Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
observer

Duty of care?

Recommended Posts

Should Prisons have a "duty of care" over their inmates? And presuming they should, cos that's the law: could this be best ensured by placing prisoners in solitary confinement - for their own protection? :?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Should Prisons have a "duty of care" over their inmates? And presuming they should, cos that's the law: could this be best ensured by placing prisoners in solitary confinement - for their own protection? :?

 

If you are reffering to the case of that absolute scum Huntley, themn he shouldn't even be breathing; let alone be alive to sue the Government for ?100,000 because some one slit his throat.

 

Personally, I reckon the government should sue the bloke who slit his throat for NOT killing him

 

As for prisoners, thjey should not have human rights while they are inside, they should lose that privilage for offending in the first place. As for the lawyers who defend these cases, they are lower than the criminals. I watched sky news today and there have been countless of the legal aid wizards on there bleating about how "of course his human rights have been breached".... and " the government failed to protect him".... utter nonsense, only these human rights supporters can possibly agree with this crap.

 

Over to you Kije

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

should he win the case, a penny damages would be appropriate. Anything more he should be sued by the victims families.

 

Taking his argument a stage further, if someone damages my property can I sue the police for negligence?

 

happy days

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, if we extend this still further, hasn't the Government got a duty of care over all it's citizens - so the likes of Gary Newlove could now sue HMG? :shock:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

just shows what idiots are still ruining this country. The lawyers representing huntley should be struck off too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't believe any inmate should be allowed to sue for any reason. However every inmate should expect to be safe while serving their term in prison.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
However every inmate should expect to be safe while serving their term in prison.

 

Agreed, but there is only so much they can do. As has been pointed out above, if you take it further, everyone could sue the police for neglect of duty everytime a crime is committed for failing to keep us safe.

 

If they were locked up 24 hours a day for their own protection, the human rites idiots would be bleating about that too...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Don't believe any inmate should be allowed to sue for any reason. However every inmate should expect to be safe while serving their term in prison.

 

Completely agree :!:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So lock 'em in solitary, with no physical contact with another human being - ever: - it could be done in a centrally controlled, compartmentalised system - just think: no drugs, no fights etc. :wink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Methinks Obs is talking with his tongue in his cheek helped by desperation and frustration in knowing what is wrong in the system, but no-one will fix it.

 

Happy days

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They can see/talk to their "families" via visual tele links - thus no "tongue in cheek" passing of drugs when they visit, and no need for "local" prisons either! We're not talking cr*p; we're talking about cr*p. :wink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So you have written off their families in one fowl swoop without even giving them a trail, Why not just lock them up as well, Better still sterilise them you never know their might be a genetic link to criminality.

 

What crime have their families done to only see one of their parents by video link. :!:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Typical toga wearing nonesense: the question you should be asking, is "what crime had his/her victims done, never to see their love one's ever again"? :roll:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Answer the question Obs what crime have the families done :?:

 

The families have the crime of being married to or fathered by scum.

 

If the families are punished too, it may help to arrest some of the problems; however because we lock someone up and then give them all the comforts their victims may have been denied and then allow the families of the scum to visit, there is no deterrent.

 

Lock them up, as far from home as possible. NO physical contact during any visits and then make them serve their full sentence.

 

Kije, If you think the policy of being nice to scumbag criminals and their benefit dependant brood is working, take a look around and open your eyes

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More stupid human rights twaddle regarding arrested/detained people...... I quote :

 

"Police officers [in Manchester] have been banned from ordering suspects held in cells to change into blue boiler suits in case it infringes their human rights.

 

Instead, they are being encouraged to fetch clean clothes from the suspected criminal's own home so that they can feel more comfortable. "

 

............. If a relative of the suspect cannot bring in an outfit, an officer can be dispatched to pick one up. :? Failing that, the alleged offender can be given a white tracksuit. "

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1299425/Police-banned-putting-suspects-blue-boiler-suits--human-rights.html

 

:roll::roll:

 

How on earth can wearing a boiler suit infringe a person's human rights? :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The families have the crime of being married to or fathered by scum

 

Get Real Baz, :!:

 

As to the rest of your post

 

The families have committed no crime Baz, Being married to a scumbag at the moment is not a crime, and to be fair on them , many of them when they got married did not realise they were marring scumbags, you have to allow visits, I do not have a problem with the no physical contact.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only reason "we have to do anything" is cos your precious EU and pinko liberal establishment in this country would be screaming about their "human rights" if such common sense were to be applied in the cases of long term prisoners indeed, this topic was kicked off by such HR nonesense. :twisted:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The families have the crime of being married to or fathered by scum

 

you have to allow visits

 

Maybe in your eutopia you do Kije, but I can't see why we have to allow them. Do muder victims get the same rights afforded to them as the scum that carry out the crimes? Do the hell as like. You are a typical liberal doogooder who believes that everyone has rights regardless of what crimes they have carried out.

 

If someone does a crime, especially a very serious one, why should they have the right to see their families when they may have denied that right to their victims?

 

Of course in the ideal world, there would be no arguement, the murderers families would be afforded the same rights as the victims families..... the right to bury a body

 

Now get real yourself and wise up to life in the real world

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nothing against restricting the human rights of prisoners, But you cannot restrict the rights of their families as they have committed no crime.

 

As for Obs trying to blame the EU what a pile of crap, You will find Obs that even in the early in 1900's families had the right to see prisoners. Long before the EU, If you want to debate I have no problem. I'll help you out Please put your Brain in gear before you post.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
But you cannot restrict the rights of their families as they have committed no crime.

 

 

but you are quite happy for the rights of the victims families to be taken away by some scumbag?

 

Look after the prisoners Kije and sod the victims, that is the typical Liberal way isn't it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Under a system you want Baz, The Birmingham 6 and the Guildford 4 would all be dead. Would you put these deaths down to acceptable losses, and under your system how would the families of these people find justice as it would have been the State that killed them. :?:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This whole case arose cos Huntley is argueing his Human Rights were infringed in prison, and that the prison has a duty of care. HR derives from the European Convention on HR, which we signed. IF, in the interest of protecting Huntley by keeping him in solitary confinement - we would also be accused of infringing his human rights - so a no win situation. The problem with you pinko liberals Kyje, is that you spend that much time humming and arrhing over the morality of a situation, that instead of amputating the limb, the patient gets gangarene and dies - got a problem, get it sorted. :twisted:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...