A ruling has just been made that the victim can now seek compensation. He bought a ticket whilst on day release and won £7M.

Don't get me wrong, scumbags like him should be locked up and the key thrown away. Prisoners should not even be allowed to play the lottery.

However, the idea of paying compensation retrospectively because the culprit happened to come into a bit of good fortune doesn't seem right. Although the British justice system is crap and the punishment for rape is never harsh enough, this is setting a precedent that someone can be punished twice for one crime. Very dodgy ground if you ask me.

It's also encouraging lying bitches to accuse blokes with cash of rape knowing that if they can lie their way through a trial they can then claim pots of cash. Diabolical news.

What century are you trapped in?

I was thinking more along the lines of, if you get divorced and there's a financial settlement in place from a court ruling with the ex wife, she could come back and sue yo ass a second time. Mutha fuc-ka!!!

So you really don't think that it will lead to an increase in unfounded claims against, for example, footballers or actors as some unscrupulous sods look for a big pay day?

I doubt it, but I will look to the Daily Mail and Express for a lead on this one

Once the 'niggers' have finally stolen all the Poles and Lady Di is found guilty of murdering Dodi, it will be front page, I tell thee!

On the basis that retrospective justice is never a good thing I tend to agree with Mr Chunky. No doubt everyone will wish this rapist ill fortune and rightly so but you can't change the rules retrospectively.

Taking it to the extreme; if I park my car on the road in a perfectly legal position then six months later they paint yellow lines there, I could get a parking ticket.

It's the latest belly laugh in an increasingly risible justice system.

If the bloke appeals, it will be overturned.

Now where's the Doctor when you need him?? He surely can't still be playing cricket.....

Playing devil's advocate here, if the guy had already had the 7m when he was convicted he'd prolly have been made to pay straight away. If there was no compo given or even dicussed, it was because the guy was patently broke and (on face value) had no hope of earning money in prison, not because compo wasn't deserved.
So if it was deserved then, it must still be now.

My gut feeling however is I think it's wrong to give the victim two bites at the cherry (excuse my choice of words!). The compo should have been awarded straight away regardless of the prisoner's means.

I've not had time to read the Judgment yet, but are they saying by precedent that the "six year rule" with regards to financial claims is now redundant in all instances or have they made special exemption in this case?

It seems that the law lords are saying that the 6 year rule should be redundant in sex abuse cases and victims can should still get a fair trial for compensation if the time limit has expired. Victims can now go to the high court for a judge to decide.

It looks as though the person who committed the crime is not being punished twice after all

well that's fair comment then.
Everyone was worried that other court rulings could be overturned, such as after divorce cases or becoming a successful businessman later on etc.
If a convicted sex offender or killer gets money, then that's different. they shouldn't be rewarded with a good life for winning the lotto. Either they should be banned from receiving its proceeds (and given their £1 back) or they accept that if they come into oney then they are expected to settle up with the victim or their families/dependents

Prisoners should not be allowed to play the lottery at all.

Didn't know they sold lottery tickets in the nick.

The country has gone to pot they will ban smacking your kids and caning next.

Well seeing as nearly everyone who plays the lottery loses, it's one way of getting prisoners' money off them innit.

Of course there will be accidents like this one, but overall they are almost certainly going to be in deficit.

He was on a jolly passed off by the liberal leftie lot as "day release".

Don't think I can go along with that.

A sentence is passed on the present circumstances surely. That sentence should fit the crime if the judge is doing his job right. Sentence served, parity restored. You shouldn't pay the penance for life in case your circumstances change.

For instance: you get wrongly dismissed, you get the judgement, you get compensated. If the company continues to make a decent profit, are you entitled to a slice of it??

Aye, but what they are saying is that victims often don't come forward through fear and embarrasment, some were only children when it happenend, and in most cases, they are just relieved to see the criminal behind bars and don't have the confidence to carry on with a compo claim. (I think)

I know!!!!


come back the posh Doc!

we should start a campaign

viewtopic.php?f=42&t=12892


even non-cliquers can vote!!

Aye, but that's the lawyers job and the compo can be sorted out in chambers, it's not a jury job. It's a decision after the verdict or a separate hearing out of the public gaze.