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!
Merseyrail "Draconian"
Comments
-
If your kids are as intolerant as you, I bet she hopes that she never has to teach them!
What's life like when you are so perfect?
It's not a question of intolerance.
This girl is to become a teacher. That means that she is expected to educate children to a standard, and social etiquette is a part of the education that she will impart onto her pupils. Frankly, if she puts her feet on the seats of trains then she really is not fit to be educating children since she hasn't learned the basics herself.
Merseyrail must be heartily sick and tired of their trains being violated by antisocial people and no doubt they have given much consideration, after exhausting all other avenues, before resorting to the courts.
Sometimes in life an example has to be made. I can't believe that this girl could be so stupid as to put her feet on the seats when there were pictorial and electronic notices displayed on the train telling her what would happen if she violated the order.0 -
No no no! Did no-one read the report. She pleaded guilty and was given an Absolute Discharge, so no, it's not on her record.
She was training to be a teacher, and would have to abandon that career choice if she had been given a criminal record.
Surely the most hardened / right wing / daily mail amongst you must appreciate that losing someone who would potentially be a great teacher and asset to the nation for making a 'mistake' of putting her feet on a seat is overly draconian? Are you all really whiter than white?
I doubt she'll be doing it again, no lasting damage done to her career and it certainly sends out a message to others travelling on MerseyRail not to put their feet on seats. All in all, job done, time to move on.
The definition of an absolute discharge is “that the court takes no further action but the offender's discharge will appear on his or her criminal record See the Criminal Justice System for England and Wales website for the definition if you are not sure. So it certainly does appear on your criminal record.
Also, I'm not clear why a sole (no pun intended) conviction for putting your feet on a train seat would stop her (or indeed anyone else) being a teacher! I suggest that this is media/newspaper twaddle to hype a story out of proportion. Such a conviction would certianly not stop her from being employed as a teacher. The CRB, List 99 and other checks to vet prospective employees and others working in schools' and the like are to ensure there is no danger to the children. A conviction for feet on seats would not have any consequence to her employment prospects. Have a look at the recommendations contained within the Bichard Inquiry Report undertaken following the Soham murders and Ian Huntley's conviction if you want more information on how vetting of teachers is now to be undertaken and what is to be looked for.
Finally, I've not read or seen the Magistrates comments except as indicated on here. It's all well and good the Magistrate(s) suggesting that it should be dealt with by way of a Fixed Penalty fine. However, it may well be (and I do not know the answer) that this offence cannot be dealt with by way of a Fixed Penalty, in which case the only route is to the Court's. I would imagine that had the train inspectors (or whatever they are called) had had this option available they may well have used it. Let's not forget that most Magistrates are only lay people with no legal trainiing or background and that their comments can be as niaive and inaccurate as anyone elses. If the law does not provide for a Fixed Penalty to be issued then it's no good berating Merseyrail, have a go at the Government.0 -
That thread was deleted for some reason.
I disagree with you. The court were wrong in their decision in my view. Since the matter was now in the court it would have been appropriate for the barmy magistrates therein to issue an appropriate penalty, enough to signal to others that they would do well to refrain from this antisocial activity.
Instead they have chosen to send a signal out to anyone who feels like putting their feet on the train seats, that they can't be bothered to deal with it, and in the process they have humiliated Merseyrail in their attempts to run an orderly service. Thereby ensuring a free-for-all situation and, in my view, actually encouraging this appalling behaviour.
Well, if you're perfectly happy for your tax contributions to be used in this manner, carry on...I for one am not.
There is no way that this 'case' should have reached the court, it's a disgrace.
It is very expensive to have a case heard in a court of law, and you and I are paying for this.
Fixed penalty fines are the way forward in dealing with misdemeanors like this, not submitting them for court proceedings.0 -
No no no! Did no-one read the report. She pleaded guilty and was given an Absolute Discharge, so no, it's not on her record.
She was training to be a teacher, and would have to abandon that career choice if she had been given a criminal record.
Surely the most hardened / right wing / daily mail amongst you must appreciate that losing someone who would potentially be a great teacher and asset to the nation for making a 'mistake' of putting her feet on a seat is overly draconian? Are you all really whiter than white?
I doubt she'll be doing it again, no lasting damage done to her career and it certainly sends out a message to others travelling on MerseyRail not to put their feet on seats. All in all, job done, time to move on.
An absolute discharge DOES go on record and remains there for one year it is evidence of guilt and that no further action was taken0 -
The definition of an absolute discharge is “that the court takes no further action but the offender's discharge will appear on his or her criminal record See the Criminal Justice System for England and Wales website for the definition if you are not sure. So it certainly does appear on your criminal record.
Also, I'm not clear why a sole (no pun intended) conviction for putting your feet on a train seat would stop her (or indeed anyone else) being a teacher! I suggest that this is media/newspaper twaddle to hype a story out of proportion. Such a conviction would certianly not stop her from being employed as a teacher. The CRB, List 99 and other checks to vet prospective employees and others working in schools' and the like are to ensure there is no danger to the children. A conviction for feet on seats would not have any consequence to her employment prospects. Have a look at the recommendations contained within the Bichard Inquiry Report undertaken following the Soham murders and Ian Huntley's conviction if you want more information on how vetting of teachers is now to be undertaken and what is to be looked for.
