Bed & Breakfast curtesy of HM

May 30th, 2007 § 0 comments § permalink

“It’s wrong to refer to the deductions as ‘bed and breakfast’ as they are made in respect of the costs an individual would have had to pay out of their net income on things such as a mortgage or rent.”

Said a Ministry Of Justice statement.

This refers to Warren Blackwell, who was imprisoned for three and a half years for a crime he didn’t commit and is about the compensation he is going to receive, thought to be about £100k, which will be deducted almost £7000 for expenses he would’ve saved on, stuff like rent and food, whilst in prison.

Did you notice the Doublespeak that goes with the Orwellian name of Ministry of Justice:

  • “…wrong to refer to the deductions as ‘Bed & Breakfast’
  • “…would have to pay…such things as a mortgage or rent”

    The Ministry of Justice has done an assessment and come to this figure, and will make the deduction because the compensation is “to put an individual back into the financial position they would have been in but for the miscarriage of justice, but not to a better position.”

    Now, I do not know Warren, so I don’t know whether he was employed or not or what his finances were when he went into prison, but I do know that he is married and has a 7 year old son. His wife has still had to pay a mortgage/rent, that doesn’t reduce when one less person is living there. How could the MoJ predict what Warrens employment status could’ve been during those 3.5 years of imprisonment? Three and a half years is a long time, most people do not know if they will still be with the same company in three and a half years time, or unemployed, etc so how the bloody hell is the Govt. supposed to know?

    Mr Blackwell couldn’t have been in prison, and yet he is having to reimburse the Govt. for his stay. The people who put themselves in prison by committing crimes do not have to pay a thing. If that is the way the Govt. wants to go, why not introduce two new schemes, Pay as You Go for occasional sinners, who will have a short stay every few years and Pay Monthly for the biggies that do years.

    There is also no mention of anything to compensate Warren for missing out on three and a half years of his son growing up, who was 3 when Warren went into prison, and is now 7. Those years can never be replaced or returned and children change so quickly at that age that money cannot ever help to undo the loss, but it would be a gesture.

    On a related note, Mr Blackwells accuser remains anonymous and has a history of falsely accusing men:

  • Has made at least five other fake allegations of sexual and physical assault to police in three separate forces.
  • Was married twice and made false allegations against both husbands – one of whom was a policeman.
  • Once accused her own father of sexual assault, but police concluded she had made it up.
  • Accused a boy of rape when she was a teenager, only for a doctor to discover she was still a virgin.
  • The CCRC concluded that in the case of Mr Blackwell, she had “lied about the assault and was not attacked at all, her injuries being self-inflicted”.

    Whilst this lady obviously has some mental problems, and Warrens has had a (relatively) good outcome, it is often not the case and the man has his life ruined and the woman remains anonymous.

    Related Post: Obsolete – Injustice Multiplied Part Two


  • Help out a Good Person

    May 30th, 2007 § 0 comments § permalink

    Rachel North London could do with some help with some unwanted attention that she has dealt with tremendously, doing everything by the book, but needs some help to stop her stalker.

    Follow the link, read Rachel’s words, see what you can do please.

    I hope as many people would help me if I needed it.



    Innocent man to pay for jail time

    May 30th, 2007 § 0 comments § permalink

    Warren Blackwell has spent 3 and a half years in prison. He spent that time in prison after wrongly being found guilty of rape.
    It’s expected that he will be paid about £100k in compensation.
    Unfortunate, but the compensation goes towards putting things right, not that 3 and a half years can be returned.

    Mr Warren was told he would receive compensation minus £6,800, which has been assessed as the amount of money he had saved from normal expenses while in jail.

    Assessed? Save from normal expenses? WTF??

    This mans son was 3 when he went to prison because some lying bint accused him

    Labels: Prison

    The Final Countdown

    May 10th, 2007 § 0 comments § permalink

    7 weeks to go.


    Iain Dale – Defender Of Free Speech

    May 3rd, 2007 § 0 comments § permalink

    Fancy a chuckle?

    Iain Dale has a piece on CiF about the freedom of speech and debate that blogging has brought to everyone.
    Except he forgot to mention his sockpuppetry, anonymous bullies, distraction and diversion techniques and the latest one, his redirection script.

    Laugh? I nearly shat!


    Labels: ,

    The Winograd Report

    May 2nd, 2007 § 0 comments § permalink

    Well, finger on the pulse once again, the Winograd Report, the interim report into Israels performance in the war with Hezbollah/Lebanon last summer is out, and it isn’t very good for Olmert or his Chief of Staff and Defence Minister.

    Basically, it says that they had no clue as to what they were doing, had no experience of this sort of thing and didn’t take any advice from anyone that would know how to go about fucking up a country and have you own population think you did a good job.

