Admin Vista Posted February 20, 2009 Admin Report Posted February 20, 2009 Right or wrong? Discuss............................ Personally I think it was wrong, he assaulted a teenager with a golf club FFS. Commit the crime do the time and he'd already been let off with some of the time. What's more I reckon that if you, I or any other member of Joe Public were involved in the same scenario then the original prison Governors answer would have stood. Oh and WTF is a a government minister as high up as Jack Straw doing wasting his time (time that we pay for mind) on a matter like this?
steve mk2 Posted February 20, 2009 Report Posted February 20, 2009 damn i read ure post after voting and now uve swayed my answer i mean no
stevepeanut Posted February 20, 2009 Report Posted February 20, 2009 well I had figured he was a worky ticket if he needed a curfew lifting. But if he has gone as far as whacking a teen with a golf club, then fook him, fook him in his stupid ass. Seriously though, its one law for us, one law for them
countrybumpkin Posted February 20, 2009 Report Posted February 20, 2009 would they of done it for anyone else? i dont think so, so it shouldnt be done for him
morcheen Posted February 21, 2009 Report Posted February 21, 2009 wrong,but chav scum have their own rules it seems
Admin Vista Posted February 21, 2009 Author Admin Report Posted February 21, 2009 So 4 yes's albeit one that should have been a no. Any of the other three yes's care to state why they think it was the right thing to do?
Messenjah Posted February 21, 2009 Report Posted February 21, 2009 its a no from me however the charges against the guy who attacked me with a golf club have all been dropped because he "is in trouble for more serious things"
Trevmk3 Posted February 21, 2009 Report Posted February 21, 2009 no it shouldnt be relaxed, i dnt care what day it is for them. he did wrong, he new what he was doing, so he should pay the price for it nd relaxing it doesnt do that
Burns Posted February 21, 2009 Report Posted February 21, 2009 do we have a link to a news article so i can make up my mind?
Trevmk3 Posted February 21, 2009 Report Posted February 21, 2009 just go to the sun and search for it
Burns Posted February 21, 2009 Report Posted February 21, 2009 just go to the sun and search for it i'll go look at a more trustworthy news source thank you
Burns Posted February 21, 2009 Report Posted February 21, 2009 right; http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7901232.stm he has a 7pm curfew and they're relaxing it for one night so that he can spend time with his wife who has weeks to live. can you imagine if you were in that situation and the state wouldn't let you spend your wedding night with your new wife. it would be heartless to do that to anybody, i don't care if you're a celebrity or not. so i voted yes Oh and WTF is a a government minister as high up as Jack Straw doing wasting his time (time that we pay for mind) on a matter like this? it's all about trying to increase his popularity isn't it
Trevmk3 Posted February 21, 2009 Report Posted February 21, 2009 he has a 7pm curfew and they're relaxing it for one night so that he can spend time with his wife who has weeks to live. can you imagine if you were in that situation and the state wouldn't let you spend your wedding night with your new wife. it would be heartless to do that to anybody, i don't care if you're a celebrity or not. so i voted yes only trouble is, if it was anyone else they wouldnt be alloud too
Burns Posted February 21, 2009 Report Posted February 21, 2009 he has a 7pm curfew and they're relaxing it for one night so that he can spend time with his wife who has weeks to live. can you imagine if you were in that situation and the state wouldn't let you spend your wedding night with your new wife. it would be heartless to do that to anybody, i don't care if you're a celebrity or not. so i voted yes only trouble is, if it was anyone else they wouldnt be alloud too do you have an example of this to back that theory up? let's face it, if they didn't let him off his curfew for one night they wouldn't be punishing him, they'd be punishing his dying wife more. i understand that it would be less likely to happen to a 'normal' person as politicians wouldn't be bothered about it but if you consider it from jade's point of view that would be a shit way to end a life.
Trevmk3 Posted February 21, 2009 Report Posted February 21, 2009 i know what your saying Rich, and yes i can see your point i still think its wrong, but there is always going to be a difference of opinion with subjects like this
mk2 escy ron Posted February 21, 2009 Report Posted February 21, 2009 am i right in saying that he whacked the dude with a golf club cos they were chucking rocks and stuff at jade/jade place and shouting abuse? cos if i were in that situation i'd have done more than hit the little git with it!
