentence for minor involvement with drugs of the kind he describes, so he is going to be met with suspicion rather than understanding if he continues in this way.

Were just going round in circles....but he pleaded guilty to intent to supply with class A drugs because that's what his solicitor told him to do...

Why would he have any reason to lie to us? If he had come on saying I was a drug dealer but I want to re build my life he could of spared all these details and just asked how to get his family back and his employment...but he has repeated the same story over and over in detail and has nothing to gain from it.

Tiddlywinks

Kayalana99 wrote: »

Were just going round in circles....but he pleaded guilty to intent to supply with class A drugs because that's what his solicitor told him to do...

Why would he have any reason to lie to us? If he had come on saying I was a drug dealer but I want to re build my life he could of spared all these details and just asked how to get his family back and his employment...but he has repeated the same story over and over in detail and has nothing to gain from it.

He pleaded guilty because he WAS guilty.

If he had come on here and said as you've quoted 'I was a drug dealer but I want to rebuild my life' do you really think he'd have got the same responses? I don't - and that is why he feels the need to play the offence down by talking about being fooled into thinking it was a 'bag of green' for a pothead.... Really? Getting paid £100 for that? Come on... That's a lot of money for a 'pothead' to pay for a user quantity of 'green' to be carried for him... that would not have been a credible defence.

Kayalana99

My heads hurting, I believe him and stick with everything I have said.

Nicki

Kayalana99 wrote: »

Were just going round in circles....but he pleaded guilty to intent to supply with class A drugs because that's what his solicitor told him to do...

Why would he have any reason to lie to us? If he had come on saying I was a drug dealer but I want to re build my life he could of spared all these details and just asked how to get his family back and his employment...but he has repeated the same story over and over in detail and has nothing to gain from it.

No: he pleaded guilty to possession with intent to supply Class A drugs because that was what he did. The drugs found on his possession were Class A.

The info has dripped out over the course of the thread. If you read the first post, you would think that all he did was naively take some pot into a festival for a friend, and consequently had the book thrown at him. Its only when pushed that it came out what exactly the drugs were, and then accidentally that his role must have been more than he alleges.

Just to remind you again, in case you did not read the link, if all that happened was that his girlfriend's brother asked him to carry a bag of pot for personal use into the festival, and he was caught with a larger bag containing the more serious drugs (which is what he has said) the court could not have sentenced him to 43 months, and the maximim sentence for doing that is not, as he says 7 years.

If he got a sentence of the length he says for the drugs he says then there was evidence that his role in all this was both bigger and more knowing than he claims. There must be evidence that he was a lead player in the supply of those drugs or played a very significant role in it.

If his role was the smaller role he claims, to have been given a sentence of the length he describes, the drugs were a lot more serious and in bigger quantities than he claims.

It is of course up to you to believe what you want to believe, but I didn't sit up and create an external link to a faked up CPS website to cast doubt on OP's story

Nicki

Tiddlywinks wrote: »

Really? Getting paid £100 for that? Come on... That's a lot of money for a 'pothead' to pay for a user quantity of 'green' to be carried for him... that would not have been a credible defence.

That made me go and google how much a user quantity of pot would cost on the street. Hope none of the family are checking my user history

However, it is an excellent point. Why would you pay someone 4/5 times the value of the drug to carry it through security for you? That's an insane amount of money, and would surely ring warning bells to anyone that there must have been more in the bag than claimed.