An advisory service for who? They have an Advisory Service for Squatters?  WTF?  Should that not be “burglars? What the hell is the difference? 

Liberal Democrat opposition leader Ashley Lumsden said a senior council source told him that housing officers had earlier committed ‘a grave error’ by publishing a list of all vacant properties in the appendix of a council document.

When the squatters presented their demand, the information was already in the public domain so the request could not be denied.

But the council said it had been forced to give out the information because of a legal precedent set by another council.

A spokeswoman for Lambeth Living, which manages the borough’s council housing, said: ‘When responding to FOI requests we have to operate within the letter of the law.

‘A legal precedent had already been set in response to a similar FOI inquiry to Bexley Council.

‘On challenging the request, they were instructed by the Information Tribunal that they had a legal duty to provide the address details of empty properties which were not owned by individuals.’

She added that the number of Lambeth properties with squatters had fallen over the past six months from 49 to 45.

The incident is not the first major embarrassment for Lambeth in its struggle with squatters.

Four empty blocks of flats at Limerick Court on the border of Streatham and Balham were occupied by more than a hundred people for six months until they were evicted last summer.

Two years ago at least 100 armed police officers used stun grenades in a huge raids on a property in Kennington which had been used as a squat for decades - finding several kilos of cannabis, crack cocaine and six rounds of live ammunition.

Councillor Lumsden said the Freedom of Information incident was in a long line of blunders by the housing department that has seen it overspend by an estimated £23 million, and the number of empty council homes double since 2006 to close to 900.

He told the Streatham Guardian: ‘The administration seems hell-bent on destroying public housing in Lambeth through a mixture of brain-numbing incompetence and sheer bloody-mindedness.’

HERE FOR MORE PLUS PHOTOS

Please understand my irritation and rant on this sort of thing doesn’t include those who through misfortune or health or something they honestly couldn’t avoid. Sometimes there are folks who really are in dire straights and simply find themselves “squatting” in some god forsaken building or under a bridge in a box. I am thankful I’ve been so lucky as to not know first hand what that must be like.  I have to wonder about the many I’ve read about who choose that lifestyle.  It’s just beyond my imaginings. Who in their right mind would want to live like that?

But there are people and the number grows if I can believe what I read, who are simply leeches. You can see them on street corners almost anywhere with hands out.  Some actually have apts. or even houses to go back to after a hard days mooching.  And others simply enjoy the idea of squatting anywhere they please and daring anyone to do anything about it.  To make matters worse, in todays legally advanced times there are those who pander to them and find “loopholes” to make things easier for them to carry on with this kind of activity.

I don’t blame the squatters half as much as I do the idiot left wing types who make it so easy.  And the lawyers who work on their behalf under the cloak of “rights” of any kind they can dream up. BAH!

Posted by peiper     on 03/20/2009 at 09:25 AM   
Filed Under: • Daily Life • Editorials • Government • UK •  
• Comments (0) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Sunday - March 15, 2009

Housework

One way to tell that you are making progress sorting through old papers, catalogs, and junk mail is when you’ve moved enough paper to locate the paper shredder.

I’m not yet at that point. I know I have one ... somewhere.

If you don’t hear from me by Tuesday, send in the rescue Saint Bernards. Well aged brandy only please.

Posted by Drew458     on 03/15/2009 at 05:57 PM   
Filed Under: • Daily Life •  
• Comments (4) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Friday - March 13, 2009

Access road dispute takes expensive route to High Court.  (don’t pass this one by)

Sure, I know at first glance you’ll think huh?  Who cares?  But really. For something I doubt any American can understand, this might be a funny read.
But ONLY to us.  For Brits who live with this and do know about it, I’m pretty sure it’s business as usual.  But it sure looks BONKERS to me.

Hey .. we don’t have this anywhere in USA, do we?  If we do, I never heard of anything like it and I’ve been around awhile.

Now then, I am familiar with something here called “infilling.” That’s where you may own a home with enough property to have another house built. So, you might sell off part of your property with approval from the city of course.  But with space being what it is here, I have seen as many as three homes with just one driveway. 

How in heck can anyone

Neighbours’ access road dispute takes expensive route to High Court

March 13, 2009
Jack Malvern

Wealthy neighbours who once enjoyed a close relationship have gone to the High Court to argue over a trellis in a case where legal costs are estimated to run to hundreds of thousands of pounds.

Simon and Sarah Baynes Clarke allege that their neighbours have attempted to prevent them accessing their home by car between the hours of 10.30pm and 7.30am, while Michael Corless and his wife, Joanne, say that they have been covertly photographed going about their daily business.

