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

madness

Jump to newest
 

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

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1299042/Huntley-sues-100-000-Soham-killer-claims-compensation-attacked-prison.html

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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

I personally think anyone in prison should not be able to sue for anything

After all they did pretty much have a choice to be in there or not at the start

(and i said pretty much because i realise that some things aint always cut and dried)

As for that prick hes deff guilty beyond any reasonable doubt and should have absolutly nothing in prison at all

Never mind compesation xx

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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

..and i guess he's gonna get legal aid too.....

tax the stupid!!!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ylde FloozyWoman
over a year ago

preston

I thought the idea of going to prison was to deprive peoples of their civil liberties.

Seems to me he has more civil liberties in there than he does out here.

NOT GOOD!!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *plpxp2Couple
over a year ago

Middlesbrough

Visited a young offenders institution some years ago (yes visited ) and the gym and other equipment was unbelievable (at a time whan schools had little in the way of kit) and they had spent a fortune on training staff.......why? If the little thugs hurt themselves they could sue.

You couldn't help but think kids would go in for minor offences and com eout equiped for GBH.

Something worng with the system

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *eakcoupleCouple
over a year ago

peak district

they should have hung him. end of problem.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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

should we realy be surprised at this .we all know the guilty are looked after in this country and the victims get nothing.in huntlys case he could get 10 times more than what his victims families recieved .

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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

Ian Huntley's crime was unspeakable.

Prisons are not full of sweet natured people. The majority are emotionally damaged , psycopathic or psychotic.

If a someone is locked up for tax evasion would we hate them with the same degree of vilification as we do Huntley and other sex offenders?

Maybe your teenage son is in there for car theft or a fight in the street.

Do we think the tax evader should be protected from violent criminals ?

Do you want your son beaten up and to have his throat cut as Huntley's was in April, or do you want your son protected?

Which criminals do you think should be looked after and punished by the sentence and conditions of that sentence handed out by the court?

Which criminals do you feel should have a sentence handed out by the court and then any other punishement meted out to them by other prisoners who may or may not feel that it makes them some kind of saint as they only robbed a car or never paid tax? Rumour has it they can earn kudos through such acts. Not exactly a selfless act - done in the interests of the raped and murdered children and their familes. More a way of earning promotion. So should we slap these people on the back as we blindly think they give a fuck ?

Our sons could do it perhaps. Cut someones throat and we can slap them on the back and call them heroes.

I don't know what makes people like Huntley tick. I teeter on the edge over the death penalty. Sometimes I bay for it - sometimes I think it's wrong.

I'm VERY interested in what happens to people to harden them to be able to commit such crimes. Is it nature, nurture , momentary madness ?

I'm also VERY interested in what makes people such as 'joe public' turn a blind eye to violence and attempted murder. Not only turn a blind eye but consider it a 'great' thing to be taking place. Does it make them as violent and criminally minded as those that carry out the act? Does it make them feel as 'right minded' as the tax evader?

Sometimes I think a forum is an easy place to say what people think is the 'in crowd' thing to say. Best we keep emotion at bay when speaking about Huntley.

If the system has a duty of care to prisoners and Huntley is a prisoner then the system has failed. If it doesn't owe him then it doesn't owe our sons either.

Do we really want to go back to those days where people could disappear and no one was answerable ?

An untouchable authoritarian system ?

I'd have to stop speeding! I might be bludgeoned to death at the roadside! By a police officer of course!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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

no two wrongs make a right, however, if you're in an institution like that, then you have to accept that the chances of something happening to you are increased.

the prison authority can only do so much, you cant man mark each prisoner 24/7 so it shouldnt be the prison service he is fighting against, but the perpertrator of the crime surely??

obviously he is going where the cash is.

if we get attacked on the street, we are only entitled to criminal compensation, should we not expect our police to give a duty of care to prevent us being attacked in the first place? should we not sue them?

that would be ludicrous...as is huntleys claim

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *histler21Man
over a year ago

Ipswich

I hope the girls' parents sue him for civil damages...

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *atisfy janeWoman
over a year ago

Torquay


"Ian Huntley's crime was unspeakable.

Prisons are not full of sweet natured people. The majority are emotionally damaged , psycopathic or psychotic.

If a someone is locked up for tax evasion would we hate them with the same degree of vilification as we do Huntley and other sex offenders?

Maybe your teenage son is in there for car theft or a fight in the street.

Do we think the tax evader should be protected from violent criminals ?

Do you want your son beaten up and to have his throat cut as Huntley's was in April, or do you want your son protected?

Which criminals do you think should be looked after and punished by the sentence and conditions of that sentence handed out by the court?

Which criminals do you feel should have a sentence handed out by the court and then any other punishement meted out to them by other prisoners who may or may not feel that it makes them some kind of saint as they only robbed a car or never paid tax? Rumour has it they can earn kudos through such acts. Not exactly a selfless act - done in the interests of the raped and murdered children and their familes. More a way of earning promotion. So should we slap these people on the back as we blindly think they give a fuck ?

Our sons could do it perhaps. Cut someones throat and we can slap them on the back and call them heroes.

I don't know what makes people like Huntley tick. I teeter on the edge over the death penalty. Sometimes I bay for it - sometimes I think it's wrong.

I'm VERY interested in what happens to people to harden them to be able to commit such crimes. Is it nature, nurture , momentary madness ?

I'm also VERY interested in what makes people such as 'joe public' turn a blind eye to violence and attempted murder. Not only turn a blind eye but consider it a 'great' thing to be taking place. Does it make them as violent and criminally minded as those that carry out the act? Does it make them feel as 'right minded' as the tax evader?

Sometimes I think a forum is an easy place to say what people think is the 'in crowd' thing to say. Best we keep emotion at bay when speaking about Huntley.

If the system has a duty of care to prisoners and Huntley is a prisoner then the system has failed. If it doesn't owe him then it doesn't owe our sons either.

Do we really want to go back to those days where people could disappear and no one was answerable ?

An untouchable authoritarian system ?

I'd have to stop speeding! I might be bludgeoned to death at the roadside! By a police officer of course!

"

Top reply Granny.....

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *atisfy janeWoman
over a year ago

Torquay


"I hope the girls' parents sue him for civil damages..."

Considering he was previously a lowly paid school caretaker that never owned his own home I shouldn't think he has a brass farthing to his name.....so how would he pay damages?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ylde FloozyWoman
over a year ago

preston

I blame the Americans, it's their bloody compensation culture that kick started most of this kind of bullshit off in the frist place.

Grrrr

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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


"I hope the girls' parents sue him for civil damages...

Considering he was previously a lowly paid school caretaker that never owned his own home I shouldn't think he has a brass farthing to his name.....so how would he pay damages?"

You have a point but it looks as though he will soon be able too doesnt it xx

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *histler21Man
over a year ago

Ipswich


"I hope the girls' parents sue him for civil damages...

Considering he was previously a lowly paid school caretaker that never owned his own home I shouldn't think he has a brass farthing to his name.....so how would he pay damages?"

If he sues and is successful.....

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *atisfy janeWoman
over a year ago

Torquay


"I hope the girls' parents sue him for civil damages...

Considering he was previously a lowly paid school caretaker that never owned his own home I shouldn't think he has a brass farthing to his name.....so how would he pay damages?

You have a point but it looks as though he will soon be able too doesnt it xx"

Not really Craig, remember back to when Peter Sutcliffe tried to sue prison authorities after having an eye dug out by another inmate?.....one of a long list of attacks made on him.....He failed with his compensation claim in November 2007 made against Broadmoor Hospital.

So even if Huntley gets to sue the Home Office he isn't likely to win compensation.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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

[Removed by poster at 31/07/10 11:33:05]

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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

But in the meantime he is probably wasting public money on Legal Aid. which will probably run into thousands and thousands of pounds

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *atisfy janeWoman
over a year ago

Torquay


"But in the meantime he is probably wasting public money on Legal Aid. which will probably run into thousands and thousands of pounds"

Highlight the word 'Probably'.....No one knows if he has been given legal aid, it's all guesswork.....

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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

Pay him off but let the families who he blighted sue him for every pound he has or may subsequently earn.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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

Yes Jane i should have taken that into account but the way things are at the moment with civil liberties and human rights then nothing would surprise me

Yes Huntley's case is deff in the medias eye and hopefully he will get diddly squat

But the cases that are not highbrow get paid comp and they pass under the radar xx

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *atisfy janeWoman
over a year ago

Torquay

The money earned by Legal aid by lawyers is obscene, Two Billion Pounds in 2009 paid out to lawyers for legal aid, the highest being a cost of £1.3 million to one law firm for one case.

It's an emotive subject regarding whether or not prisoners should qualify for legal aid, at what crime conviction do you draw the line?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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


"The money earned by Legal aid by lawyers is obscene, Two Billion Pounds in 2009 paid out to lawyers for legal aid, the highest being a cost of £1.3 million to one law firm for one case.

It's an emotive subject regarding whether or not prisoners should qualify for legal aid, at what crime conviction do you draw the line?

"

you cant draw the line. everyone has a right to be represented.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *atisfy janeWoman
over a year ago

Torquay


"The money earned by Legal aid by lawyers is obscene, Two Billion Pounds in 2009 paid out to lawyers for legal aid, the highest being a cost of £1.3 million to one law firm for one case.

It's an emotive subject regarding whether or not prisoners should qualify for legal aid, at what crime conviction do you draw the line?

you cant draw the line. everyone has a right to be represented.

"

Exactly, as Granny pointed out in her post it is the right of EVERY prisoner in a jail in the UK to assume that a duty of care is afforded them by prison officers....people are sent to jail for what are often very minor offences and are open to violence, often having not yet been convicted of any crime.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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


"The money earned by Legal aid by lawyers is obscene, Two Billion Pounds in 2009 paid out to lawyers for legal aid, the highest being a cost of £1.3 million to one law firm for one case.

It's an emotive subject regarding whether or not prisoners should qualify for legal aid, at what crime conviction do you draw the line?

you cant draw the line. everyone has a right to be represented.

Exactly, as Granny pointed out in her post it is the right of EVERY prisoner in a jail in the UK to assume that a duty of care is afforded them by prison officers....people are sent to jail for what are often very minor offences and are open to violence, often having not yet been convicted of any crime.

"

whilst i agree he has a right to be represented, he doesnt have a right to lay the blame at the door of the prison service. as i said in an earlier post, it is impossible for the ps to man mark everyone 24/7...wholly impossible and unrealistic to expect it, therefore i dont see how they can be culpable. even if they had cctv on them 4/7, the crime takes moments to commit and i doubt anyone could have got their quick enough to prevent it.

their duty of care would extend to ensuring preventative measures are in place to the best of their abilities and within reason and if that fails, that he got the treatment required after the attack, which i believe he did

the only person he should have a right to bring to task is the guy that attacked him....but as i said, no money in that.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *atisfy janeWoman
over a year ago

Torquay

Taken from a UK Legal Brief website...

"The Prison Service, the Prison Governor, the Prison Director and all members of staff in a particular prison owe a duty of care to the prisoner to take reasonable care in the circumstances to protect him or her from injury. This is therefore a civil law duty of care imposed on all people working in a prison".

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *atisfy janeWoman
over a year ago

Torquay

[Removed by poster at 31/07/10 12:15:50]

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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


"Taken from a UK Legal Brief website...

"The Prison Service, the Prison Governor, the Prison Director and all members of staff in a particular prison owe a duty of care to the prisoner to take reasonable care in the circumstances to protect him or her from injury. This is therefore a civil law duty of care imposed on all people working in a prison".

"

yes, reasonable, not total

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *atisfy janeWoman
over a year ago

Torquay

"Reasonable care in the particular circumstances of a situation will mean that the prison staff or managers will have to exercise their judgment as to the nature and extent of the threat on that particular prisoner and will have to put in place those certain measures which they believe to be appropriate to protect that prisoner from harm".

History and experience has told Prison staff that prisoners like Huntley are always liable to attack from other prisoners, rapists and child killers are always on the 'at risk' list.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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

to be honest, in todays britain you got more rights being a prisoner than you have being productive to society!

you have 3 meals a day , you have access to medical care, you have your own room, you have a team o professionals making sure your mental health is ok, you have heat, you have water, you have legal representation that you dont need to pay for , someone cleans for you, you have access to exercise etc ok you cant leave when you choose but you do the crime you do the time!

there will be a price on huntley and many other murderers and abusers plus the glory of being the one who does get to them,

the compensation culture is gettin out of hand you just need to switch the tv on to see the adverts for it and other high profile cases such as the slopping out of cells, iv to do this on a daily basis in work and dont see much compensation coming my way for the trauma of a filled commode.

prison is meant to be a detterant not bloody butlins without the red coats or whatever!

it costs over 40k a yr to keep someone in prison thats an average case not one that requires solitary etc add that to the prison population per annum its a lot of money and at a time when every other public service is being cut.

xx

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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


""Reasonable care in the particular circumstances of a situation will mean that the prison staff or managers will have to exercise their judgment as to the nature and extent of the threat on that particular prisoner and will have to put in place those certain measures which they believe to be appropriate to protect that prisoner from harm".

History and experience has told Prison staff that prisoners like Huntley are always liable to attack from other prisoners, rapists and child killers are always on the 'at risk' list."

bearing in mind he has been in prison since 2002 and this is the first attack, i'd say it had been managed reasonably well so far.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *atisfy janeWoman
over a year ago

Torquay

Huntley has history of being attacked in prison, he will use these previous attacks to press forward a claim for negligence.

If you had a horse and you put it in a field and the horse kept jumping the gate....would you not fit a higher gate?

As Huntley has been attacked on previous occasions the prison service could well be found negligent in their inactions....I am sure that no-one on here likes that one little bit, but that's what will make his claim winnable....therefore possible qualifying him for Legal Aid.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *atisfy janeWoman
over a year ago

Torquay

[Removed by poster at 31/07/10 12:25:02]

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *atisfy janeWoman
over a year ago

Torquay


""Reasonable care in the particular circumstances of a situation will mean that the prison staff or managers will have to exercise their judgment as to the nature and extent of the threat on that particular prisoner and will have to put in place those certain measures which they believe to be appropriate to protect that prisoner from harm".

History and experience has told Prison staff that prisoners like Huntley are always liable to attack from other prisoners, rapists and child killers are always on the 'at risk' list.

bearing in mind he has been in prison since 2002 and this is the first attack, i'd say it had been managed reasonably well so far.

"

Sorry but you are incorrect....

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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


"Huntley has history of being attacked in prison, he will use these previous attacks to press forward a claim for negligence.

If you had a horse and you put it in a field and the horse kept jumping the gate....would you not fit a higher gate?

As Huntley has been attacked on previous occasions the prison service could well be found negligent in their inactions....I am sure that no-one on here likes that one little bit, but that's what will make his claim winnable....therefore possible qualifying him for Legal Aid."

what would you suggest? that you infrnge his human/civil rights and had a personal bodyguard on him 24 hrs a day? or infringe his other human/civil rights and keep him in isolation for the duration of his prison term??

either way, the ps would be accused of some sort of negligence. they do what they can do and huntley is not the only high risk criminal in prison...he's just the most news worthy at the moment. would be unrealistic to expect they all had protection around the clock....as a tax payer we would all be appalled, as a prisoner you'd no doubt be incensed about your rights to privacy.

this is a no win situation for the ps, it doesnt make them culpable or negligent

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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


"Ian Huntley's crime was unspeakable.

Prisons are not full of sweet natured people. The majority are emotionally damaged , psycopathic or psychotic.

If a someone is locked up for tax evasion would we hate them with the same degree of vilification as we do Huntley and other sex offenders?

Maybe your teenage son is in there for car theft or a fight in the street.

Do we think the tax evader should be protected from violent criminals ?

Do you want your son beaten up and to have his throat cut as Huntley's was in April, or do you want your son protected?

Which criminals do you think should be looked after and punished by the sentence and conditions of that sentence handed out by the court?

Which criminals do you feel should have a sentence handed out by the court and then any other punishement meted out to them by other prisoners who may or may not feel that it makes them some kind of saint as they only robbed a car or never paid tax? Rumour has it they can earn kudos through such acts. Not exactly a selfless act - done in the interests of the raped and murdered children and their familes. More a way of earning promotion. So should we slap these people on the back as we blindly think they give a fuck ?

Our sons could do it perhaps. Cut someones throat and we can slap them on the back and call them heroes.

I don't know what makes people like Huntley tick. I teeter on the edge over the death penalty. Sometimes I bay for it - sometimes I think it's wrong.

I'm VERY interested in what happens to people to harden them to be able to commit such crimes. Is it nature, nurture , momentary madness ?

I'm also VERY interested in what makes people such as 'joe public' turn a blind eye to violence and attempted murder. Not only turn a blind eye but consider it a 'great' thing to be taking place. Does it make them as violent and criminally minded as those that carry out the act? Does it make them feel as 'right minded' as the tax evader?

Sometimes I think a forum is an easy place to say what people think is the 'in crowd' thing to say. Best we keep emotion at bay when speaking about Huntley.

If the system has a duty of care to prisoners and Huntley is a prisoner then the system has failed. If it doesn't owe him then it doesn't owe our sons either.

Do we really want to go back to those days where people could disappear and no one was answerable ?

An untouchable authoritarian system ?

I'd have to stop speeding! I might be bludgeoned to death at the roadside! By a police officer of course!

Top reply Granny....."

Indeed!

I was going to write a similar response but doubt it would have been as eloquant!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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

he infringed the rights of those 2 little girls and their families so in my eyes quicker someone actually does do away with him the better! harsh i know but really dont care! totally fed up with the society that murderers etc have more rights and get more than people they harm!

the limbs in the loch killer william begg there another one who plays the system over his so called rights! more rights than they boy he abducted and chopped up. it makes you sick.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *atisfy janeWoman
over a year ago

Torquay


"Huntley has history of being attacked in prison, he will use these previous attacks to press forward a claim for negligence.

If you had a horse and you put it in a field and the horse kept jumping the gate....would you not fit a higher gate?

As Huntley has been attacked on previous occasions the prison service could well be found negligent in their inactions....I am sure that no-one on here likes that one little bit, but that's what will make his claim winnable....therefore possible qualifying him for Legal Aid.

what would you suggest? that you infrnge his human/civil rights and had a personal bodyguard on him 24 hrs a day? or infringe his other human/civil rights and keep him in isolation for the duration of his prison term??

either way, the ps would be accused of some sort of negligence. they do what they can do and huntley is not the only high risk criminal in prison...he's just the most news worthy at the moment. would be unrealistic to expect they all had protection around the clock....as a tax payer we would all be appalled, as a prisoner you'd no doubt be incensed about your rights to privacy.

this is a no win situation for the ps, it doesnt make them culpable or negligent

"

If they are proven to have neglected his safety then they will be found culpable of not ensuring his safety.

Otherwise where does it end?

A man is sent on remand to prison for a false claim of child molestation, the child and it's mother have made the whole thing up.....the man subsequently doesn't get sent for trial as the CPS decide the case is a load of rubbish and he is released.

In the meantime the accused has been attacked in prison because the staff didn't afford him the correct protection(or decided not to) and the man receives serious injuries....

Would that man have any more rights to legal aid than Huntley?

You need to look beyond your feelings against Huntley and his crimes, you need to understand that in the eyes of the law prisoners have a right to be protected from attack whilst serving a sentence or on remand.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *atisfy janeWoman
over a year ago

Torquay


"he infringed the rights of those 2 little girls and their families so in my eyes quicker someone actually does do away with him the better! harsh i know but really dont care! totally fed up with the society that murderers etc have more rights and get more than people they harm!

the limbs in the loch killer william begg there another one who plays the system over his so called rights! more rights than they boy he abducted and chopped up. it makes you sick. "

Where do you draw the line?....what about prisoners on remand and then found not guilty, or simply never go to court as the case is dropped....or the accusers are lying?

Are they 'fair game' for attempted murder or maiming by other prisoners?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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


"Huntley has history of being attacked in prison, he will use these previous attacks to press forward a claim for negligence.

If you had a horse and you put it in a field and the horse kept jumping the gate....would you not fit a higher gate?

As Huntley has been attacked on previous occasions the prison service could well be found negligent in their inactions....I am sure that no-one on here likes that one little bit, but that's what will make his claim winnable....therefore possible qualifying him for Legal Aid.

what would you suggest? that you infrnge his human/civil rights and had a personal bodyguard on him 24 hrs a day? or infringe his other human/civil rights and keep him in isolation for the duration of his prison term??

either way, the ps would be accused of some sort of negligence. they do what they can do and huntley is not the only high risk criminal in prison...he's just the most news worthy at the moment. would be unrealistic to expect they all had protection around the clock....as a tax payer we would all be appalled, as a prisoner you'd no doubt be incensed about your rights to privacy.

this is a no win situation for the ps, it doesnt make them culpable or negligent

If they are proven to have neglected his safety then they will be found culpable of not ensuring his safety.

Otherwise where does it end?

A man is sent on remand to prison for a false claim of child molestation, the child and it's mother have made the whole thing up.....the man subsequently doesn't get sent for trial as the CPS decide the case is a load of rubbish and he is released.

In the meantime the accused has been attacked in prison because the staff didn't afford him the correct protection(or decided not to) and the man receives serious injuries....

Would that man have any more rights to legal aid than Huntley?

