Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To think if Ian Huntley gets compensation

217 replies

Marjee · 31/07/2010 22:50

he should give it to the government to pay towards the prison service?

This has made me so angry so apologies if its long and ranty but ffs
This evil man killed two innocent children and now according to the news he is likely to gain at least 20k! I'm sure I've read somewhere that if someone on benefits wins the lottery they are expected to pay back some money, why should this be any different? I wonder how much taxpayers money is going towards keeping him behind bars? What a shame his attacker didn't finish the job! Ugh disgusting vile evil man, whats he going to do with that money anyway?!
Sorry ladies I did warn you, anyway I feel better for having got that off my chest!

OP posts:
IMoveTheStars · 01/08/2010 00:57

Does anybody else believe that a mental illness is at play wrt any murder case?

(total tangent, I'm just interested in criminal phsycology)

ReallyFFS · 01/08/2010 00:59

Oh please

He was in danger?

Didn't bother him too much when he murdered thos poor girls Squirrel...

The state nmeeds to protect him???

Duty of care my ass

scottishmummy · 01/08/2010 01:00

absolutley not.ih had robust psych ax and no mental illness.dont assume criminality =mental illmness it doesnt.he went to rampton for assessment,returned to prison.

ReallyFFS · 01/08/2010 01:05

Yep, he went as crim, not mentally ill

But the state still protecting him as he can sue ffs

Have a laugh

Youre a double murderer

BUT

You can still scan cash out of the state

Cos you obv SUFFERED SO

FFS

squirrel42 · 01/08/2010 01:08

ReallyFFS - this is just like having a discussion with the personification of tabloid headlines!

You clearly won't be happy until all child murderers/abusers have been torn to pieces in front of a baying crowd waving mis-spelt placards.

I'm going to stick to affording everyone some basic human dignities, even if they - for whatever reasons - can't or won't behave like decent people should. And I'll stick to punishments that aim to rehabilitate where possible while protecting the rest of society, and not go straight for bloodlust.

IMoveTheStars · 01/08/2010 01:08

ReallyFFS - there needs to be a standard rule where prisoners are protected from other prisoners. It is NOT another inmates right to take the life of anybody else (obviously). I appreciate that a lot of people think 'shame he didn't do it properly' wrt the person that slit Ian Huntley's throat.

Of COURSE he shouldn't be afforded the same consideration as any other person in society, but he DOES have a right to basic human rights. He is a human after all (I appreciate this may be subjective!)

scottishmummy - I'm interested in a certain gland in the brain that generally happens to be a different size in serial killers. It's something that interests me for some reason.

Obviously if someone like him had killed my son, I would wish every kind of hell on him. I do appreciate that I;m being a bit cold on this thread - it's only because I'm not letting my thoughts go to the alternative, sorry

Alouiseg · 01/08/2010 01:11

Some of us just cannot see the benefit to society in indulging heinous murderers with the same standards as non murderers. It's got nothing to do with tabloid headlines.

IH costs us a fortune, a fortune we, as a country don't have. If we're making cuts then let's start with compensation for double child murderers.

squirrel42 · 01/08/2010 01:13

Theoretical question:

Assuming child murderers should lose 100% of their rights and be punching bags for whoever wants to finish them off slowly, what about other criminals?

Someone who kills an adult in a bar fight - they lose maybe 85% of their rights?

Someone who kills an adult by drink driving - maybe 75%?

A prolific burglar? A shoplifter?

Just wondering where lines will be drawn. It might be useful to clarify the "child" part of child murderer as well; are we going for under 16, under 18 or below secondary school age?

ReallyFFS · 01/08/2010 01:14

Of course it;s not another prisoners right to take anyone's life!

And no, I'm not going to be part pf a baying crowd

Afford everyone some human dignities...yes. They didn't afford others so, did they?

I just think its ridiculous how he can sue, given what he did.

Surely your right to sue should be taken away should you be convicted of double murder?

squirrel42 · 01/08/2010 01:18

Okay diferent theoretical question now. This is an issue of compensation for an injury, seemingly caused by staff placing him in a dangerous situation.

What about if Ian Huntley's cell ceiling had been poorly maintained and a bit of plaster fell on his head and gave him a concussion. Should he be allowed to say "hey - you should have kept that ceiling safe, and I've been injured as a result of your negligence so I'm entitled to compensation"?

If not, then what if it happened to his cellmate Prisoner A who "only" killed his wife, or Prisoner B who "only" stole £1 million from a bank?

scottishmummy · 01/08/2010 01:19

presume you mean hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal gland hypothesis.hasnt been proven need for further research

ReallyFFS · 01/08/2010 01:20

So.

Murder someone

But don't worry. You'll get all your human rights protected as you're in prison.

Don't you worry about the person you killed

Which the rest of us are paying for, keeping you

And if you decide to sue, cos you feel its unfairs, then we'll pick up the cost too

FFS. What a fucking joke

IMoveTheStars · 01/08/2010 01:24

squirrel - precisely!

Really/Aloiseg etc - it's a crappy system. but anything else is wrong. We live in a democracy where people have rights.

In another country where human rights are just the luck of the draw he would have been killed way before trial (I am thinking of certain central african countries). Many people here would have been happy with that - Ian Huntley gets what he deserves etc etc

I personally would like to see him kept just healthy enough to serve another 25 years in a shit hole, and appreciate just how much of a demon he is.

ReallyFFS · 01/08/2010 01:24

What about if Ian Huntley's cell ceiling had been poorly maintained and a bit of plaster fell on his head and gave him a concussion. Should he be allowed to say "hey - you should have kept that ceiling safe, and I've been injured as a result of your negligence so I'm entitled to compensation"?

Oh. Shucks

What a shame

What, he kills two little girls and then expects the state to keep him safe? Taxpayers have to keep him safe?

ReallyFFS · 01/08/2010 01:26

I utterly object to my fucking money keeping him fucking 'safe' ffs

SlackSally · 01/08/2010 01:26

But, ReallyFFS, how can you complain about it being wrong to take away the human rights of the two victims and then propose doing the same to Huntley?

Either it's wrong or it's not, surely?

Why would you want (or the want the state on your behalf) to sink to his level?

scottishmummy · 01/08/2010 01:27

jareth are you alluding to pituaryb gland and criminality?is contentious and unproven

IMoveTheStars · 01/08/2010 01:28

scottishmummy - yes, thank you. I think it's a bit fascinating that the size of a gland in the brain can determine if someone is capable of murder (which certainly seems to be the case on the basis of some american studies)

However, I work in epidemiology and am aware that the base for study is never really going to be significant enough to prove/disprove a link.

scottishmummy · 01/08/2010 01:30

no the pituary gland and criminality isnt robust resesrch.doesnt imply causation at all

thumbwitch · 01/08/2010 01:33

Isn't there a whole facet of "research" that was done by someone taking head/face measurements as well to decide whether or not someone had criminal tendencies? Can't remember off the top of my head what it's called

ReallyFFS · 01/08/2010 01:33

Er. He took their lives away?

And he should pay...?

It's not wrong when he is paying for it surely?

And what level are we sinking to?

Taking some rights away from a murderer?

Isn't that justice?

And yeah I will propose taking rights away from Huntley because he killed 2 ten year olds Wouldn't you jail him/reduce his human rights?

|Cos most people I know would

IMoveTheStars · 01/08/2010 01:34

Ah really? I'm mostly basing on TV reseach. I could ask the bods at werk, but I don't think serial killers are high on their profile.

I didn't think it was pituitary? Am I wrong there?

scottishmummy · 01/08/2010 01:37

bumps on heid= crominality.total tosh.Cesare Lombroso.discredited work of anthropological/criminological interest only

SlackSally · 01/08/2010 01:37

Well, as someone else has pointed out, he has had a lot of his human rights taken away from purely by being sent to prison.

I was more referring to your implication that he shouldn't be protected, in which case he would surely be murdered by other prisoners.

If it's wrong for him to murder, how can it be right for others to murder him?

blackberryway · 01/08/2010 01:40

FFS you have made the same point over and over so I think everyone gets it, they just don't agree. Why do you keep repeating what he did? We all know what he did, we all bear the scars of hearing about that awful crime. Justice was done as far as it could be - he will spend all or almost all of his life in prison. Other equally horrible cases (imo) have been dealt with far more leniently. What else do you want?