Mrs Justice Proudman was told that both couples purchased their detached homes in Carmelstead Close, Haywards Heath, West Sussex, in 2001 for about £575,000 each. Mr and Mrs Baynes Clarke bought South Heath, and Mr and Mrs Corless North Heath. The access road serving both houses and a third property, Carmelstead, was retained by a property development company. The road was sold to Mr and Mrs Corless for £3,000 in 2004.

(Just so we’re clear on this. Other reports say “driveway.” But no matter as this apparently is the same thing. And these homes for BMEWS readers info, are in the area of MILLION DOLLAR HOMES!  How do places like this get one access road?  Oh yeah one other thing. Million dollar houses here do NOT mean mansions of the rich and famous. Often, far from it. Very far. )

Paul Stafford, for Mr and Mrs Baynes Clarke, claimed that, during negotiations for the sale of the access road, Mr Corless had deliberately kept his neighbours in the dark about what was going on, despite earlier talks between the neighbours in which Mr Corless had suggested that a management company be set up by the owners of the three properties to control the road.

Mr Stafford is asking Mrs Justice Proudman to order that the access road is held by Mr and Mrs Corless for themselves and their neighbours, as well as the owners of Carmelstead, on constructive trust.

But Timothy Morshead, for Mr and Mrs Corless, told the High Court there was never an agreement that could be binding.

He alleged that Mr and Mrs Corless’s lives had been made a misery ever since they informed Mr and Mrs Baynes Clarke — whose daughter once babysat for Mr and Mrs Corless — that they had bought the road.

As Mr Baynes Clarke stood in the High Court witness box, Mr Morshead told him: “The fact is, you are determined to punish Mr and Mrs Corless for what you see as their un-neighbourly conduct, regardless of what it takes.” Mr Baynes Clarke, who works in the construction industry, denied the accusation.

Mr Morshead said that Mr and Mrs Baynes Clarke had presented to the court 350 photographs of Mr and Mrs Corless, including pictures of Mr Corless filling up a watering can with a hosepipe and putting compost on bushes.

But Mr Baynes Clarke said the photos showed Mr Corless flouting a hosepipe ban and throwing away rubbish, adding that his neighbour “took pleasure” in dumping garden waste in front of the Baynes Clarkes’ property.

The Baynes Clarkes are also complaining about a wooden, self-supporting trellis, put up by Mr and Mrs Corless, which they say has been nailed to their fence.

The trellis, which Mr and Mrs Corless say they erected in response to the construction of decking that overlooked their property, has already been the subject of a planning appeal, Mr Morshead said. Mr and Mrs Baynes Clarke are insisting that it be reduced from 3m (9ft 9in) to 2.2m.

The Baynes Clarkes also object to Mr and Mrs Corless having put up goalposts and basketball nets on a turning area in the access road.

Mr Stafford alleged that in 2007 the Corlesses wrote to their neighbours, seeking to enforce a 10.30pm to 7.30am curfew and telling them that, if they wanted to use the road outside those hours, they had to seek permission.

The hearing continues.

DRIVEWAY ACCESS

Just happen to notice again the date these homes were bought. 2001. That means in American dollars they went for WELL OVER ONE MILLION.

Posted by peiper     on 03/13/2009 at 01:36 PM   
Filed Under: • Daily Life • UK •  
• Comments (1) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Thursday - March 12, 2009

Yoot crime as boy age eight is accused of rape.  Eight?  Is that even possible? 8?

Saw this one and really was surprised as I would never have thought age eight would have been developed enough.
Saw the original story in Telegraph with more detail re. ‘yoot’ crime in The Mail.

I can somewhat agree with people who say kids are having sexual images hammered into them at a very early age. Makes a parent job harder then it used to be I bet.  And at an earlier age.  That is, the parents who are trying.  We read about many who are pretty dismal at the job.  Never know where their kids are or what they’re doing.  But even then, it can’t be possible for parents to know about every single hour even among the many good parents.  Has to be a big worry and an ulcer maker I would guess.

Would you say communication is theeeee most important?  Or ... would kids at a certain age think communication a waste and see it as unwanted control?  I’m asking as a non parent so curious.

Now (over here as readers are aware) there’s a move afoot to start sex ed. at five.  That’s 5.  As in years old.  Thing is, so called “experts” who are also parents and are supposed to know something about the subject because it’s their profession, seem to believe that’s ok.  Five?
Being a non parent maybe I should not question what experts are supposed to be trained for.  But gee ... Five?

Then of course you are all aware as well about that dust-up last week over parents not wanting to send kids to their school for the Romeo and Julian thing.  So, are kids being pushed into growing up sooner?  I tend to think that without actually knowing if I’m correct or not.

