To think I should steal £53K then just cry to get away with it

[moogstera1]

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-20309090
Unbelievable. So she cried at an earlier hearing ( I'm sure I would if I'd been caught nicking 50 odd grand) and so this means she's in a fragile state and won't go to prison.
aibu there's different rules going on.
And yes, I have got a bee in my bonnet about the MP stealing saga.

I think if a person was not already known to be mentally ill prior to the alleged crime and it is suspected that this state of being 'infit to stand trial' is purely as a result of the stress of the pending case itself, then it should not be allowed to be used as a reason not to appear. It's just too easy to use it as a cop-out.

Of course it's upsetting and scary - it's that way for most people who end up in court accused of a crime. It doesn't mean they needn't turn up.

Dreaming, but Moran is a politician, you know, the lot that live by different rules to the rest of us. Sure there was a bit of fixing going on there, she probably can dish some dirt on others still in the game.

And I should add that 'experts' are for hire.

Why can't they postpone the trial until she is well again. She wasn't actually mentally unwell when she committed the crime.

Well yes she does have a serious problem, indeed. She has been found out to be a fraud and criminal.

It would not surprise me if that had left her suicidal. But the trial should be postponed rather than her being let off.

FellatioNelson, whether her mental illness has developed as a result of 'being caught' or not doesn't alter the fact that she if she cannot be an active participant in her own trial, then how can she have a fair trial. She may have been accused of the offence but until she is convicted by a jury (or pleads guilty) she is deemed to be innocent.

As she is unfit to stand trial, a finding of fact hearing occurs and she has been found, by a jury, to have committed the act and will be sentenced in due course; it's just the sentencing powers available to the judge are somewhat different.

I'm surprised the prosecution agreed this.
Presumably there's evidence aplenty of her being rather chipper and demonstrative of her innocence, along with significant skills in "impression management" as a politician.

It seems like they have let her have her cake and eat it several times over:

In the same way that abject grief in the wake of a close family death is entirely natural emotional response, so is abject terror and fear in the face of the prospect your cosy life being torn apart by an extremely well evidenced criminal trial. Same for every criminal one. My understanding was that trials proceeded even in the face of suicidal defendants.

But not only that she wants to maintain her innocence in the face of extremely strong evidence. Surely her emotional status could only be enhanced by being given the opportunity to clear her name of these heinous allegations ?

How that emotional torment must now have multiplied having been found guilty whilst denied the opportunity to put her side.

Anyone know if the fitness to stand issue affect whether the money will be paid back?

TheCrackFox
Why can't they postpone the trial until she is well again. She wasn't actually mentally unwell when she committed the crime.

agree

and if she is as ill as whats said how come she carried on working as posters have stated she did while awaiting the courts decision

if she's fit enough to work why not trial ??

Cumfy - a person who is suicidal may still be fit to stand trial if they are capable of properly understanding the proceedings (as detailed in earlier post). It's nothing to do with her emotional torment preventing her from having a trial, but if she is unfit to the standard explained then she cannot have a fair trial. It's also not a case of the Prosecution allowing this to happen; the judge decides based on reports of psychiatrists and evidence placed before him whether she is fit to stand trial. The judge can reject the Psychiatrist's findings.

Josh Lyman - confiscation proceedings to potentially recoup her benefit from offending, depending upon her available assets, cannot take place (Proceeds of Crime Act) because she hasn't been convicted of an offence.

its always a certain type of person well heeled and influential and a certain type of crime white collar though, isn't it?

Loads of people w. quite serious mental health problems in prison and no-one has a problem with that.

BarbarianMum, how many other people do you know of who have been deemed to be unfit to stand trial? Yes, there are lots of people with mental health problems are in custody but simply having mental health issues isn't the test for whether one is unfit to stand trial.

Dreaming Radio 4 were reporting that "the defence and prosecution agreed she was unfit to stand trial."

I presume both sides have the opportunity to advance arguments if they wish to "assist" the judge in his decision. And I am surprised that the prosecution did not advance arguments against naive digestion of the psychiatric reports, perhaps along the lines I was suggesting. Clearly we can't see the reports..... so it's all a bit moot.

But the idea that her mental condition has in reality deteriorated to a state where she cannot instruct a solicitor, is not readily credible.

I hadn't appreciated that both sides had agreed; they tend to do this when both Psychiatrists are in complete agreement that the person isn't fit to stand trial; one of the Psychs having been instructed by the Prosecution. I don't think the fact that we don't know what is in the reports is a moot point; it's completely obvious that they, in their medically qualified experience, had found her unfit to stand trial based on the test of being fit to instruct solicitor, understand the allegations and follow (taking active part in) proceedings, and to object to a juror. I don't think that you or I, not being qualified forensic psychiatrists, are really in a position to say whether her condition can have deteriorated to that extent. Two Psychiatrists, the Prosecution and ultimately the Judge clearly felt she it had.

(I should add that I certainly don't condone expenses fiddling by MPs, or anyone else for that matter. I just wanted to share my knowledge of the law and procedure regarding fitness to plead)

I'm afraid I do suspect a conspiracy of double standards - one rule for public figures and another for the rest of us. Would someone who was not in her exalted position have been allowed to scuttle away from their responsibilities in the way she has? I doubt it. I suspect that the rest of us would have to be far more ill to be declared unfit.

I suspect that there is in some quarters the feeling that public embarrassment is all the punishment that public figures need.

Lock her up for twenty years. Who cares about her mental healthy, she stole from her employer, US. Labour are a bunch of hypocrites, pretending to care about the poor and needy while lining their pockets at our expense, as well as doing consultancy work on the side.

Dreaming a bit of googling indicates that the defence Psych is Dr Phillip Joseph an eminent consultant forensic psych who has for years been instructed on very high profile murder cases. He clearly is at the top of his field.

For instance he was instructed by Tony Martin's team, when his conviction for murder was quashed by the court of appeal and substituted with manslaughter; largely on the basis of his mental status.

So what's he doing on a relatively trivial case like this ?
He will have commanded an extremely high fee.
There's no way Moran's team would have got him via legal aid.

Seems that the taxpayer has subbed her get out of jail free don't go to jail at all card.

She was never 'capable' of being an MP. Absolutely horrible woman who would examine her fingernails while being thanked for deigning to grace charity events with her presence. Luckily for her, Luton is the kind of constituency where Labour could field a stuffed bear and still win the seat.

I suppose if it is the strain of proceedings that has made her so mentally ill, then she has in effect had her punishment and there is no point wasting taxpayers' money locking her up. It shouldn't be allowed to stop her being made to pay it all back though. She will forever live with the shame.

cumfy if he's been instructed on high profile murder cases that demonstrates he certainly is available to be instructed by legally aided defendants, as almost all murder defendants will be using legal aid. It is perfectly possible to obtain public funding to instruct excellent experts.

she has been independently assessed by two psychiatrists and based on their findings a judge has rule she is not fit.

So what happened in the Saunders case if this is such a water proof procedure?

The whole Margaret Moran saga still makes me twitch with rage.

I am in what was her constituency in Luton. The year she claimed for the dry rot in her 'second home' in SOUTHHAMPTON DH and I were working phenomenally hard to set up and run our own business and bring up our two young children. That year the 4 of us had less to live on for the whole year, including tax credits, etc than she fraudulently claimed for that dry rot. It is wrong on SO many levels.
On being caught she 'disappeared' for 10 mths, leaving us completely unrepresented, got caught during that time offering influence for cash and then hung on until the election before standing down so she could get a huge pay-off as an out-going MP. Her audacity still astounds me

I'm not sure what I want to happen (though her head on a plate at the Christmas lights switch-on would be popular :)) However I do want her to be made to repay Every Last Penny.

And breath...

Sorry what makes me so bloody angry about people saying 'Oh but she's mentally ill poor thing, she can't possibly be tried'.

Has it not occurred to them that the prisons are FULL of people who suffer from much more severe mental health issues. People who have nicked much less money. People who were in much more pressing circumstances than just fancying a top up to their already generous salaries? People facing far worse problems than Moran?

Yet they get prosecuted and she doesn't. I would like to see a mum of 3 on benefits with clinical depression try and get away with shoplifting by saying she was too depressed to go to court. We wouldn't have half the prison population we have.

It's not the fact that she's mentally ill that's got her off. It's the fact that she's mentally ill and is a middle class ex-MP who knows how to work the system.

It makes me furious she has not been treated in the same way as any other common criminal by the system.

As dreaming said above, it's not as simple as just having ' mental health problems'. Plenty of people I have represented ( defence solicitor) have mental health problems, very very few areunfit tobe tried. She has gone through the same procedure anyone else would have to to be declared unfit.

They should all be treated consistently and fairly, along with any other person found guilty of fraud at work.
Know of an older lady (in her 60s) found guilty of fraud - took about £30k from her school - she still was charged and imprisoned for the crime. Again know of another woman (prob in her 50s) - she took about £100k from her work. She was also imprisoned.