Guest juvehearts Posted July 23, 2008 Share Posted July 23, 2008 6Yrs & 3 Mths for him 6yrs & 6 Mths for her Why did they send them to jail? its going to cost the tax payer ovver 100k per year x13 is 1.3m!! They launderd just under 500k, 250k of this the UK wont get back unless the police managed to fine sive each & every transaction they have made since he went missing. costing more police time & man hours. by puting them in prison it takes up more room for murders & sex offenders. yea they have done wrong, but IMO a tagging order , a heavy fine & community service would have been more sutiable! discuss............. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commander Harris Posted July 23, 2008 Share Posted July 23, 2008 cost should never be a barrier to handing out the appropriate sentence laid down in the law. If we don't have the space build more prisons, don't compromise on sentencing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deesidejambo Posted July 23, 2008 Share Posted July 23, 2008 6Yrs & 3 Mths for him6yrs & 6 Mths for her Why did they send them to jail? its going to cost the tax payer ovver 100k per year x13 is 1.3m!! They launderd just under 500k, 250k of this the UK wont get back unless the police managed to fine sive each & every transaction they have made since he went missing. costing more police time & man hours. by puting them in prison it takes up more room for murders & sex offenders. yea they have done wrong, but IMO a tagging order , a heavy fine & community service would have been more sutiable! discuss............. I prefer the death penalty, but as that is probably not PC prison is the alternative. Prison is meant as a deterrent to stop people from commiting crime. If people see that major fraud is only punishable by Community Service I think you will see a huge increases in Frauds! I would think about having a punt myself if thought that the punishment would be that light. As for fines - that is not possible because they don't have the money to pay anyway. They will have to return what is left of the fraud money (if there is any left) and after that there will be no money to pay any significant fines. Personally - I don't have a big problem with peeps taking a punt to defraud an Insurance Company but if you get caught then you should just own up and take the consequenses. Ann Darwin decided to wriggle out of it by concocting a complete nonsense story which was dragged through the Courts (at Taxpayers expense). For that reason I hope she dies in jail - she should have stood up and admitted it was a fair cop. Instead she will probably sell her story to a tabloid and ultimately benefit from her crime. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest juvehearts Posted July 23, 2008 Share Posted July 23, 2008 cost should never be a barrier to handing out the appropriate sentence laid down in the law. If we don't have the space build more prisons, don't compromise on sentencing. This is true & labour's fault for not realizing this. whilst crime is down, prison places is up. simple soultion is, dont do the crime if you cant do the time still ****ed off bout the sentencing. what i would have tought was a better soultion would have been to asses the cost of the tax payer & give the approiate sentance. imo a suspendend sentance with all assets frozen until the outstanding amount is paid off & community service. meaning if they ever worked they would have to live off the stares amount which is ?50 a week until its paid off Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I P Knightley Posted July 23, 2008 Share Posted July 23, 2008 I prefer the death penalty, but as that is probably not PC prison is the alternative. Aye - fair for him. but her? I think we should get her pumped! And that's a first for Ivanawfyticklikov Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Helzibob Posted July 23, 2008 Share Posted July 23, 2008 Aye - fair for him. but her? I think we should get her pumped! Nearly every thread on this board ends up with this comment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deesidejambo Posted July 23, 2008 Share Posted July 23, 2008 Aye - fair for him. but her? I think we should get her pumped! I'll hold your guide dog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boris Posted July 23, 2008 Share Posted July 23, 2008 I'll hold your guide dog. Superb. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loveofthegame Posted July 23, 2008 Share Posted July 23, 2008 So wait a minute she got more time than him?! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest juvehearts Posted July 23, 2008 Share Posted July 23, 2008 I'll hold your guide dog. kin ah git sloppy seconds Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest juvehearts Posted July 23, 2008 Share Posted July 23, 2008 So wait a minute she got more time than him?! aye, unbelieviable Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billy the Jambo Posted July 23, 2008 Share Posted July 23, 2008 6 years for trying to defraud an insurance company out of a few quid RIDICULOUS .What about all the super rich that defraud the inland revenue the authuorities should be chasing them not people like the Darwins.They get 6 years but what about all the neds running about with knives stabbing people when the cops can be bothered getting of their arses to find them when they get to court you will get some yoghurt knitting do gooder saying prison isnt the place for them send them a holiday to the Maldives and give them loads of help but some poor family is at a grave where is the justice there Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
milky_26 Posted July 23, 2008 Share Posted July 23, 2008 Aye - fair for him. but her? I think we should get her pumped! Nearly every thread on this board ends up with this comment. and the problem is? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I P Knightley Posted July 23, 2008 Share Posted July 23, 2008 I'll hold your guide dog. Mate, you've got to either (a) be quick as a flash or ( be prepared to stoop pretty low if you're going to get in first on a JKB thread with the "get her pumped" line. For the record, I didn't say that I would personally do the pumping; I just recommended that someone should. But, as someone once put so eloquently on these boards, "Hole's hole." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Helzibob Posted July 23, 2008 Share Posted July 23, 2008 So wait a minute she got more time than him?! Probably cause she was the one to actually commit the fraud. She signed the papers and took the money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tane Posted July 23, 2008 Share Posted July 23, 2008 Probably cause she was the one to actually commit the fraud. She signed the papers and took the money. Didn't he also just admit to the crime? If she'd done the same and didn't bother letting it go to trial I'm sure she'd have come out better off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rawrrrrrrr Posted July 23, 2008 Share Posted July 23, 2008 The wife should have got far more She had a ridicolous case and was blatantly guilty and to only give her 3 extra months for wasting all that time and money by going to trial is a joke At least the husband didnt try and deny it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CostaJambo Posted July 23, 2008 Share Posted July 23, 2008 Never mind the sentence, can anyone even begin to imagine what a pisher it must have been for their sons when they found out? Sick, sick parents. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cobblers Posted July 23, 2008 Share Posted July 23, 2008 6 years for trying to defraud an insurance company out of a few quid RIDICULOUS . Sorry Billy but it's not the Insurance Company who picks up this loss. It's poor buggers like us who end up paying more in premiums. If they'd robbed a bank of this amount we wouldn't complain about the sentence. What they did (especially to their own family) is much worse IMO. I've no sympathy for them what so ever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ibrahim Tall Posted July 23, 2008 Share Posted July 23, 2008 Why exactly did he even come back? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rawrrrrrrr Posted July 23, 2008 Share Posted July 23, 2008 Why exactly did he even come back? At the time there was rumours the cops/insurance where onto them but then if this was the case why come back and just admit it There is definitly more to it I reckon but I cant see us ever finding out Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.