That's interesting, but as I'm not legally qualified, I have only the press to rely on unfortunately. My understanding is that what you say is correct, and that the absolute discharge is noted on their record.
However, this is not a criminal conviction. Teachers (and other professions working with children / vulnerable people) are required to declare criminal convictions and / or cautions when applying for teacher training. Notification of absolute discharges are not required. However, this is only what the press tell us, do advise if this is incorrect...
Universities / places of studies do have power of discretion in the case of an applicant that has a criminal conviction, and you would like to think they would have applied it in this case irrespective. However, judging by some responses, I do wonder.0 -
.............Teachers (and other professions working with children / vulnerable people) are required to declare criminal convictions and / or cautions when applying for teacher training. Notification of absolute discharges are not required. However, this is only what the press tell us, do advise if this is incorrect...
..................
It is not only people working with, but also on the same premises as children etc. However the reason for the disclosure and the subsequent checks is as I outlined. It is to ensure, as far as is possible, that there is no risk to the children and others. A conviction or caution for putting your feet on a train seat should not have any impact. And, in state schools anyone turned down can enquire as to the reason why and if it was because of such a conviction/caution then I would suggest they would be able to challenge the decsion. However, i do not think that it would reach that in anycase as it would be seen as an irrelevance. As I said, typical ignorant media hype and reporting. If you know anything about anything you'll appreciate how often the press misrepresent and misreport even the most straightforward issues.0 -
Well, if you're perfectly happy for your tax contributions to be used in this manner, carry on...I for one am not.
There is no way that this 'case' should have reached the court, it's a disgrace.
It is very expensive to have a case heard in a court of law, and you and I are paying for this.
Fixed penalty fines are the way forward in dealing with misdemeanors like this, not submitting them for court proceedings.
Yes, I understand that my tax contributions are used to finance the court system. Similarly, if the seats on the trains are damaged by antisocial people, then the fare paying passenger, you and I, have to foot the bill to put it right. If Merseyrail have decided they've had enough and that they are serious about stamping on this behaviour, then I support their action in bringing the matter to the attention of the courts. If there's enough publicity when people are taken to court, then hopefully the desired effect will ensue. The end result just might be that there are no further court cases, or very few, and train fares will not have to increase to cover the cost of repairing the damage and cleaning the seats. The money left in the kitty will enable the train operators to improve their services.0 -
Yes, I understand that my tax contributions are used to finance the court system. Similarly, if the seats on the trains are damaged by antisocial people, then the fare paying passenger, you and I, have to foot the bill to put it right. If Merseyrail have decided they've had enough and that they are serious about stamping on this behaviour, then I support their action in bringing the matter to the attention of the courts. If there's enough publicity when people are taken to court, then hopefully the desired effect will ensue. The end result just might be that there are no further court cases, or very few, and train fares will not have to increase to cover the cost of repairing the damage and cleaning the seats. The money left in the kitty will enable the train operators to improve their services.
Totally disagree.
For one, I do not use trains, so I'm not a fare paying passenger, and certainly not with Merseyrail. I'm from a different region entirely, why should my tax contributions deal with a regionalised transport company?
Additionally, there is no greater reason for this 'crime' to be in front of the courts than say, a fixed penalty fine for allowing your dog to foul the pavement, or for fixed penalty notices for anti-social behaviour.
Misdemeanors like this are best dealt with in the aforementioned manner. I'm pretty sure Merseyrail do not take someone to court for failing to purchase a valid ticket for their journey, and this is no different.
Are you trying to say that a £100 fine for making a seat dirty does not cover the cleaning costs?
I'm certainly not defending the actions of the individual involved, far from it, I too get sick of people's lack of respect for public 'services' and the general, 'it doesn't belong to me, therefore I don't care about it' attitude.0 -
Totally disagree.
For one, I do not use trains, so I'm not a fare paying passenger, and certainly not with Merseyrail. I'm from a different region entirely, why should my tax contributions deal with a regionalised transport company?
Additionally, there is no greater reason for this 'crime' to be in front of the courts than say, a fixed penalty fine for allowing your dog to foul the pavement, or for fixed penalty notices for anti-social behaviour.
Misdemeanors like this are best dealt with in the aforementioned manner. I'm pretty sure Merseyrail do not take someone to court for failing to purchase a valid ticket for their journey, and this is no different.
Are you trying to say that a £100 fine for making a seat dirty does not cover the cleaning costs?
I'm certainly not defending the actions of the individual involved, far from it, I too get sick of people's lack of respect for public 'services' and the general, 'it doesn't belong to me, therefore I don't care about it' attitude.
The fact that you, personally, don't use Merseyrail trains is not relevant to how tax is spent on provision of the national court system.0 -
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.5K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.2K Spending & Discounts
- 245K Work, Benefits & Business
- 600.6K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.4K Life & Family
- 258.8K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards