http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... arges.html


poor luv (dripping sarcasm)
i wonder if anybody else can claim the same defence for fraud after this

can't do the time don't do the crime ...

I'm sure murderers get depressed when they get caught too, but they're still put on trial.

Pathetic - so she pleads ill-health and get's off.

She was fit enough to steal all that money so she's fit enough in my eyes to go to prison.

and just to put a different view across ...



http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... -fine.html

this is how the system works, ho hum
remember, we are all in this together ...

Oh steady on.

Ok, people do fake illness to avoid punishment. The two most obvious cases I can think of are Al magrahi, who was released due to apparently being in the final stages of terminal cancer but is still alive, what, four years later? And the executive of.. can't remember, the company that owns Guinness who was let off due to the onset of Alzheimer's disease only to then become the only person in medical history to 'recover' from that condition. I'm sure they aren't the only examples.

However, if she's self harming, that's not something you can fake and its not something specialists are needed to diagnose - the wounds are either there or they aren't. And if someone is in such a mental state where harming themselves seems like a good idea, I don't really feel sticking them in the dock is a particularly enlightened or civilized thing to do. After all, she hasn't killed anyone, she's not a terrorist. She's a woman who got greedy.

True justice requires the absence of cruelty.

justice requires that all are equal under the law
such a shame that isn't the case when its a 'them' trial or an 'us' trial

but remember 'we are all in this together' (except and excluding justice) ...

Oh right, so dragging people who are so disturbed they are physically harming themselves up in public and adding extra humiliation to their misery is a good thing then? That's what we should be doing to each other as human beings?

Bollocks. I thought we'd got further than that as a civilisation. I thought we were beyond laughing at the mad people. Obviously I was wrong. Call me when you lot get out of the Dark Ages.

Jon

place them under 24 hour watch in a very small very bare cell and if they go insane, ho hum, there is always care in the community ...

According to the article she 'attempted to harm herself'. Wasn't successful then?

Reminds me of the patient who did something very naughty and was brought in by his family because he was suicidal. He was fine doing the naughty things but as soon as the police became involved (ie caught), he suddenly became hysterical and irrational. I had no pity for him and would have been happy to throw him to the dogs but professionally, I ended up sending him to the psychiatrists.

FFS, if you knowingly commit a crime, you should not be surprised when you get caught.

If she can't attend court, they should set up a video link to one of her homes.

I suspect most people who commit crimes are expecting to get away with them. Otherwise you wouldn't bother, would you...

Anyway, I have no problem with the concept people fake mental distress to avoid prosecution. I just find it rather hard to believe that goes as far as wounding yourself although as JV points out, it's not very clear if she actually has done so. If she is in a state where someone (other than her lawyer) claims she is a genuine suicide risk, I don't want her on the stand while that is the case. What she did (or is alleged to have done, technically) was wrong, but as far as I'm aware its not a capital offense. At best, she should receive treatment and the case should go ahead if/when she's mentally sound enough to face court. There is a huge difference between justice and cruelty and some of the posts on here have had far too little of the former and far too much of the latter. 'Justice' does not simply mean 'bad people get hurt', it means 'bad people get punished and their victims get redress, each of which is appropriate to the wrong done'. 'Justice for all' applies to the perpetrator too. It has to, or we're not a society, we're just a mob.

As I say, there's a bit too much of the bullying about this thread.

Jon

I really don't see the issue.

She has £80,000 that she shouldn't have. Take it back off her.

Simples.

Why does she even have the opportunity to defend herself?


---
I am here: http://tapatalk.com/map.php?oggdpb

The issue is the act of (effectively) defrauding the public purse is itself a crime. Therefore, she should be prosecuted and giving back the money shouldn't get her out of that. In fact, don't I recall something of a public outcry back when this all broke because a couple of MP's did escape prosecution by handing the money back, which people at the time thought was basically dodging the bullet?

A trial isn't 'giving the defendant an opportunity to defend themselves' - mainly because we have the principle of 'innocent until proven guilty'. A trial is a process by which we get to the truth and justice is seen to be done. At least, that's the ideal.

IMO, she should stand trial, if/when he is passed medically fit to do so. That's the only thing that's entirely 'fair' both to her and to the rest of us, who are effectively the victim in this case.

Jon

This.
The alleged condition isn't permanent. If it is, she probably shouldn't be working.
When she's recovered, then the she should stand trial to answer the accusations.