As for these kids mentioned here .... well.  Hard to imagine an 8yr old but then again a lot would depend on his origin too. Ya think? It could.
I once heard a 10 yr old tell a cop what his civil rights were.  And that was over 30 years ago.  No foolin’.
So maybe all these years later it isn’t outlandish at all to accept that crime is getting younger.  And younger and more serious.

There is NO going back I know that.  But I still believe as I stated in another post that the entertainment industry (entertainment in gore) in all it’s forms, has coarsened the culture to a point where this is simply one of the results.
It has to take very strong, dedicated and worrying parents to attempt the role of buffer, adviser, disciplinarian and heaven only knows what the heck else the demand are on you.  Oh yeah, banker too. 

So far, I think I’m darn lucky to have avoided that role in life.  Thankfully I recognized early on that I just wouldn’t cut it as a parent.

EIGHT YEAR OLD BOY ACCUSED OF RAPING GIRL
By Neil Puffett
12 March 2009

An eight-year-old boy accused of rape was among 24 Suffolk children who were not prosecuted last year because of their age, police have revealed.
The boy was accused of carrying out the attack on a girl under the age of 10 but was not charged because he too is under 10, the age of criminal responsibility.

A Freedom of Information request made to Suffolk police reveals other serious offences that are alleged to have taken place, included four incidents of racially aggravated harassment, alarm or distress by a five-year-old, two six-year-olds and an eight-year-old.

Other alleged crimes committed in 2008 included two incidents of common assault and battery by nine-year-olds and nine cases of criminal damage caused by seven-, eight- and nine year-olds.

In total, 18 separate alleged crimes were revealed.

A Suffolk police spokesman said: “In circumstances where the suspected offender is below the age of criminal responsibility, the incident, like any other crime, is thoroughly investigated.

“However, it cannot be dealt with by way of prosecution. Further action involving the offender is very much dependent on the incident and can be a complex issue.”

Each incident is assessed to determine whether the child is suffering bullying or neglect or needs to be referred to another agency, the spokesman added.

JUST YOOTS

AND THERE IS THIS:

Kyle Abdo became Britain’s youngest convicted rapist when he was aged 12 in 2004 and given two-and-a-half years’ detention for raping a nine-year-old girl.

Liverpool Crown Court heard how Abdo was aged 11 when he carried out the attack during a game of hide and seek at his home.
A judge made an order allowing him to be named.

Another boy aged 12 was given three years supervision at Newcastle Crown Court in February last year after he admitted raping a girl of seven in a drunken game of truth or dare.

The rape which happened in Gateshead in February 2006 after the boy who was aged 11 at the time had drunk four cans of lager and two miniature bottles of vodka.

ABDO?

Posted by peiper     on 03/12/2009 at 09:26 AM   
Filed Under: • Crime • Daily Life • UK •  
• Comments (0) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Wednesday - March 11, 2009

THE FRONT PAGE OF THE DAILY MAIL.  MUSLIM SCUM GREET BRIT MEN RETURNED FROM FRONT

Muslim hate preacher ridicules troops abused in anti-war protests - and mocks their dead comrade

By Michael Seamark, Andrew Levy and Matt Sandy
Last updated at 12:07 PM on 11th March 2009

A Muslim preacher of hate today ridiculed British soldiers who were abused during a homecoming parade - branding them cowards who have an ‘uncanny knack for death by friendly fire’.

Firebrand preacher Anjem Choudary praised the Muslims who had protested at yesterday’s parade for the 2nd Battalion Royal Anglian Regiment in Luton.

And in an inflammatory message posted on an Islamic extremist website, Choudary viciously mocked their comrade who was killed by friendly fire in Iraq.

His words came as police charged a man who allegedly shouted abuse at the Muslim anti-war protesters.

Venom: Faces contorted with fury, some of the Muslim demonstrator who marred the homecoming of the Royal Anglian Regiment yesterday

Choudary, who has links with banned Muslim cleric Sheikh Omar Bakri Mohammed, likened the soldiers to Nazis and branded yesterday’s homecoming a ‘vile parade’ of ‘brutal murderers’.

Choudary said: ‘On 10th March 2009 200 pathetic and cowardly British soldiers from the second battalion, of the Royal Anglian Regiment, pompously marched through Luton to demonstrate their skill at murdering and torturing thousands of innocent Muslim men, women and children (in Iraq) over a 24-month period.’

Choudary leads the controversial Islam For The UK organisation which wants Britain to be an Islamic state, ruled by Sharia law.

His group was formed after Bakri’s fundamentalist organisation Al-Muhajiroun was banned by the Government.

He said: ‘Non-Muslims in Britain must appreciate that the actions of the British soldiers must be condemned unreservedly; they are not heroes but closer to cowards who cannot fight, as their uncanny knack for death by ‘friendly fire’ illustrates.’

