MPs in criminal conspiracy to break the law
The following is a letter to insidetime, from issue March 2011
I would like to suggest that the MPs of this country stop and take a serious look at their attitudes and actions. In their debate in the House, on 10-2-11, I heard several MPs, including the Prime Minister, making statements about ‘law-breakers’ being allowed to vote. The debate in itself was a meeting amongst a group of people in order to discuss and plan how to disregard and break the law – this is known in legal terms as a criminal conspiracy! We are now in a position in this country where MPs themselves are ‘law-breakers’. I really am confused, can someone tell me how the actions and attitudes of these MPs further their supposed aims to reduce offending and reoffending, especially when social exclusion has been identified as a major factor in reoffending? I have one word for them – EXPENSES. In the same week as the debate, 2 of their fellow MPs have been found guilty of law-breaking. And we all know that their actions were not isolated incidents.
The vast majority of the general public have no opinion either way on the issue of prisoners voting, despite the claims of the gutter press. Personally I can assure MPs that as a hard working member of that general public I never gave a thought to prisons or prisoners. A majority of victims and their families, whose stories will sell lots of papers, are taken advantage of by the gutter press in order to turn the tide of public opinion against votes for prisoners, and MPs are encouraging this abuse by jumping on the bandwagon in order to look tough and further their careers. It’s a national disgrace.
I don’t accuse all MPs of corruption, there are some who genuinely want to protect the public, just as not all prisoners are ‘murderers, rapists and paedophiles’, and forcing prisoners out of society is not the way to achieve change for the better. Here’s another word that MPs might want to ponder – INCLUSION.
From Xavier Themis – HMP Wakefield
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.
2 comments:
What a brilliant post.
Shouldn't the name be Gary Alec Hopkins? Some crimes are so bad (raping and killing a 3 year old in the 80s for example) that inclusion should never again be an option.
Post a Comment