We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Funding for prison visits problem.
Comments
-
Like I said, oh, no, such a shame...
Social work however bend rules and manipulate events, their argument was he came from a family on benefits, she cheated on him meaning he must of been a bad person, he used to go on nights out with friends to hide the pain therefore that meant he was cheating, even stupid things like when he was awarded visits for a while his daughter had a cold one day therefore it was his bad parenting that gave it to her so he was a risk to her.
Then they wanted reports on his mental health and criminal background, he stole a bottle of vodka when he was 18 and therefore that meant he was a criminal, he broke his arm at school and the doctors report claimed it must of been from violent parents (and other such nasty comments) therefore that meant he was brought up in a violent background so bad to be around kids.
Even the alleged crime(which there has never been a clear answer to if he did or not) was all circimstantial like he went to visit relatives on the day of the crime with no notice therefore he was on the run, when he was arrested he had a blank look therefore he knew he was guilty but on the flip side when he broke down at court they said that was an admission of guilt so you cant win!
Not going to say the crime as for one its none of your business and two you could use it to bias your mentality on it.
Either way you haven't given any help on my actual question just judging which is against the rules.0 -
The point being rehabilitation rather than pure punishment, and for your information all their luxuries come out of their own pocket - Not really accurate though is it. , in the sense its like pocket money and they do long hours for £10 a week - But they aren't expected to pay for accommodation, heating, food etc from that £10. Presumably the cost of these is subsidised by their work, with them receiving this as a final 'wage' and everything is bought at RRP so one dvd would cost them about £15 - a DVD is a luxury that many cant afford.
The point is is someone was a good person before and does one bad thing though that could be a extreme bad thing would you lump them in with someone who is a bad person everyday of their life just because they did that one thing? At what point do you go to extremes. - At the point where the bad thing they did was 'extreme'. Oh they only did it once, so that's ok... What rubbish.
So you compared a tiny portable tv and a 16 year old games console to a 4K tv and current games console? - It's prison. They shouldn't have any console. Should work to repay society.
Right that idea works.
Stop treating prisoners like naughty school children. These are adults, most of whom are violent. Let's take off the gloves and deal with the situation.0 -
Johnnytwostep wrote: »nope, but you were trying to justify the fact that they have games consoles and tvs with the excuse that they are old models of both. I say they shouldnt have anything of the sort.
"And even then the shared one is a old PS2 with those games that struggle to sell at 10p, their tvs until recently were manky crts (only got rid of them due to needing digital feed) even then they get about 8 channels on it as they are censored".
Actually I was "justifying" the idea that it was a luxury because it was said people who work don't have them when its more along the lines you think that just having them no matter how old they are or limited they are is a luxury.
In that sense a 30 year old tv and console would be too much and a luxury.
Are you of the mentality that people in prison should just rot without improving themselves, that will cause more damage than not because it will either cause resentment so they cause more crime or damage their mental health so they are useless to the world.
You do realise its seen as a luxury even there, they can be taken away for bad behaviour and the such.0 -
Social work however bend rules and manipulate events, their argument was he came from a family on benefits, she cheated on him meaning he must of been a bad person, he used to go on nights out with friends to hide the pain therefore that meant he was cheating, even stupid things like when he was awarded visits for a while his daughter had a cold one day therefore it was his bad parenting that gave it to her so he was a risk to her.
Then they wanted reports on his mental health and criminal background, he stole a bottle of vodka when he was 18 and therefore that meant he was a criminal, he broke his arm at school and the doctors report claimed it must of been from violent parents (and other such nasty comments) therefore that meant he was brought up in a violent background so bad to be around kids.
Even the alleged crime(which there has never been a clear answer to if he did or not) was all circimstantial like he went to visit relatives on the day of the crime with no notice therefore he was on the run, when he was arrested he had a blank look therefore he knew he was guilty but on the flip side when he broke down at court they said that was an admission of guilt so you cant win!
Not going to say the crime as for one its none of your business and two you could use it to bias your mentality on it.
Either way you haven't given any help on my actual question just judging which is against the rules.
Yes it does0 -
Stop treating prisoners like naughty school children. These are adults, most of whom are violent. Let's take off the gloves and deal with the situation.
Stop trying to twist things to your own sick frame of mind as you are going to extremes, wow some people cant afford as little as 10p for a second hand dvd, I never justified any actions even as a one off but theres a different between someone who is violent or nasty all the time and someone who snaps as everyone has done something bad in their life.
You seem to think a naive ignroant mentality that all criminals fit one mould i.e violent and never deserve any help.
My relative is spending their time teaching foreigners English, call centre work for people who have issues like depression, does extra volunteer work over their quota and wins multiple awards in prison for their work.
You don't know what they did if they even did it(in the eyes of the law they did therefore as far as the world is concerned they are guilty) I have seen this once popular confident person turn into a nervous wreck and put on suicide watch, treated like scum of the earth.
This person before they were arrested did charity work abroad, worked with local kids, did a lot of fundraising and won awards there too.0 -
Social work however bend rules and manipulate events, their argument was he came from a family on benefits, she cheated on him meaning he must of been a bad person, he used to go on nights out with friends to hide the pain therefore that meant he was cheating, even stupid things like when he was awarded visits for a while his daughter had a cold one day therefore it was his bad parenting that gave it to her so he was a risk to her.