Burns Posted February 21, 2009 Report Posted February 21, 2009 i know what your saying Rich, and yes i can see your point i still think its wrong, but there is always going to be a difference of opinion with subjects like this yeah, it's a prickly one mate, the world would be boring if everyone thought the same thing i just see this as a way for politicians to increase their popularity, nothing else
johnny_h Posted February 21, 2009 Report Posted February 21, 2009 Who the fook is Jade Goody? What the fook has she done to deserve such attention and special privaledges? Yes it's sad she is dying but then again millions of other people around the world are in the same boat. It's bollox that everyone is bending over backwards for this waste of space.
Admin Vista Posted February 21, 2009 Author Admin Report Posted February 21, 2009 right; http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7901232.stm he has a 7pm curfew and they're relaxing it for one night so that he can spend time with his wife who has weeks to live. can you imagine if you were in that situation and the state wouldn't let you spend your wedding night with your new wife. it would be heartless to do that to anybody, i don't care if you're a celebrity or not. so i voted yes I agree with the principle of what you're saying Burns and if we could guarantee that it would be applied universally to everyone then I would have voted yes too. Unfortunately however I suspect that for the nobodies that don't command media attention, the original governors answer of no would not have been overturned because there would have been no publicity or outpouring of public sympathy that demanded it. All I'd like to see is a level playing field for all. Either everyone gets a yes or everyone gets a no, no exceptions.
PlopPlop Posted February 21, 2009 Report Posted February 21, 2009 I don't really know too much about this issue because I don't read the newspaper (I'm more interested in my own friends and family issue's opossed to big brother celebs). But I do know that I've seen friends curfews lifted for simular and other compassionate reasons, and if it is true that the lad was giving abuse and throwing things at my loved ones I'd be in prison a lot longer than Jades fella cos I'd do worse. I don't like Big Brother and I couldn't care less for Jade but I can imagine being in their shoes and thats what you need to do before you vote, because if you changed Jades name for one of your loved ones I don't think you'd have the same oppnion. Sorry everyone if I commented a bit strong here but I recently found out my sister has bone cancer and has not got long left and if somebody abused her I would do very bad things to them regardless.
mk2griff Posted February 21, 2009 Report Posted February 21, 2009 IS it too much to ask that this man gets to spend one night with his dying wife to be.im not condoning what he did or saying that sentances should be waved but his wife to be is dying from cancer shorly we have enough compassion left in this country to wave these stupid sentances on conpassionate grounds.if you read the shit papers then you will see that if you get 2yrs prison you will be out in one & so on.because the prisons are full to bursting point.personly i think if you get two yrs then you should serve 2yrs.or life do life. but when it comes to family lets show a bit of dignity does,nt matter if she,s a so called celebrity or not.i have lost two members of my family from the same disease and at that time nothing or no one whould of stopped me from being there.lets just hope people have enough decency to leave them alone at this very sad time for them and her family.
johnny_h Posted February 21, 2009 Report Posted February 21, 2009 The point is the only reason he is being allowed out longer IS because she is a celebrity. Like Vista says, it's one rule for nobodies and another rule for media whores.
Admin Vista Posted February 21, 2009 Author Admin Report Posted February 21, 2009 The point is the only reason he is being allowed out longer IS because she is a celebrity. Like Vista says, it's one rule for nobodies and another rule for media whores. Plopplops post would suggest that others have been allowed to on compassionate grounds though. But I do know that I've seen friends curfews lifted for simular and other compassionate reasons In which case why did this particular prison governor say no? Are there no guidelines? Is every case assessed on its merits?
PlopPlop Posted February 21, 2009 Report Posted February 21, 2009 The point is the only reason he is being allowed out longer IS because she is a celebrity. Like Vista says, it's one rule for nobodies and another rule for media whores. It's not just celebs. pal, and I know this first hand (and for a worst crime as well, and his missus was not dieing) so lets stop this one rule for one rubbish.
looney_mom Posted February 22, 2009 Report Posted February 22, 2009 The point is the only reason he is being allowed out longer IS because she is a celebrity. Like Vista says, it's one rule for nobodies and another rule for media whores. Plopplops post would suggest that others have been allowed to on compassionate grounds though. But I do know that I've seen friends curfews lifted for simular and other compassionate reasons In which case why did this particular prison governor say no? Are there no guidelines? Is every case assessed on its merits? I voted yes, because firstly from what I can see, his actions were not without provacation and secondly, we have personal experience here, in this family that, without going into detail that it is not necessarily one rule for them and another for us. Certainly, in our case, it was assessed on an individual basis, not under a blanket rule. If more people in this country were to showw a little more compassion and understanding this country would not be going through half the shit it does IMHO
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now