You need to look beyond your feelings against Huntley and his crimes, you need to understand that in the eyes of the law prisoners have a right to be protected from attack whilst serving a sentence or on remand."

i'm not looking at my personal feelings, never would on a topic like this or i would have said i wished he'd been more successful. i said earlier, two wrongs dont make a right.

however, as you said, the prison service has a reasonable responsibility. who's to say they didnt look after huntley within reason?

the point im trying to make is that it would be impossible to protect him to the degree he would possibly require without denying his other rights.

also, there are serial killers and child molesters in prison so there is precedence on how to control such situations...huntley is not, unfortunately, the first.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *atisfy janeWoman
over a year ago

Torquay

Taken from a UK Law website.....

Will a prisoner ever be segregated to protect himself from harm from other prisoners?

On occasions prison staff may deem it appropriate to segregate a prisoner from the rest of the prisoners in order to protect his safety. Accordingly the following factors will be taken into consideration to deem whether this measure is appropriate:

Whether that prisoner has been threatened, assaulted or bullied

Whether the nature and the extent of any such threat is sufficient to justify segregation

Whether improved supervision on the prison wing, transfer to another prison wing or transfer to another prison would be deemed a more appropriate solution

Whether the prisoner is unable to cope with the normal location

Whether the prisoner has been convicted of an offence that has attracted media attention and is likely to create resentment amongst the other prisoners

Whether the prisoner has come under pressure to bring drugs or other contraband into the prison

Whether the prisoner is an informant or suspected of being so by the other prisoners

Whether the prisoner is segregated from the rest of the prison would that prisoner’s mental health deteriorate which may lead to an increased risk of self injury or suicide?

As Huntley was already seriously injured in a previous attack I would suggest that he was in fact likely to be attacked again at some point.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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


"

As Huntley was already seriously injured in a previous attack I would suggest that he was in fact likely to be attacked again at some point.

"

this is all very informative, but i'm pretty sure that the ps are also aware of these regs and it's not improbable to suggest that these regs had been imposed.

as i said, there is precedence to go by and i find that policy is usually based on history and lessons learnt. doubt they would take any greater risks with huntley given his ability to still hit a headline, but should also not be accorded any more than given to any other prisoner in the same risk category.

i for one will wait to see what the court says and wait until the evidence is in before pointing the finger at the ps.

from what i know of the ps, it is overworked and under-resourced. i applaud them for what they do...it cant be easy for them to watch folk like huntley being afforded more rights than the guards that are there to protect him.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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

[Removed by poster at 31/07/10 13:04:51]

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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


"[Removed by poster at 31/07/10 13:04:51]"

interestingly so, it seems huntley was segregated in an "at risk" wing.....as was his assailant.

so the ps were carrying out their duties.

also appears that 3 guards were attacked with a broken bottle 7 days previous to this attack...and within that month another 4 guards were assaulted.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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


"he infringed the rights of those 2 little girls and their families so in my eyes quicker someone actually does do away with him the better! harsh i know but really dont care! totally fed up with the society that murderers etc have more rights and get more than people they harm!

the limbs in the loch killer william begg there another one who plays the system over his so called rights! more rights than they boy he abducted and chopped up. it makes you sick.

Where do you draw the line?....what about prisoners on remand and then found not guilty, or simply never go to court as the case is dropped....or the accusers are lying?

Are they 'fair game' for attempted murder or maiming by other prisoners?"

the majority of the ones held on remand are usually either segregated or in solitary thats IF they are remanded.

there no doubt there have been people accused of crimes they didnt commit the birmingham 4, the ice cream wars, the lady who was accused of murdering her child i cant remember her name??

the point is huntley etc were convicted as in tried by a jury and convicted therefore were in the most part, guilty and imprisoned as such.

anyone could be attacked anywhere not just in prison its the luck of the draw. if he hadnt murdered those 2 little girls he wouldnt be there and there wouldnt be a que of people waiting to attack him. law of the jungle rules at times but i have no sympathy for him or any other like him he was guilty should have thought of the consequences of a life in prison before he did what he did the same as every other one like him. the usefulnes of him to society is to psychologists investigating crime x

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *atisfy janeWoman
over a year ago

Torquay


"[Removed by poster at 31/07/10 13:04:51]

interestingly so, it seems huntley was segregated in an "at risk" wing.....as was his assailant.

so the ps were carrying out their duties.

also appears that 3 guards were attacked with a broken bottle 7 days previous to this attack...and within that month another 4 guards were assaulted. "

Can you direct me to this article?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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


"[Removed by poster at 31/07/10 13:04:51]

interestingly so, it seems huntley was segregated in an "at risk" wing.....as was his assailant.

so the ps were carrying out their duties.

sure np, will pm it to you

also appears that 3 guards were attacked with a broken bottle 7 days previous to this attack...and within that month another 4 guards were assaulted.

Can you direct me to this article?"

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *uton_coupleCouple
over a year ago

luton


"[Removed by poster at 31/07/10 13:04:51]

interestingly so, it seems huntley was segregated in an "at risk" wing.....as was his assailant.

so the ps were carrying out their duties.

also appears that 3 guards were attacked with a broken bottle 7 days previous to this attack...and within that month another 4 guards were assaulted.

Can you direct me to this article?"

has the daily mail suddenly become a paper that prints storys your happy to debate or.............

are you being selective ?

if its the latter , your past criticisms seem a little .... thin

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *atisfy janeWoman
over a year ago

Torquay


"[Removed by poster at 31/07/10 13:04:51]

interestingly so, it seems huntley was segregated in an "at risk" wing.....as was his assailant.

so the ps were carrying out their duties.

also appears that 3 guards were attacked with a broken bottle 7 days previous to this attack...and within that month another 4 guards were assaulted.

Can you direct me to this article?

has the daily mail suddenly become a paper that prints storys your happy to debate or.............

are you being selective ?

if its the latter , your past criticisms seem a little .... thin

"

Why don't you mind your own business?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ushroom7Man
over a year ago

Bradford

Madness, sheer madness.

And the Huntley situation is despicable too.

And i won't mention the only winners will be the lawyers yet again. Or some Legal Aid being corrupt.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *atisfy janeWoman
over a year ago

Torquay


"[Removed by poster at 31/07/10 13:04:51]

interestingly so, it seems huntley was segregated in an "at risk" wing.....as was his assailant.

so the ps were carrying out their duties.

sure np, will pm it to you

also appears that 3 guards were attacked with a broken bottle 7 days previous to this attack...and within that month another 4 guards were assaulted.

Can you direct me to this article?"

Thanks for the link but as with most Daily Mail articles it is speculative and over elaborated.....this was the line in the article for me that summed up the Daily Mail's reporting of the matter...

Fowkes is said to have shouted: ‘He had it coming. I want everybody to know me as the guy who killed Ian Huntley.’

I haven't seen this repeated outside of the tabloids, if you look at the news channels (BBC, Sky etc.) they are carrying some half decents reports on the matter.

It's the legal slant that is worth listening to, Sky just had a very worthwhile report that you should try to take a look at.

If you take the name Huntley out of the equation the bare facts are he will only be afforded Legal Aid if the Legal Aid board decide there is a case to answer and if that case is winnable.

If the facts stack up that the Prison Service didn't seem to be liable for the incident in their duty, then he is unlikely to get Legal Aid.

If however it looks like there may be a case that the Prison Service may have been negligent it is expected to be agrred in an out of court settlement.

So I suppose only time will tell.

Thanks for the link anyway.

"

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *atisfy janeWoman
over a year ago

Torquay


"

Madness, sheer madness.

And the Huntley situation is despicable too.

And i won't mention the only winners will be the lawyers yet again. Or some Legal Aid being corrupt."

The lawyers are always the big winners, I think that their fees should be looked at and maybe regulated better by government.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *uton_coupleCouple
over a year ago

luton


"[Removed by poster at 31/07/10 13:04:51]

interestingly so, it seems huntley was segregated in an "at risk" wing.....as was his assailant.

so the ps were carrying out their duties.

also appears that 3 guards were attacked with a broken bottle 7 days previous to this attack...and within that month another 4 guards were assaulted.

Can you direct me to this article?

has the daily mail suddenly become a paper that prints storys your happy to debate or.............

are you being selective ?

if its the latter , your past criticisms seem a little .... thin

Why don't you mind your own business?"

oh sorry didnt know the forums were just for you, thought anyone could join in

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ushroom7Man
over a year ago

Bradford


"

Madness, sheer madness.

And the Huntley situation is despicable too.

And i won't mention the only winners will be the lawyers yet again. Or some Legal Aid being corrupt.

The lawyers are always the big winners, I think that their fees should be looked at and maybe regulated better by government."

In truth Legal Aid rates for lawyers are "poor", it's the content of the work that requires scrutiny.

There is an irony in that lawyers will be prosecuting the ( allegedly ) fraudulent and thieving 3 MP's and a Lord.

As someone said, if they have done nothing wrong and have nothing to hide, why are they trying every trick in the book to avoid a trial?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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

the joy of the capitalist society when murdering scum can make money! money that US the taxpayer will be payin for the evil scum! and they wonder why people are pissed off!! pay the lawyers, pay the criminal, anyone else to be paid?? what good will the money do him anyway? will he ever be released to spend it. i sincerely hope not. once again makes you sick ! x

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *atisfy janeWoman
over a year ago

Torquay


"[Removed by poster at 31/07/10 13:04:51]

interestingly so, it seems huntley was segregated in an "at risk" wing.....as was his assailant.

so the ps were carrying out their duties.

also appears that 3 guards were attacked with a broken bottle 7 days previous to this attack...and within that month another 4 guards were assaulted.

Can you direct me to this article?

has the daily mail suddenly become a paper that prints storys your happy to debate or.............

are you being selective ?

if its the latter , your past criticisms seem a little .... thin

Why don't you mind your own business?

oh sorry didnt know the forums were just for you, thought anyone could join in "

Then maybe you shoud join in the discussion instead of picking out one member for criticism?

Still in Spain?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *uton_coupleCouple
over a year ago

luton


"[Removed by poster at 31/07/10 13:04:51]

interestingly so, it seems huntley was segregated in an "at risk" wing.....as was his assailant.

so the ps were carrying out their duties.

also appears that 3 guards were attacked with a broken bottle 7 days previous to this attack...and within that month another 4 guards were assaulted.

Can you direct me to this article?

has the daily mail suddenly become a paper that prints storys your happy to debate or.............

are you being selective ?

if its the latter , your past criticisms seem a little .... thin

Why don't you mind your own business?

oh sorry didnt know the forums were just for you, thought anyone could join in

Then maybe you shoud join in the discussion instead of picking out one member for criticism?

Still in Spain? "

pmsl, Why don't YOU mind your own business?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *atisfy janeWoman
over a year ago

Torquay


"[Removed by poster at 31/07/10 13:04:51]

interestingly so, it seems huntley was segregated in an "at risk" wing.....as was his assailant.

so the ps were carrying out their duties.

also appears that 3 guards were attacked with a broken bottle 7 days previous to this attack...and within that month another 4 guards were assaulted.

Can you direct me to this article?

has the daily mail suddenly become a paper that prints storys your happy to debate or.............

are you being selective ?

if its the latter , your past criticisms seem a little .... thin

Why don't you mind your own business?

oh sorry didnt know the forums were just for you, thought anyone could join in

Then maybe you shoud join in the discussion instead of picking out one member for criticism?

Still in Spain?

pmsl, Why don't YOU mind your own business? "

See....not nice is it?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ushroom7Man
over a year ago

Bradford

It's amusing.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *acreadCouple
over a year ago

central scotland

Its reported that the legal aid costs for this case will be anything up to a million pounds.

What they should do in the ridiculous cases of compensation claims is make the law firms pay at least a percentage of the overall costs to the taxpayer if they lose and see if the no win no fee brigade are so willing to take some cases on board.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ushroom7Man
over a year ago

Bradford


"Its reported that the legal aid costs for this case will be anything up to a million pounds.

What they should do in the ridiculous cases of compensation claims is make the law firms pay at least a percentage of the overall costs to the taxpayer if they lose and see if the no win no fee brigade are so willing to take some cases on board.

"

Excellent idea. May i suggest that the percentage is set at 125% plus VAT on top.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *atisfy janeWoman
over a year ago

Torquay

Good comment just now on Sky,

'Morally it absolutely stinks that Huntley should be suing for compensation...however in Briatin we don't have a court of Morals, we have Courts of Law, and as such Huntley is as entitled as anyone else under those laws'.

I shouldn't think there is a single person on this site that isn't disgusted and outraged that Huntley has the cheek to sue for compensation, but his guilt has been proven, he is serving the sentence laid down by the court, and is therefore like every prisoner (or prisoner on remand) entitled to receive a reasonable duty of care while in prison.

Maybe one of his three suicide attempts might just have worked?......

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *uton_coupleCouple
over a year ago

luton


"Good comment just now on Sky,

'Morally it absolutely stinks that Huntley should be suing for compensation...however in Briatin we don't have a court of Morals, we have Courts of Law, and as such Huntley is as entitled as anyone else under those laws'.

I shouldn't think there is a single person on this site that isn't disgusted and outraged that Huntley has the cheek to sue for compensation, but his guilt has been proven, he is serving the sentence laid down by the court, and is therefore like every prisoner (or prisoner on remand) entitled to receive a reasonable duty of care while in prison.

Maybe one of his three suicide attempts might just have worked?......"

very well said !!!!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ugby 123Couple
Forum Mod
over a year ago

O o O oo

ok please keep any issues away from the forums.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *atisfy janeWoman
over a year ago

Torquay


"Its reported that the legal aid costs for this case will be anything up to a million pounds.

What they should do in the ridiculous cases of compensation claims is make the law firms pay at least a percentage of the overall costs to the taxpayer if they lose and see if the no win no fee brigade are so willing to take some cases on board.

"

The limit paid for correspondence (a letter) to a Law Firm in a Legal Aid case is £135 + Vat, I mean it must must cost at least twice as much as that for a solicitor to send a letter about a case?

It's a farce, Law Firms are raking it in because Legal Aid is too generous.

Why else would there be an estimated £1 million bill for a court case by Huntley?, the real criminals are wearing the fancy wigs.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ushroom7Man
over a year ago

Bradford

Such a shame that Harriet Harman's "Court of Public Opinion" didn't take off.

The answer is simple.

Judge sits, immediately states that Huntley IS due compo and awards 1 shiny new penny.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *nothercoupleCouple
over a year ago

Exeter

A lead injection administered just behind the ear would have been the way forward for huntley (I wont dignify his name with a cap)

I vote for the same treatment for all of his kind unless handling nuclear wast by hand ever makes a comeback!

If you take a life you should expect to give up any rights you may have had.

The only prisoners that should ever get any form of compensation are those that are falsley convicted.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *nothercoupleCouple
over a year ago

Exeter

Sheesh.... typo's

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *atisfy janeWoman
over a year ago

Torquay


"A lead injection administered just behind the ear would have been the way forward for huntley (I wont dignify his name with a cap)

I vote for the same treatment for all of his kind unless handling nuclear wast by hand ever makes a comeback!

If you take a life you should expect to give up any rights you may have had.

The only prisoners that should ever get any form of compensation are those that are falsley convicted."

Ok then.....remember the case of the pensioner from Exeter who was sent to prison a couple of years ago for refusing to pay her Council Tax?

What if she had been attacked by another prisoner because the Prison Service hadn't afforded her reasonable care?......would you deny her compensation?

There is only One law of the land, and that is the one that treats everyone equally......Murderer or Council Tax evader.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ushroom7Man
over a year ago

Bradford


"Sheesh.... typo's"

psst typo's or spellings?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ushroom7Man
over a year ago

Bradford


"

There is only One law of the land, and that is the one that treats everyone equally......Murderer or Council Tax evader."

jeezuz, you ever heard of politicians?

both national and local governments?

the day they comply with all laws as we do will be a great day of rejoicing.

i suspect i'll be long gone.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *nothercoupleCouple
over a year ago

Exeter


"Sheesh.... typo's

psst typo's or spellings? "

Them too!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ugby 123Couple
Forum Mod
over a year ago

O o O oo

[Removed by poster at 31/07/10 14:58:27]

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ugby 123Couple
Forum Mod
over a year ago

O o O oo

I don't reckon he should be able to claim compensation.

As long as the guards didn't turn a blind eye to what was going on, then you can't put the blame on the guards. They can't be covering EVERY person one to one who is in prison, and that could have happened to anyone. It only takes a split second to knife someone or harm them in some way.

The best thing to do is not end up in prison in the first place.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ushroom7Man
over a year ago

Bradford

[Removed by poster at 31/07/10 14:59:20]

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ushroom7Man
over a year ago

Bradford

i agree

( ps in truth i daren't do otherwise )

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *nothercoupleCouple
over a year ago

Exeter


"

Ok then.....remember the case of the pensioner from Exeter who was sent to prison a couple of years ago for refusing to pay her Council Tax?

What if she had been attacked by another prisoner because the Prison Service hadn't afforded her reasonable care?......would you deny her compensation?

There is only One law of the land, and that is the one that treats everyone equally......Murderer or Council Tax evader."

Yes I remember her, and NO, she effectively put herself in prison therefore she gave up her rights! (in my book)

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ugby 123Couple
Forum Mod
over a year ago

O o O oo

Damn, I love a good debate, but don't join in much cos people think I might get my whip out if you disagree

Go forth and debate people, I can't ban you for disagreeing !!

Mushroom, do you still agree or you want to change your mind?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ushroom7Man
over a year ago

Bradford


"Damn, I love a good debate, but don't join in much cos people think I might get my whip out if you disagree

Go forth and debate people, I can't ban you for disagreeing !!

Mushroom, do you still agree or you want to change your mind? "

Change my mind? who's are you thinking of? i don't wanna be barred

And i agree, you can't beat a mass debate

well you can actually but u know what i meant

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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

[Removed by poster at 31/07/10 16:24:29]

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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


"[Removed by poster at 31/07/10 13:04:51]

interestingly so, it seems huntley was segregated in an "at risk" wing.....as was his assailant.

so the ps were carrying out their duties.

sure np, will pm it to you

also appears that 3 guards were attacked with a broken bottle 7 days previous to this attack...and within that month another 4 guards were assaulted.

Can you direct me to this article?

Thanks for the link but as with most Daily Mail articles it is speculative and over elaborated.....this was the line in the article for me that summed up the Daily Mail's reporting of the matter...

Fowkes is said to have shouted: ‘He had it coming. I want everybody to know me as the guy who killed Ian Huntley.’

I haven't seen this repeated outside of the tabloids, if you look at the news channels (BBC, Sky etc.) they are carrying some half decents reports on the matter.

It's the legal slant that is worth listening to, Sky just had a very worthwhile report that you should try to take a look at.

If you take the name Huntley out of the equation the bare facts are he will only be afforded Legal Aid if the Legal Aid board decide there is a case to answer and if that case is winnable.

If the facts stack up that the Prison Service didn't seem to be liable for the incident in their duty, then he is unlikely to get Legal Aid.

If however it looks like there may be a case that the Prison Service may have been negligent it is expected to be agrred in an out of court settlement.

So I suppose only time will tell.

Thanks for the link anyway.

""

erm, it wasnt in the mail, it was in the independent......i wont read the daily mail ...ever...not only for the reasons you stated above.

just as an aside though, everything we've discussed thus far has been speculative. we dont know that actual facts are and are speculating on the cause and effect of this case.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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


"I don't reckon he should be able to claim compensation.

As long as the guards didn't turn a blind eye to what was going on, then you can't put the blame on the guards. They can't be covering EVERY person one to one who is in prison, and that could have happened to anyone. It only takes a split second to knife someone or harm them in some way.

The best thing to do is not end up in prison in the first place.

"

exactly!!! we are still making the wild assumption that they were negligent in their duty without the case even being heard.

be happy for someone to define reasonasble....it's hardly an exact measure now is it?!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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


"I don't reckon he should be able to claim compensation.

As long as the guards didn't turn a blind eye to what was going on, then you can't put the blame on the guards. They can't be covering EVERY person one to one who is in prison, and that could have happened to anyone. It only takes a split second to knife someone or harm them in some way.

The best thing to do is not end up in prison in the first place.

exactly!!! we are still making the wild assumption that they were negligent in their duty without the case even being heard.

be happy for someone to define reasonasble....it's hardly an exact measure now is it?!"

fook...*reasonable!!

i think i've caught something contagious on this thread....

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

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

It's been a good debate on here and I'm sure those who argue that he may get compensation are playing devils advocate as it's plain that morally nobody thinks he should but the argument will be if the PS took reasonable steps and care of him. The fact that he was attacked previously will make no difference unless it can be shown that no action was taken following this and also he himself may have been offered alternative care, which if he declined then HE has a responsibility for. All the prison service have to do is prove 'reasonable steps' were taken to ensure his safety as mentioned before he'd probably be suing if he was watched over 24/7. Now that I have done my reasonable bit I hope he rots in jail.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 
 

By *ugby 123Couple
Forum Mod
over a year ago

O o O oo


"Damn, I love a good debate, but don't join in much cos people think I might get my whip out if you disagree

Go forth and debate people, I can't ban you for disagreeing !!

Mushroom, do you still agree or you want to change your mind?

Change my mind? who's are you thinking of? i don't wanna be barred

"

wow double snipe.

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