Then they wanted reports on his mental health and criminal background, he stole a bottle of vodka when he was 18 and therefore that meant he was a criminal, he broke his arm at school and the doctors report claimed it must of been from violent parents (and other such nasty comments) therefore that meant he was brought up in a violent background so bad to be around kids.
Even the alleged crime(which there has never been a clear answer to if he did or not) was all circimstantial like he went to visit relatives on the day of the crime with no notice therefore he was on the run, when he was arrested he had a blank look therefore he knew he was guilty but on the flip side when he broke down at court they said that was an admission of guilt so you cant win!
Not going to say the crime as for one its none of your business and two you could use it to bias your mentality on it.
Either way you haven't given any help on my actual question just judging which is against the rules.
He has been awarded visits to his daughter, I will just go on to make up my own mind what he has done, and which prison he is in north of the border (as there arent many 'specialist' prisons).0 -
Johnnytwostep wrote: »Yes it does
I knew you would say that, but if you want to get technical pretty much everyone has done something criminal at one point so they are all criminals.
I meant in the grand scheme of things, stealing a bottle of vodka when you were 18 would be treated as badly as some violent serial killer as both are criminals right.0 -
Social work however bend rules and manipulate events - What rubbish. , their argument was he came from a family on benefits - I'll pay your travel costs if you can publish the social services report that states this. , she cheated on him meaning he must of been a bad person - and this. , he used to go on nights out with friends to hide the pain therefore that meant he was cheating - and this. , even stupid things like when he was awarded visits for a while his daughter had a cold one day therefore it was his bad parenting that gave it to her so he was a risk to her. - He should've gone to court! It's not my fault he's too stupid to play the game.
Then they wanted reports on his mental health and criminal background, he stole a bottle of vodka when he was 18 and therefore that meant he was a criminal- Well he was. But how old is he now? It's all well and good to say, when he was 18, but makes a big difference if he's 19,29, or 39 now. , he broke his arm at school and the doctors report claimed it must of been from violent parents - A report from x number of years ago, that wasn;t followed up, that showed him to be a victim of abuse. (and other such nasty comments) therefore that meant he was brought up in a violent background so bad to be around kids. - I'm sorry I don't believe you at all.
Even the alleged crime(which there has never been a clear answer to if he did or not) - You already said he did it, 'he had a moment of madness' was all circimstantial like he went to visit relatives on the day of the crime with no notice therefore he was on the run - sorry, don't believe that. , when he was arrested he had a blank look therefore he knew he was guilty - again don't believe that but on the flip side when he broke down at court they said that was an admission of guilt so you cant win! - You've not explained what the crime was, just more mitigating evidence.
Not going to say the crime as for one its none of your business and two you could use it to bias your mentality on it. - I don't know him, or you, so it's preposterous to say it will bias me. Trust me, I'm already biased. He's been locked up, and his mental health is in question. He should probably stay locked up.
Either way you haven't given any help on my actual question just judging which is against the rules.
Judging is not against the rules? I'm expressing my opinion on a topical issue which has raised a number of interesting points.
You might not 'like' what I've said, but that's unfortunate.
I've not been abusive or offensive. or anything else.0 -
Social work however bend rules and manipulate events, their argument was he came from a family on benefits, she cheated on him meaning he must of been a bad person, he used to go on nights out with friends to hide the pain therefore that meant he was cheating, even stupid things like when he was awarded visits for a while his daughter had a cold one day therefore it was his bad parenting that gave it to her so he was a risk to her.
Then they wanted reports on his mental health and criminal background, he stole a bottle of vodka when he was 18 and therefore that meant he was a criminal, he broke his arm at school and the doctors report claimed it must of been from violent parents (and other such nasty comments) therefore that meant he was brought up in a violent background so bad to be around kids.
Even the alleged crime(which there has never been a clear answer to if he did or not) was all circimstantial like he went to visit relatives on the day of the crime with no notice therefore he was on the run, when he was arrested he had a blank look therefore he knew he was guilty but on the flip side when he broke down at court they said that was an admission of guilt so you cant win!
Not going to say the crime as for one its none of your business and two you could use it to bias your mentality on it.
Either way you haven't given any help on my actual question just judging which is against the rules.
If he was found guilty of it, it isn't alleged.0 -
Johnnytwostep wrote: »He has been awarded visits to his daughter, I will just go on to make up my own mind what he has done, and which prison he is in north of the border (as there arent many 'specialist' prisons).
No he had a few visits before he in prison before they found excuses.
And he lives south of the border.If he was found guilty of it, it isn't alleged.
Alleged as in he could be innocent but the law decides he is guilty so thats what matters.
Even at the time everyone was saying he wont go to jail and even wondered why it made it to court in the first place due to lack of evidencee but it was all twisted to extremes.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 351.8K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.4K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454K Spending & Discounts
- 244.8K Work, Benefits & Business
- 600.2K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.3K Life & Family
- 258.5K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards