advertisement


Eric Joyce - Labour - Mega Sleaze

Ok.

But hey, maybe that’s payback for the ‘advantageous’ terms that used to exist?

The thing is, how on earth can it be right to take away someone’s retirement security? They’ve contributed their earnings to it, so at the very least they should get their contributions returned.
 
Tony Lockhart said:
Ok.

But hey, maybe that’s payback for the ‘advantageous’ terms that used to exist?

The thing is, how on earth can it be right to take away someone’s retirement security? They’ve contributed their earnings to it, so at the very least they should get their contributions returned.
Click to expand...
I agree, I’m very uncomfortable with the practice, and not convinced it contributes to keeping civil servants or police on the straight and narrow.

I understand that the sanctions are only available for offending while in office. I don’t think they can grip your pension if you’re naughty after retiring.
 
Tony Lockhart said:
Ok.

But hey, maybe that’s payback for the ‘advantageous’ terms that used to exist?

The thing is, how on earth can it be right to take away someone’s retirement security? They’ve contributed their earnings to it, so at the very least they should get their contributions returned.
Click to expand...
I am not saying it is right or wrong but if, for example, you have defrauded the company out of £1m I am not surprised that they would seek to recover that money by whatever means possible, including taking the pension.
 
richardkendell said:
I am not saying it is right or wrong but if, for example, you have defrauded the company out of £1m I am not surprised that they would seek to recover that money by whatever means possible, including taking the pension.
Click to expand...
The Local Government Pension Scheme, for example, allows recovery of money if the employee had defrauded or stolen money from the employer or otherwise caused direct financial loss. It does not allow for recovery in other cricumstances.
 
Teachers can also lose their pension if dismissed for gross misconduct. Same for healthcare workers.

I think the actual happenings are few.

In this case of Joyce, it is not relevant.
 
Cav said:
The Local Government Pension Scheme, for example, allows recovery of money if the employee had defrauded or stolen money from the employer or otherwise caused direct financial loss. It does not allow for recovery in other cricumstances.
Click to expand...
I wonder what the rules were for the NHS scheme in the case of Shipman. Perhaps they have changed.
 
JensenHealey said:
Teachers can also lose their pension if dismissed for gross misconduct. Same for healthcare workers.

I think the actual happenings are few.
Click to expand...
I seem to recall the criteria in the Civil Service scheme used to be "gross misconduct" but in all my experience over the years I never actually saw a case where the pension was stopped.
 
Tony Lockhart said:
About three years ago a guy where I work was found guilty of similar to Joyce.

“When the equipment was analysed it was found to contain 804 still and moving images in the most serious level A category, 818 still and moving level B images and more than 40,000 still and moving images in the lowest level C category.

There were also 3,000 prohibited images of children,.

Nxxxxxxg, 59, now of Xxxxx Xxxxx, Stowmarket, admitted three offences of making indecent images of children and possessing prohibited images of children.

He was given a 16-month prison sentence, suspended for 12 months, and ordered to do 150 hours unpaid work in the community.”


At least there’s some sort of consistency in sentencing. He is ex-RAF, but I’m not sure they’ll have any interest in him.
Click to expand...

So, in the instance Tony outlines above and Joyce, by being handed down a suspended sentence they avoid prison which seems lenient to me and hardly a deterrent.

I had to sack a guy once who had not declared his criminal conviction for similar offences. He was in his mid 20s and would have gone to prison had he not suffered with Asperger Syndrome.
 
thebigfredc said:
So, in the instance Tony outlines above and Joyce, by being handed down a suspended sentence they avoid prison which seems lenient to me and hardly a deterrent.
Click to expand...

The guy at work:

The prisons are full.
He admitted everything straight away.
He agreed to undergo treatment.
His wife and daughter kicked him out.

What would prison have done except given him friendships with likeminded men?
 
Fair points but the only item on the list that would have hurt him is losing his family which to my mind pales into insignificance in comparison with the suffering and harm endured by the innocent children who appeared in the videos/pictures.
 
Tony Lockhart said:
About three years ago a guy where I work was found guilty of similar to Joyce.

“When the equipment was analysed it was found to contain 804 still and moving images in the most serious level A category, 818 still and moving level B images and more than 40,000 still and moving images in the lowest level C category.

There were also 3,000 prohibited images of children,.

Nxxxxxxg, 59, now of Xxxxx Xxxxx, Stowmarket, admitted three offences of making indecent images of children and possessing prohibited images of children.

He was given a 16-month prison sentence, suspended for 12 months, and ordered to do 150 hours unpaid work in the community.”


At least there’s some sort of consistency in sentencing. He is ex-RAF, but I’m not sure they’ll have any interest in him.
Click to expand...
There was a guy who was a regular at my local. 2 years ago he stopped coming. 6 months later he was in the local papers having been convicted of offences very smilar to those above. His sentence was very similar.
 
thebigfredc said:
Fair points but the only item on the list that would have hurt him is losing his family which to my mind pales into insignificance in comparison with the suffering and harm endured by the innocent children who appeared in the videos/pictures.
Click to expand...
There are repercussions which will follow him for life though. IIRC for these sort of offences you go on the sex offenders' register for a long time, perhaps for life. And these sort of convictions are, I think, not so easy to dispose of under the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act. He'll never work in any profession involving vulnerable people, and any employer entitled to do a CRB check will probably learn about it, and is unlikely to offer a position. So his long term life chances are compromised permanently. I agree his actions encourage scumbags to harm children, but the serious sentences should be reserved for them. There are other, innocent actions which also encourage scumbags to mistreat people. If you've ever used a hand car wash, or a nail bar, there's a good chance you've encouraged and enabled modern slavery. That doesn't make you guilty of the offence. In the case of the sexual image stuff, you have to prosecute and sentence for the offence committed, not for the collateral damage, though that aspect is catered for in the range of sentencing options to an extent.
 
What have the politics of a perv' got to do with anything at all, whatsoever?
Joe Average gets nicked for kiddie porn' offences and NEVER are their politics examined.

MP's are no different to the rest of us - we are all the same, all subject to the same limits of morality and all else besides.

As for pension being linked to anything...……..why? If I got nicked for anything whatsoever, it would not affect my pension - a TOTALLY insane link/suggestion.
 
I know it used to be the case that if you were given a dishonourable discharge from the Armed Forces, your pension would be forfeited. I don’t know if that is the case now.
 
thebigfredc said:
Fair points but the only item on the list that would have hurt him is losing his family which to my mind pales into insignificance in comparison with the suffering and harm endured by the innocent children who appeared in the videos/pictures.
Click to expand...
I wouldn't imagine losing family would concern him one bit. We all know sentencing is skewed and depends on the quality of your legal team.
 
Jesus, I wish that I had 1% of the in-depth "knowledge and intuition" of the posters here!!!

The marvels of modern IT and all else!!!!

Or is it all bollox based on naff all concrete?

I know where my money is...……………...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top