    • The Prime Minister made up his mind hastily, despite the fact that no detailed military plan was submitted to him and without asking for one. Also, his decision was made without close study of the complex features of the Lebanon front or of the military, political and diplomatic options available to Israel. He made his decision without systematic consultation with others, especially outside the IDF, despite not having experience in external-political and military affairs. In addition, he did not adequately consider political and professional reservations presented to him before the fateful decisions of July 12th.
    • The Prime Minister is responsible for the fact that the goals of the campaign were not set out clearly and carefully, and that there was no serious discussion of the relationship between these goals and the authorized modes of military action. He made a personal contribution to the fact that the declared goals were over-ambitious and not feasible.
    • The Prime Minister did not adapt his plans once it became clear that the assumptions and expectations of Israel’s actions were not realistic and were not materializing
    • The Minister of Defense did not have knowledge or experience in military, political or governmental matters. He also did not have good knowledge of the basic principles of using military force to achieve political goals.
    • Despite these serious gaps, he made his decisions during this period without systemic consultations with experienced political and professional experts, including outside the security establishment. In addition, he did not give adequate weight to reservations expressed in the meetings he attended.
    • The Minister of Defense did not act within a strategic conception of the systems he oversaw. He did not ask for the IDF’s operational plans and did not examine them; he did not check the preparedness and fitness of IDF; and did not examine the fit between the goals set and the modes of action presented and authorized for achieving them. His influence on the decisions made was mainly pointillist and operational. He did not put on the table – and did not demand presentation – of serious strategic options for discussion with the Prime Minister and the IDF.
    • The Minister of Defense did not develop an independent assessment of the implications of the complexity of the front for Israel’s proper response, the goals of the campaign, and the relations between military and diplomatic moves within it. His lack of experience and knowledge prevented him from challenging in a competent way both the IDF, of which he was in charge, and the Prime Minister
    • The army and the COS were not prepared for the event of the abduction despite recurring alerts. When the abduction happened, he responded impulsively. He did not alert the political leaders to the complexity of the situation, and did not present information, assessments and plans that were available in the IDF at various levels of planning and approval and which would have enabled a better response to the challenges.
    • Among other things, the COS did not alert the political echelon to the serious shortcomings in the preparedness and the fitness of the armed forces for an extensive ground operation, if that became necessary. In addition, he did not clarify that the military assessments and analyses of the arena was that there was a high probability that a military strike against Hezbollah would make such a move necessary.
    • The COS’ responsibility is aggravated by the fact that he knew well that both the Prime Minister and the Minister of Defense lacked adequate knowledge and experience in these matters, and by the fact that he had led them to believe that the IDF was ready and prepared and had operational plans fitting the situation.
    • The COS did not provide adequate responses to serious reservations about his recommendations raised by ministers and others during the first days of the campaign, and he did not present to the political leaders the internal debates within the IDF concerning the fit between the stated goals and the authorized modes of actions.
    • In all these the Chief of Staff failed in his duties as commander in chief of the army and as a critical part of the political-military leadership, and exhibited flaws in professionalism, responsibility and judgment.

    I was going to emphasise parts, but pretty much all of it ended up in bold.

    Labels: Israel, Lebanon

    Something To Hide?

    May 2nd, 2007 § 0 comments § permalink

    Background: Iain Dale. Guido Fawkes.

    The whole point of a blog is to be able to track back through conversations and posts and comments using links to provide an illustrations, examples and references to various points in the conversations using hyperlinks.
    So Why would two of the ‘Leading Political Bloggers’ (as they keep telling everyone) want to block links to their posts?

    That is what Iain Dale and Paul Staines have done.
    When you click on a link to anything on their sites from Bloggerheads or The UK Today, Iain redirects you to his front page, and ‘Guido’ sends you to
    mmm. nice.

    Come on guys, if you’re the cream of the bloggers and are honest, have nothing to hide, and consistent, what’s the problem? It’s not like they’re hard to get round, and the links to various posts help people understand the situation.
    Or is that what you’re afraid of…?


    May Day

    May 1st, 2007 § 0 comments § permalink

    It’s 1st of May today.
    It completely passed me by until during a quiet five minutes at work a looked at Lenins’ Tomb and saw that someone has done a good thing today.
    Hugo Chavez announced that Venezuela will withdraw from the IMF and World Bank, is to increase their minimum wage and “set up a regional lending organisation that doesn’t insist on ‘structural adjustment programmes'”.
    I wonder who will follow suit?

    I thought I would mention it as it makes for some good news after the negative vibes that’s been going on here lately with Dead Tossers and Kate Moss.

    It’s good, go have a look.

    Labels: Chavez, Venezuela

    Kate Moss – Top Shop

    May 1st, 2007 § 0 comments § permalink

    So fucking what.
    A clothes horse spends a few years wearing clothes that other people have designed and made and people go mental when Topshop launch a range clothes that she, er, put her name to, not designed, just stuck a label in them.
    And the press go mental too. Well, wake up, it isn’t news, it’s a free fucking advertising.



    Where am I?

    You are currently viewing the archives for May, 2007 at Sim-O.