His cruel comments were clearly designed to mock the memory of Private Darren George, 23, from Pirbright, Surrey, who was accidentally shot by a colleague in Kabul on April 9, 2002.

SCUMLINK TO REST OF STORY

THESE ARE THE IMAGES FROM MORNING PAPER, THESE ARE SOME OF THE SCUMMY UNWASHED,SMELLY LICE INFESTED BASTARDS GREETING TROOPS.

HERE IS WHAT PASSES FOR MUSLIM EYE CANDY.  SMELLY , HAIRY , LICE RIDDEN, UNWASHED SKANKS.
this is the price to be paid for allowing these sub-humans to live among a higher order. these are the breeders. they produce what’s seen in photo above, and below. and they breed like the insects they are.

INTERESTING THAT ONE SIGN CLAIMING ENGLAND A TERROR STATE.  IF IT’S THAT, THEN WHY DOESN’T HE GO LIVE IN AN islamic COUNTRY?

Good seeing the sign in lower right.
Just once I wish the cops would turn away and let the troops FIRE AT WILL.  But then all that paperwork ...

Posted by peiper     on 03/11/2009 at 09:06 AM   
Filed Under: • Daily Life • Illegal-Aliens and Immigration • Jack Booted Thugs • Outrageous • Personal • RoPMA • Terrorists • UK •  
• Comments (7) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Tuesday - March 10, 2009

School bans CCTV film check to protect iPod thief’s rights.  Can they get any dumber?

BMEWS readers all ....

I read part (okay only the headline) of an article this morning that says people who are always angry are at risk of heart attacks.
So I thought ... hmmmm.  They’re talkin’ to me.  Maybe I’d better say my goodbyes now while I can and while I still feel fit.

So just in case the worst happens, it’s been great knowin’ ya’ll and here’s just another example of why I’m perpetually pissed off!

This appeared in this morning’s Telegraph on page 13.  Unfortunately, the story isn’t online in their site. Typical of these SOBs and so I’m PO’d on that score too as I had to go to something called Press Display and sign up for an account where they give me a couple of free articles a week I think it is.  So that means I haven’t a direct link to the article.  But you can tell I am NOT making this up.

So now I’m 2wice angry. 

Here is more lunacy from comrade socialist nanny state.

10 Mar 2009
The Daily Telegraph
By Richard Savill

School bans CCTV film check to protect iPod thief’s rights

ATEENAGER whose £165 iPod was stolen from a school changing room has been told that he cannot view CCTV footage because it would infringe the rights of the thief.

Oliver Wheen, 16, wanted to see if there was footage of the incident at Varndean School in Brighton to identify the suspect, but was refused permission by teachers who cited the Data Protection Act.
The schoolboy’s bag, containing his house keys and books, as well as the iPod, was taken during a PE lesson, forcing his mother, Lesley Wheen, to change the locks on their home.

Mrs Wheen, whose son also made an unsuccessful request under the Freedom of Information Act to view the footage, said: “It makes a bit of a mockery of having the cameras in the first place. What are they actually there for? If they are supposed to be a deterrent they obviously have not deterred anyone.”
The schoolboy asked to see the footage from cameras covering the entrance to the changing room after his bag was stolen while he was in a 90-minute games lesson which included trampolining in the sports hall.

A spokesman for the school said: “As a rule it is locked but every child knows that if they have anything valuable in their bag they have to give it to the teacher for them to lock up.
“There are no CCTV cameras in the changing rooms for privacy reasons so the only footage would have been someone walking out with the pupil’s bag.
“It has been reviewed and nothing like that was seen.”

The boy was initially allowed to watch the footage in fastforward alongside a member of staff, but after he complained the video needed to be shown in real time he was referred to a senior teacher who made clear he should not have been shown it in the first place.
Wendy Kassamani, the information compliance officer for Brighton and Hove council, said: “You are entitled to CCTV footage of yourself but not of other people.”

The school said police and designated members of staff were allowed to view the footage. “The matter including the footage has been passed to police.”
The spokesman added that it was the choice of pupils as to whether they brought an iPod into school.

Pupils had responsibility for their iPods and they were not allowed to use them in lessons unless directed to by the teachers.
The teenager’s bag has been handed back three weeks after it vanished.

Sussex Police are investigating the theft of the iPod which is still missing.

-30-

They allowed a fast forward view. Oh that’s a big help.  Can you folks believe this crap? So they watched and nothing showed up. Fine. But this is so darn stupid it defies description.  So I’ll leave the rest of that to you.

