Landlady ordered to pay damages to serial rapist for clearing his flat after arrest

Cat695

Oh god it took you a whole 38 mins to think of that one

Incisor

Cat695 wrote: »

And for your info he was also convicted of rape in the 70's....but thats ok because his LL did a far worse thing buy moving his stuff into storage.

You are the only one who is saying that the Landlady did a far worse thing. This is an example of you making yourself look stupid, when you make up things you want to think your opponents said and then get angry about them.

Meatballs

He wasn't found guilty when she moved his stuff.

Cat, you'd be pretty peeved if you were alledged to have raped someone (it happens) only to find you had been evicted, when you got home.

The judge has to rule the same way regardless of what the person has been found guilty of.

Whilst I agree this guy should probably have burned at the stake I'm happy that my legal rights are still intact despite people like you running around screaming your head off illogically.

Incisor

Cat695_(using_his_Human_Rights) wrote: »

Oh god it took you a whole 38 mins to think of that one

First of all you tell your opponents to go away and take a good long look at themselves. And then you complain when they take their time to give you an answer.

real1314

house184 wrote: »

One wonders what Cat695 would say if he is later found not guilty on an appeal.

Whislt car695 might be at one extreme, this sort of comment is just plain stupid. You're suggesting that we should do what exactly? Assume all criminals may be found not guitly at a later date? How liberal is that??


And for those that are equating the human rights of a violent rapist with this "offence", I think that the criminal court has proved beyond reasonable doubt that he had breached his tenancy by using the property to commit a criminal offence. Therefore she would have been able to evict him, if she'd gone about it the correct way.
I suspect that Legal Aid got him better lawyers than her money got her.

And I'd be surpised if he'd ever got bail on this sort of offence, certainly not bail that would allow him to return to the property where the offence occurred.

Cat695

Though he had been found guilty of rape prior to this


And he could have been given his home back......THATS when he could have used his human rights.

Scousebird_2

paddy's_mum wrote: »

For heaven's sake! Cope is quoted as saying "it (the eviction?) caused problems between me and my wife".

So his repeated and rapidly escalating tally of vicious sex crimes were as nothing to his wife? All that mattered were his possessions which the landlady has "put into storage". Give us all a !"£$%%^^& breaK!

Has anyone set up a support fund for this landlady? If so, please give me the address and bank details. I'll be first in the queue at the bank tomorrow to send her a fiver.

And me....that's a tenner-and I wouldn't of even awarded the scumbag that!! That's enough to buy him 40 ciggies to hopefully choke and do us all a favour by leaving this world!!

paddy's_mum

I think that maybe this thread should be moved to the Discussion board since it has clearly moved way beyond the remit of the property section.

It is interesting to read (in the Crawley Observer) that the landlord is facing "financial ruin" as a result of this particular case. She has already been ordered to pay Cope £750, plus her own legal costs of £5k and an estimated (up to) £13k of legal costs for her former tenant.

Day after day, time after time, argument after argument, we read on this board examples of both landlords and tenants breaking the rules. Often, that breach has occurred because of a lack of communication, a wrong assumption, a moment's foolishness. So why is this particular landlord being so obviously penalised? Is it because Cope is being funded by the taxpayer aka you and I? Is it because as a prisoner, he has greater rights to a transparently 'fair' hearing than you or I?

As an earlier poster said (sorry, forget who) wouldn't this whole affair have been best dealt with via a "slapped wrist"? How on earth did it get to go the 'whole hog' and result in what to my mind is a travesty of justice.

Almost every member of mse can tell you of a thug, a burglar, a violent person, a drug taker, an abuser, a rotten neighbour, a criminal driver, who is taken to court and walks away with a paltry fine or a community service order for 25 hours, much of which is never completed.

I suspect that the reason that this particular thread has caught fire is because so many people clearly understand that the judicial system in this country is failing dramatically. They are utterly frustrated by their powerlessness in the face of so much 'do-gooderism', so called christian tolerance and sheer vulnerability in their efforts to protect themselves and their loved ones without risking criminal prosecution.

There is a great deal wrong with this county and our laws when (in Cope's own words) a "decent landlord" is dragged through the courts, financially penalised, humiliated, and generally made out to be a grave wrong-doer while the real victim(s) do not have a voice that everyone can hear. Why was Melody Gaynor (the landlord) not also afforded public funds to present her case?

I am also utterly in agreement with the comment (again, sorry, can't recall who) that if it was your daughter, or mother, or a loved one who had been the VICTIM of a nasty crime, you too would be hard pressed to hang on to notions of 'rule of law', 'do the right thing', 'the mills of God grind slow', in your anger against the betrayal and your loathing of the perpetrator. Sometimes, in my view, you have to experience it to understand it. When I was 21, I kniew all about how to rear children. By the time I was 35 ... my, what a lot I had learned!

neverdespairgirl

Gorgeous_George wrote: »

He was jailed for life. Is the landlady expected to keep the place for him to move back in in 20 years' time?

No. She shouldn't have moved in just after he was arrested, though. She broke the law. In fact, it was an unlawful eviction, and a criminal act by the LL, probably.

neverdespairgirl

Cat695 wrote: »

as i said when CONVICTED!! crime has RISEN geatly since prisoners started to get their rights......so you do the maths

what "rights" do you have in mind? The right to life? The right to freedom from torture?

The fact that two things happen at the same time doesn't prove causation, anyway.

For example, the number of lions in the wild has declined since women got the vote. It doesn't mean that one caused the other.