Alpha Man Gummies Uk -Mosstrim Diet...
How it Works4 mins ago
DAVID CHATER MP EXPENSES CHEAT IN COURT FOR SENTENCING - SHOULD HE GO TO JAIL?
His defence lawyer says he doesnt deserve to go to jail, despite systematic fraud. lots of character witnesses turned up saying he is "a good man"
My opinion is he should be made an example of and the maximum force of the law should come down on him, Anything less and it shows that politicians have learned nothing from this episode and they are as out of touch with the people as ever and things havent changed one iota.
What do you think, should he go to jail or not?
My opinion is he should be made an example of and the maximum force of the law should come down on him, Anything less and it shows that politicians have learned nothing from this episode and they are as out of touch with the people as ever and things havent changed one iota.
What do you think, should he go to jail or not?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by barney15c. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Yes he should go to jail
Everyone thinks they are a 'good person' - who said "I only ever tried to give people a good time ..." It was Al Capone.
Chater may well be a 'good man', but he is a 'good man' who has broken the law, abused his position, and behaved inexcusibly, when as a public figure, he ought to know better.
If the law dictates prison, then his 'good man' status should not save him - any more than it would save you or I.
Everyone thinks they are a 'good person' - who said "I only ever tried to give people a good time ..." It was Al Capone.
Chater may well be a 'good man', but he is a 'good man' who has broken the law, abused his position, and behaved inexcusibly, when as a public figure, he ought to know better.
If the law dictates prison, then his 'good man' status should not save him - any more than it would save you or I.
Perhaps a better form of punishment would be to make him repay what he has stolen... strip him of his assets gained whilst serving as MP.....deny him the right to earn a living for what would be a considered jail term but live on job seekers allowance for the duration...whilst doing some kind of voluntary work to benefit the community. A little humility and a huge reality check may be more appropriate !...Could team him up with Tommy Sheridan as a double act on the streets of Paisley ??
The prison system does not exist on the basis of an individual's likelyhood to re-offend - if it did, we could all claim one murder each and promise not to do it again.
Prison is a punishment appropriate to a variety of offences. It is designed to give the offender time to consider his actions, and to attempt to ensure that a repeat offence does not occur.
It also serves to show to society that crime is taken seriously, and is not simply ignored.
The attitude held by a large number of MP's that niggling little aspects of life like honesty, integrity, behaving like the majority of society in being a decent human being, and accepting the responsibility of representing others - are things they can simply ignore if they choose.
It is that level of breathtaking arrogance and self-importancec, and thievery, that has put Chater in court in the first place.
The notion that he should be let off because he is unliely to do it again (yes, I think you can safely say he will never be an MP again, so the expenses gravy train is an avenue of illegal and immoral theft that is sadly closed off to him) is frankly laughable.
MP's are instrumental in setting our laws and governing our society - they should be bound by its rules and punishments like the rest of us.
Prison is a punishment appropriate to a variety of offences. It is designed to give the offender time to consider his actions, and to attempt to ensure that a repeat offence does not occur.
It also serves to show to society that crime is taken seriously, and is not simply ignored.
The attitude held by a large number of MP's that niggling little aspects of life like honesty, integrity, behaving like the majority of society in being a decent human being, and accepting the responsibility of representing others - are things they can simply ignore if they choose.
It is that level of breathtaking arrogance and self-importancec, and thievery, that has put Chater in court in the first place.
The notion that he should be let off because he is unliely to do it again (yes, I think you can safely say he will never be an MP again, so the expenses gravy train is an avenue of illegal and immoral theft that is sadly closed off to him) is frankly laughable.
MP's are instrumental in setting our laws and governing our society - they should be bound by its rules and punishments like the rest of us.
Interesting fact ...at least 18 serving mp's have been interred or gone to jail, listed in this link about 1/2 way down.
http://answers.google.../threadview?id=222827
http://answers.google.../threadview?id=222827
-- answer removed --
-- answer removed --
I think a custodial sentence is necessary because of the issue of abuse of trust.
That goes for MPs or the Nobel Lords involved.
If by the "full force of the law" you mean maximum sentence - I don't think that would be appropriate - it's after all not exactly the worst case imaginable.
Tom Wise the UKIP MEP was prosecuted for a very similar offence and got 2 years.
there's your benchmark
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom_Wise
That goes for MPs or the Nobel Lords involved.
If by the "full force of the law" you mean maximum sentence - I don't think that would be appropriate - it's after all not exactly the worst case imaginable.
Tom Wise the UKIP MEP was prosecuted for a very similar offence and got 2 years.
there's your benchmark
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom_Wise
The ones being taken to court are the ones that have clearly broken the law.
These are the minority.
The vast majority, the home flippers etc were taking advantage of a rubbish system and lax monitorring.
You may dislike it but it wasn't illegal.
In term's of home flippers I'll see your Jackie Smith and raise you George Osbourne!
These are the minority.
The vast majority, the home flippers etc were taking advantage of a rubbish system and lax monitorring.
You may dislike it but it wasn't illegal.
In term's of home flippers I'll see your Jackie Smith and raise you George Osbourne!
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.