Posted by peiper     on 03/10/2009 at 06:12 AM   
Filed Under: • Daily Life • Education • Nanny State • Stoopid-People • UK •  
• Comments (5) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Monday - March 09, 2009

Muslim sues after workmates ‘laughed at his beard’.  got it. so now ya can’t laugh either. ok.

Thought I was through for the night until I saw this.

Here we go yet again.  Another muslim suing.  Yawn.

Sorry there achmed or whatever the hell your name is, I already forgot it, I don’t buy any of your story except the part about laughing at that absolutely ridiculous, asinine and stupid looking beard.  Sue me.  It looks fake and phony and I can’t understand how this jerk can’t look in a mirror and see that.  Simply amazing.

It really doesn’t ever end people.  That because it’s allowed to go on and on and on.  Because these folks all have “rights” don’tcha know.

Anyway ... take a look at this stupid looking thing and let us know if you laughed too.

Muslim PC sues after workmates ‘laughed at his beard’

By Andrew Levy
Last updated at 9:10 AM on 09th March 2009

A Muslim police officer claims he was forced out of his job by colleagues who made fun of his beard and called him a ‘f***ing Paki’.

PC Javid Iqbal, 38, said white officers openly discussed in front of him how they were ‘ better’ than their ethnic-minority colleagues.

The married father of two also claims officers pulled faces at each other if told they had to go out on patrol with him and forced him to walk home from a job instead of picking him up.

Well of course they’d “pull faces” because nobody normal would wanna been seen with you.  You’re embarrassing. Schmuck.

Mr Iqbal says he was sacked after fellow-officers in Luton launched a ‘smear and witch-hunt campaign’ during which they lodged a string of complaints about his performance.

He is taking the Bedfordshire force to an employment tribunal claiming he is the victim of racial and religious discrimination and unfair dismissal.

The claims will add to concern about institutional racism in police forces.

An employment tribunal in London recently heard evidence that an ‘apartheid culture’ was operated at Belgravia police station, with separate vans for white and black staff.

Mr Iqbal, who was born and raised in Stevenage, Hertfordshire, told the Daily Mail: ‘My beard is an important part of my identity which helps other Muslims relate to me.

‘I am disgusted that I was bullied by other officers because of my beliefs. I became a policeman because I believed in putting something back into society.

‘I have found that institutional racism is still very much around.’

Mr Iqbal was working in Hertfordshire County Council’s finance department when he became a special constable for the Bedfordshire force, one day a week.

Following the 7/7 bombings in London in 2005, he volunteered to go on patrol every night after work for two weeks to help reassure the large Muslim population of Luton, who were concerned about revenge attacks.

In October that year he was accepted on to a training course to become a full-time constable.

He says the first racist incident came in early 2006. He claims he was in a van with seven PCs and three ‘tutor’ constables - including one other Muslim - which stopped for food at a shop which did not sell halal products. When he asked if they were stopping anywhere else, he was told: ‘This is it.’

One officer allegedly mimicked his accent and pretended to have a beard similar to his in an ‘ offensive’ incident.

Matters worsened in September 2006 when eight officers presented ‘negative statements’ to superiors about Mr Iqbal, including an allegation that he failed to help a colleague arresting a violent offender.

He said he was cleared the following June when CCTV showed he was dealing with other people at the time.

But relations with fellow officers hit a new low in February 2008, three months after he officially lodged his grievances. A sympathetic officer told him the document had been left in the duty room where anyone could read it.

Subsequently, he said, an officer had openly referred to him as a ‘f***ing Paki’.

Mr Iqbal had only recently returned to work after a ninemonth leave of absence on full pay owing to depression when he was sacked for poor performance in August last year. He says he was the victim of untrue allegations, such as failing to report a rape claim. He insists the woman complained only of harassment at the time.

Mr Iqbal’s wife, Surhya, 30, a preschool headmistress, said: ‘Javid has gone through depression quite badly. There were times when he was asleep continuously for three days. Previously, I felt if something was wrong we would be able to rely on the police. Now I know how it works on the inside I’ve lost faith.’

A source at Bedfordshire Police claimed Mr Iqbal was sacked because he was ‘not cut out to be a police officer’. A spokesman added: ‘We can’t comment on a case that is yet to be heard but the evidence will speak for itself.’

MAIL

Posted by peiper     on 03/09/2009 at 02:29 PM   
Filed Under: • Daily Life • UK •  
• Comments (7) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

WHILE DREW IS, “STILL WORKING,” SOME FOLKS ARE HAVING A GREAT TIME HERE ..

Well first of all there’s a headline in the paper today on page 6 of The Telegraph except heaven forbid they (Telegraph) make it easy to find on line.

Anyway it says the following.

MOTHERS ON BENEFIT ‘BETTER OFF’ THAN WORKING WOMEN

So is anyone surprised? See if Drew were a female with lottsa kids or an airplane hijacker or a member of the ROP who couldn’t be deported, he could be here collecting benefits from wealthy comrade taxpayer thank you native citizens, instead of cleaning windows of capitalist landowner with big house and barn.  See how easy that is?  Works for some.  Of course, the Brits are pretty well pissed off about it all but there isn’t an election scheduled for another year I believe.  And Mr. Brown sure as heck ain’t gonna call one.  Hey ... if he didn’t call one when his ratings were okay, he sure as heck is NOT gonna call one now.  And if anyone thinks the Conservatives here will be much better, well ,,,, I’m not so sure about that either.

Some editorialist or finance guy recently wrote that this place is going to the dogs, (italics mine) and to get out if you can while you can.

Then there’s another story from The Mail about a pretty lady with 6 kiddies and maybe three dads who never knew she was was not taking ‘The Pill’ because she wanted kids, kids and more kids.  She loves em and wants em but the article didn’t tell me whose paying for it all.
Right now she’s living with a lawyer and so maybe she isn’t collecting any benefits. ??  The fathers she says were indeed tricked but hey ...
“It’s my body so I don’t feel bad” she says.  “I thought it would be a challenge.”

Great role model for those little girls she has.  She says that when they’re old enough, she’ll tell em that she loved and wanted them so much that she lied to their dads just to have em.  Some logic that is but I guess so far it works for her.  But I do feel sorry for those adorable little girls.  When they’re older they will ask questions.  And they may not be happy with her answers.

But back to Drew and still working.  Poor Drew.  Can’t be fun in this weather.  BUT ... well now if he were a crinimal ( I spelled it the way I wanted it to sound) and living here, he might have benefits as well. 

Prisoners paid £5m compensation for early release
Criminals released early from prison under a scheme to end overcrowding have been paid more than £5 million in compensation, official figures show.

By Matthew Moore
Last Updated: 6:05PM GMT 08 Mar 2009

The payouts are intended to reimburse convicts for the cost of food and accommodation that would have been provided by the state if they had stayed in prison.

The Government introduced the controversial payments in June 2007 when it launched the End of Custody Licence (ECL), under which prisoners serving short terms are released nearly three weeks early to free up cells.

Offenders – including some convicted of violent crimes – are entitled to around £7 a day plus a one-off payment of £46, as they are not allowed to claim state benefits for the duration of their licence period.

Figures released by Jack Straw, the Home Secretary, after demands from the Tories showed that prison governors had paid out £2.27 million and the Department for Work of Pensions £3.11 million under the scheme.

With the £429,000 spent on administering the initiative, taxpayers have paid out close to £6 million to compensate criminals for letting them out of prison early.

The 49,800 inmates who have already benefited from the scheme have committed nearly 1,000 crimes while on ECL release, according to Government statistics.

Dominic Grieve, the shadow justice secretary, condemned the payments, saying that the money would be better spent on prisoner rehabilitation.

“Hard-pressed taxpayers will be flabbergasted to learn they are compensating prisoners for being released early – it just adds insult to injury,” he said. “Money that could have been spent holding and rehabilitating prisoners is being spend on releasing them to re offend.

Figures obtained last December showed that foreign prisoners have received more than £369,455 under the early release programme.

The Government said that the scheme was a temporary measure to ease overcrowding and said that only prisoners with personal savings less than £500 received the payments.

David Hanson, the justice minister, said: “We will end ECL when there is sufficient prison capacity to do so.”

ARTICLE SOURCE

Posted by peiper     on 03/09/2009 at 12:44 PM   
Filed Under: • Daily Life • UK • work and the workplace •  
• Comments (4) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

still working

Back again to that mansion I did the windows on in the fall. This time around I’m cleaning the windows in the barn. Well, part of the barn. They converted about a fifth of it to a 2500 square foot “apartment”, 3 bedrooms, 2 baths, with walk-in “attic” space of about 800 square feet - big enough to park at least 6 cars in if you could drive them up there. Lots of gigantic windows too, all fwench-paned double hungs with sash cords. Once again I’m doing a big window job using almost nothing but a 4” squeegee.

I was there all day yesterday. Hands are sore as hell today; not much call for window cleaning during the winter so my old paws are out of shape. Should be better today, and with luck I’ll finish the job today too. The windows hadn’t been cleaned in several years, plus all the dust and grit from painting and putting down hardwood floors.

Remind me someday to have a big old rant about how much I hate those aluminum storm window frames that people used to screw onto their houses over the original windows. Grrrrrrr.

See you later.

Posted by Drew458     on 03/09/2009 at 07:36 AM   
Filed Under: • Daily Life •  
• Comments (2) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Saturday - March 07, 2009

Serial teenage criminals to escape with a slap on the wrist.  Like Always. Great message here.

Cool way to fight crime and thugs in the street. Not.

Must be a comfort to victims here reading this.  This will all one day end in a Mad Max society. I know I’ve said that before. Thing is, I really believe it unless and until people do something to reverse things.  But I doubt that will happen.

Junkie burglars ‘cheat justice’: Serial teenage criminals to escape with a slap on the wrist
By James Slack
Last updated at 10:43 AM on 07th March 2009

Serial teenage burglars and muggers could escape with a caution if they have a drug habit, it emerged last night.

Even when a tearaway commits a string of crimes, a ‘conditional caution’ could be handed down instead of a court trial and possible jail sentence.
The conditions could involve simply saying sorry to victims or repairing damage. The Tories called the controversial Government proposals ‘cheating justice’. Critics fear they remove a significant deterrent to repeat offending.
Last year, under-18s committed more than 6,500 house burglaries and 6,300 robberies and were involved in 47,000 cases of theft and handling stolen goods.

The new guidelines will allow burglars to escape with a caution if they have a drug habit
Shadow Justice Secretary Dominic Grieve said burglaries, thefts, robberies and muggings would all be covered by the new rules.
He added: ‘People will be rightly shocked at the idea of serial offenders receiving a single caution for numerous offences. Labour’s reliance on out-of-court measures is cheating justice.’

The plan is at odds with recent directions from the Lord Chief Justice, Lord Judge.
He told the courts to give tougher sentences to housebreakers to reflect the fact that people’s homes should be their ‘safest refuge’.
Youth Conditional Cautions, which will be introduced later this year, are designed for young criminals whose offence is considered too serious for a warning or a final reprimand or who have already had both of these softer ‘punishments’.

Conditional cautions were originally supposed to be issued for one or at the most two offences, a plan which was controversial in itself.
But new guidelines published by the Ministry of Justice say prosecutors may use the caution for a string of crimes - if they were each considered suitable for out-of-court action.
The document explains that this may apply to ‘similar offences related to the same underlying problem (for example acquisitive crime to fund a drug habit)’.

Shocked: Shadow Justice Secretary Dominic Grieve said the measures mean offenders can cheat justice
It also discloses that a young offender who misses a compulsory drug rehabilitation appointment - a possible condition of the caution - may still be treated as having complied.
The document emerges on the day after the Daily Mail revealed huge increases in crimes such as robbery in Labour’s ‘decade of juvenile delinquency’.
Figures from the Youth Justice Board showed the total number of offences carried out by 10 to 17-year-olds in 2007/08 was 277,986 - or more than one every two minutes.

Lord Judge had called for jail terms for burglaries with aggravating factors such as stealing sentimental items or preying on the elderly.
He said: ‘The principle which must be grasped is that when we speak of dwelling-house burglary we are considering not only an offence against property, which it is, but also, and often more alarmingly and distressingly, an offence against the person.’

He said the home should be our ‘safest refuge’ and burglary, by any starting point, was a ‘serious criminal offence’.
Handing young burglars a conditional caution would effectively set aside this guidance, as the thief would not even appear before a court.
Prior to Judge Judge’s intervention, the Sentencing Guidelines Council had been suggesting that burglars and thieves who steal to fund an addiction to drugs, gambling or alcohol could escape a prison sentence - even if they targeted a vulnerable victim.
Youth Conditional Cautions were introduced by the Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008.

For more on the story, go here.

JUSTICE?

Posted by peiper     on 03/07/2009 at 07:50 AM   
Filed Under: • Crime • Daily Life • Judges-Courts-Lawyers • Stoopid-People • UK •  
• Comments (3) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Thursday - March 05, 2009

Democrats don’t like freedom

There are NO states that have that relative amount of freedom when 52% of the citizens or more vote Democrat. As the graph shows, those states have considerably less freedom.

I added the colored lines to their graph. Any data point bisected by the horizontal zero line counts as being below that line. Any data point bisected by one of the vertical vote percentage lines counts as being to the left of that line.

The raw data and some of the other graphs will show you that New York is the least free state in the nation, followed by New Jersey, California, Rhode Island, Maryland, and Illinois. Guess which party controls those states? The most free states are Colorado and New Hampshire, followed in no particular order by Texas, Montana, Indiana, and South Dakota. Alaska and Maine are high in Personal Freedom, but not so great in Economic Freedom.

Posted by Drew458     on 03/05/2009 at 05:58 PM   
Filed Under: • Daily Life • Government •  
• Comments (3) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

OH HOW ATTITUDES AND MANNERS HAVE CHANGED. AND NOT FOR THE BETTER.

I’m sitting here in the frustrating middle of history that goes back a thousand years and more.
My interest lately though has been WW2 but specifically a group of women super women who were Brit nurses during that time.

I’m going to write a bit about these bigger then life awesome ladies who were members of something called the “QUEEN ALEXANDRA’S IMPERIAL MILITARY NURSING SERVICE.” It was formed in 1902.  They were simply referred to as, QA’s. 
I want to share just a fraction of their story but not here, not now.  There is a book about them called Sisters in Arms, and I can’t see anyone reading it without becoming wound up with and admiring of them.

The training these women went through way back when was by todays standards, brutal.  It was humiliating and it was rough and only the very strong made the grade.  But they were first class nurses and first class ladies every one. AND ....  there isn’t any record where any one of them ever even thought about suing their employer with one of the charges being .....  “hurt feelings.” Not that generation.

Not a great transition but reading about their training back in the 30’s and then reading a story today about;

Sacked paperboy claims £8,000 compensation from newsagent

Part of his claim is for ... “Hurt Feelings.” What a message today’s generation is receiving.  Protection against hurt feelings after being fired is a human right now I guess.  It’s sickening and especially after blazing my way through 300 pages of the history of a group of women who btw, were not street smart to begin with.  Hurt feelings?  What a con.

I don’t know if this kid is really being truthful or not.  My guess is no and when you see the article you’ll see why.  I find it hard to believe that the newsagent would think to make up the story that the kid’s dad says isn’t true.

Daddy and Son lost the case (good) but it may go to appeal. (bad)

Please stay with me for one other thing before I post the article.  I got this first hand from the guy who owns the laundry service we sometimes use.
This is just to show you how decadent and stupid this place has become.  Common sense is totally out the window.

He caught one of his employees dipping into the til after a number of days showing shortages in the register.  Well, as you would expect, he canned her.
But she went to a tribunal and he had to pay her for wrongful dismissal because ..........
HE DID NOT PUT HIS REASON FOR CANNING HER IN WRITING AT THE TIME HE FIRED HER!  The system is rotten and a disgrace to that generation who gave of themselves to secure the future of this country. 

Sacked paperboy claims £8,000 compensation from newsagent
A paperboy who was sacked for being “unreliable” took the newsagent to an employment tribunal claiming £8,000 for unfair dismissal.

By Paul Stokes
Last Updated: 4:06PM GMT 05 Mar 2009

Myles Bebbington, 15, earned £20 a week delivering daily newspapers around the village of Sturry, near Canterbury, Kent, for two years.

When he asked for his round to be extended, he was allegedly told he would have to start at 6.30am and his mother Denise objected to his employer Jackie Palmer.

Myles was dismissed a few days later in August last year on the grounds that he was late, lacked motivation, posted papers through the wrong doors and failed to find cover when he was ill.

Mrs Palmer, who runs Sturry News, also said that his bicycle kept breaking which also made him unreliable.

Myles’ family launched an £8,000 claim for loss of earnings, aggravated damages, injury to his feelings alleging statutory procedures were not followed.

But the case collapsed after the tribunal in Ashford ruled paperboys like Miles were “temporary staff” and cannot legally claim unfair dismissal.

His father Mark, who represented him at the hearing and whose four other sons had worked as paperboys, said: “He’s worked there for two years, delivering papers in rain, wind and snow.

“Our claim was for £8,000, but all I really wanted was an apology, and for them to admit that we should not treat boys like that.”

Mrs Palmer said Myles had informed her he was “fed up” and had not told his parents that she had had to warn him about being late.

Robert Salter, the tribunal chairman, ruled Myles was not employed under a contract of service so unable to pursue a claim for unfair dismissal or age discrimination.

But Carolyn Hamilton, director of The Children’s Legal Centre, said: “There is no doubt Myles was an employee and I think he has a case which needs challenging in court.”

NEWSBOY

I had a newspaper route when I was a kid.  In CT. You know what winters could be like there?
And I can tell you I was younger then 15 and up and dressed by 5:30am. No foolin.’ Jeesh ....

Posted by peiper     on 03/05/2009 at 02:17 PM   
Filed Under: • Daily Life • Democrats-Liberals-Moonbat Leftists • Nanny State • UK •  
• Comments (1) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Monday - March 02, 2009

AN ENGLISMAN’S HOME IS HIS CASTLE.  UNLESS INFORMED OTHERWISE BY HEALTH AND SAFETY

Every Englishman is accustomed to pride himself with more then usual complacency upon what is called the

many traditions, and such long custom, have rendered sacred.