Ian Huntley is a victim of a crime and deserves compo
The BBC is reporting Soham killer Huntley 'should not sue' over jail attack
Soham murderer Ian Huntley should drop a compensation claim against the Prison Service after an inmate slashed his throat, victims campaigners have said.
The BBC wheel out a stupid cow! "Campaigner Ann Oakes-Odger, whose son Westley was killed in a knife attack in 2005, described Huntley's decision to sue as an "absolute moral obscenity"". What is absolutely morally obscene is that this woman can express her rabid views against a crime victim, in this case, Mr Huntley. Sad bitch!
The the Good old Beeb roll out the complete Tosser "Norman Brennan, founder of the Victims of Crime Trust, said that if Huntley won his claim, his victims' families should sue him". The idiot wants to set victim against victim! It is disgracwful that some clown with the Victims of Crimes Trust has no sympathy for a clear Victim of a Crime! He is like Hitler saying which Jews go into the gas chamber and which go into a Labour Camp! Cunts like this make me sick!
A mixture of law, politics, autobiography and humour. Once described as "The Devilish Advocate" (Guardian), I do have the ability to provoke a response. Sometimes it comes from someone who uses a thought process, and sometimes from jerks usually associated with the knee.
11 comments:
How could the BBC let you onto their PM programme? You are a silly little man who has lost all moral direction. Huntley chose to be locked up with loons - he can't complain about how rough it is inside. If he wanted the quite life he should have stopped himself from killing two children.
As i said on the earlier post, i think he deserves the legal victory over the prison service, but i would split the compo 50/50 between a victim's charity and a prisons charity.
Sentimentalising misapprehension displayed by the two commenters above. By sentencing Huntley to a sentence of imprisonment the state incurs a duty of care, whatever Huntley did to get sentenced, for which he is anyway paying the price. This isn't just about Huntley, it's about the prison service being held accountable for the mission statement it devised for itself. How else is it to be held accountable, not just for Huntley's treatment, but for the treatment of anyone who ends up in jail? The law, in all its implacable objectivity, must heed nothing but the facts.
I couldn't agree more that the prison service should be severely punished for the failiure of it's duty of care towards him (or any inmate for that matter). I don't believe, however , that he should personally benefit financially. I would much rather see any money awarded go to charity sources which will help the victims of the crimes perpetrated, and prison inmates with support and encouragement to lead a fulfilling life both sides of the bars.
DI: "help the victims of the crimes perpetrated" like Ian Huntley in this case...
Very funny. Obviously this is an effort to get some publicity for your rather pathetic blog.
Of course, you do have quite a lot in common with Ian Huntley being a fellow murderer. Still, most people have some common sense which you clearly lack.
Mister Cowling, no one is sentimentalising anything and the law is the law. Just sometimes though, carping on about the rights of murderers becomes ridiculous.
You know of course that we live in a changing world in a country which is almost bankrupt. I don't think the day is too far away when 'compo' will become a thing of the past. Annoy the masses at your peril The public will not tolerate a pay-out for Ian Huntley and are getting pretty damn tired of keeping you and your kind on benefits.
So you can shout all you like about the law. You can demand compo, you can take you rabid dog out to the park and allow it to attack people. You can post yopur happy snaps and your demented videos. You can drool and stutter. Enjoy it while you still can.
Don't get me wrong, I don't disagree that he deserves justice, or that he is a victim of a crime. In fact I stand as strongly for that as you do. It just sticks in my throat a bit that something like this can become a financial issue.
Plus, what is he going to do with the money? Let's face it, there's no real prospect of him being freed anytime soon to spend it! That's the truth of the matter.
I'd much rather that if this has to be a monetary issue, that the money is put to good use rather than sitting in a bank account until the day he shuffles off his mortal coil, only to go back to the government.
Crikey, this is getting heated. Why? What does this sad little ex-con matter? What is obvious is that tax-payers money is being poured down the drain in 'legal aid'. Public outrage is inevitable, grubby lawyers will make money, and this daft geeser will continue to churn out his crap. So?
DI: If he wins compo he will be able to spend the money inside at the prison shop.
You know as well as I do that even if he's enhanced, which he won't be, because he can't work or do OBPs in solitary, there's no way he'll be able to spend £100k on canteen or even Argos within his lifetime because of a) the private cash limit and b) the spending limit per year on both!
I have no problem in awarding him some
money to sustain himself, but the levels we're talking about in this case are so immense that I would much rather it benefited the whole prison population through a donation to an organisation such as the volunteers who staff the visits hall canteens, or even the listeners, and at the sane time there is scope for some money to go to a victim support charity.
DI: I don't know where the figure of £100,000 has come from. In my view, a more likely amount is £10,000.
Post a Comment