FabSwingers.com mobile

Join us FREE, we're FREE to use

Web's largest swingers site since 2006.

Already registered?
Login here

Back to forum list
Back to The Lounge

Ambulance boss fired for murder

Jump to newest
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago


"An ambulance manager has been struck off by a health regulator after failing to declare a murder conviction.

A Health and Care Profession Council panel heard Robert King worked in the service for 16 years after giving false information in his application form.

The hearing heard the murder raised "serious concerns about his suitability as a health care professional".

King, 48, Ambrosden, Oxfordshire, was convicted at Reading Crown Court in 1981."

He would have been 17 at the time of the murder, and thus tried as a minor. Should he have had to disclose convictions as a minor, even for murder? I know the law says murder convictions must be disclosed, but this person had clearly turned over a new leaf and was making a success of his life and his past has caught up with him. It seems we aren't allowed a clean slate after punishment has been served.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ornyHorwichCpl aka HHCCouple
over a year ago

horwich

seems quite odd no one figured it out for 16 years though.

Scarlett

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago


"seems quite odd no one figured it out for 16 years though.

Scarlett"


"

"The trust was only recently made aware by the police of the serious conviction that ex-employee Robert King was sentenced for, as a minor, in 1981.

"Criminal Record Bureau (CRB) checks were not in existence at this time and consequently the trust was unaware of his background."

~ BBC.co.uk

"

I don't know why this story seems to be bothering me so much. The guy is a convicted murderer on one hand, but a successful paramedic on the other. Where do we draw the line between being held responsible for one's actions and being given a clean slate to start again?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Our service does crb checks every 5 years. He should have declared it

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

How an earth they missed this i will never know.

Was cbr checked so i could help out at my granddaughters school it too 3 months to come back.

We called the police when my daughter was attacked by her ex (he was already known in a different part of the country for doing this).

Police couldn't decide who was telling the truth so they were both put in cells.

When ever she has a cbr it comes up she was held in custody(later found out she had a bleed on the brain)

So i really cant understand how they didn't know?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ornyHorwichCpl aka HHCCouple
over a year ago

horwich

It is a tricky one. I think everyone is capable of turning over a new leaf and be given a second chance but murder is such a terrible crime. He should have still declared though as skeletons have a way of outing themselves. Whist murder is terrible in any form some are more horrendous others

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

[Removed by poster at 08/09/12 08:55:54]

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"An ambulance manager has been struck off by a health regulator after failing to declare a murder conviction.

A Health and Care Profession Council panel heard Robert King worked in the service for 16 years after giving false information in his application form.

The hearing heard the murder raised "serious concerns about his suitability as a health care professional".

King, 48, Ambrosden, Oxfordshire, was convicted at Reading Crown Court in 1981.

He would have been 17 at the time of the murder, and thus tried as a minor. Should he have had to disclose convictions as a minor, even for murder? I know the law says murder convictions must be disclosed, but this person had clearly turned over a new leaf and was making a success of his life and his past has caught up with him. It seems we aren't allowed a clean slate after punishment has been served."
ask the loved ones of the murdered

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *kmale421Man
over a year ago

wirral


"An ambulance manager has been struck off by a health regulator after failing to declare a murder conviction.

A Health and Care Profession Council panel heard Robert King worked in the service for 16 years after giving false information in his application form.

The hearing heard the murder raised "serious concerns about his suitability as a health care professional".

King, 48, Ambrosden, Oxfordshire, was convicted at Reading Crown Court in 1981.

He would have been 17 at the time of the murder, and thus tried as a minor. Should he have had to disclose convictions as a minor, even for murder? I know the law says murder convictions must be disclosed, but this person had clearly turned over a new leaf and was making a success of his life and his past has caught up with him. It seems we aren't allowed a clean slate after punishment has been served."

The thing about this is that in this specific case from it appears that this murderer lived a good life after having served his sentance and did a good caring job, while effectively having broken the terms of his license by not declaring his murder conviction.

However, if you turn the tables and lets say within a couple of years of being a paramedic he had committed another murder, perhaps even of a patient under his care, then all hell would break loose and rightly so.

To me it is right that he was dismissed from his job, because in all liklihood with his conviction for murder he wouldn't have had the job in the first place. There's a right and wrong way to allow murderers back into society, and this man chose the wrong way. Speaking personally though, while I am not a supporter of capital punishment, I do believe that a Murderer should serve a whole of life sentance, while someone convicted of mansluaghter could possibly serve a lesser term dependant on the circumstances the offence was committed in.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ranny-CrumpetWoman
over a year ago

The Town by The Cross


"An ambulance manager has been struck off by a health regulator after failing to declare a murder conviction.

A Health and Care Profession Council panel heard Robert King worked in the service for 16 years after giving false information in his application form.

The hearing heard the murder raised "serious concerns about his suitability as a health care professional".

King, 48, Ambrosden, Oxfordshire, was convicted at Reading Crown Court in 1981.

He would have been 17 at the time of the murder, and thus tried as a minor. Should he have had to disclose convictions as a minor, even for murder? I know the law says murder convictions must be disclosed, but this person had clearly turned over a new leaf and was making a success of his life and his past has caught up with him. It seems we aren't allowed a clean slate after punishment has been served."

He was 32 when he falsified a form by omission. That's old enough to know the consequences.

I don't blame him. I'd do the same if I wanted to put my past behind me.

NO ONE - from this info anyway - can judge his crime. As a seventeen year old he may have been involved in a brawl with horrendous consequences.

He's had sixteen years employment from his lie so maybe he should be glad of that.

It's right that he was sacked though. He lied. The form prob has that clause that goes ..... Anyone who gives false info will be dismissed etc etc etc.....

It could have been just the break they needed to get rid of him. No one knows what kind of person he was.

Too much to think about.

Where did you hear it Wishy ?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *icketysplitsWoman
over a year ago

Way over Yonder, that's where I'm bound

I believe that when people have served their time then they are entitled to a second chance. That is essentially what the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act is about.

That said, whether you falsify your career history or fail to disclose a murder it is the same offence if you lie on your application and/or fail to disclose information.

I have had to sack someone for falsifying their documents. A good employee but I had to question their judgement, whether I could trust them and the message it would send if I had allowed them to remain.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Just because he is a paramedic doesn't mean he is an angel.

It is well known that people who want to kill are found within health care. They are very good at it as well.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

To me there seems no reasonable argument to support allowing convicted murders a complete fresh start in life once their jail terms are served, while there is no chance of similar restitution for their victims…..

A murder victim does not come back to life after the perpetrator has severed their jail sentence….

I also think its important to establish if at the time of the Murder, did the perpetrator give themselves up to the authorities or did they attempt to carry on leading a normal a life without being held accountable for their murderous action?

Surely the remorse shown by any murderer who’s captured and sentenced, will remain questionable to the family or loved ones of their victims…..But their pain and sadness will be genuine, and life long….

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
Post new Message to Thread
back to top