AIBU to question why taxpayers should fund Ian Huntley’s cremation?

[PassingStranger]

Can't Ian Huntleys mother who was at his bedside and in touch with him, pay for his cremation.
Why should the tax payer pay?
He's already cost the taxpayer loads.🤔😫

When there's only one person on your side of the debate, it's not debatable.

You haven't answered why you keep implying that his mother is responsible for all the bad things he's done. Or what you think a reasonable, practical alternative would be to the state providing a basic cremation.
Do you even realise that one of the reasons the govt have a say in this, is to protect the victims? So that there's nothing public that can draw attention?

Not as much as Holly and Jessica’s Parents have suffered and will continue to suffer for the rest of their lives.

We don't know how much his mother has suffered. And it isn't suffering parent top trumps either.

But if the mum paid for a funeral, idiots like the OP will be posting on Mumsnet about how terrible it is that his mum is commemorating the death.
She faces vilification if she takes responsibility or doesn't take responsibility for him.
The fact that the victims family suffer, doesn't cancel out her suffering. Both can exist. Neither are responsible for his crimes.

"she" doesn't get the cremation

This thread is a waste of time?

id say its a debate topic overall but seems in bad taste

Huntley managed to do what he did because there was no importance placed on crimes against working class women and girls. The Police didn't care that there were multiple accusations of violence and rape. The Head Master of the school didn't place importance on a DBS for a man who would be working with girls. So let's leave the women, who have done nothing, except share DNA with Huntley, alone. People need to grow up, there's a body that needs attending to, under the law. The longer it is in storage, the more it costs. They are getting £3k to dispose of it. The Daughter is NOK in terms of compensation and she doesn't want it.

Quite.

You’re treating your perspective like a law of physics. It’s an interpretation, and mine is just as valid, even if I’m the only one voicing it right now.

It baffles me that you can't see this clinical disposal of the remains is the only thing to be done. You're framing it as something that benefits his mother. Like it's special treatment she doesn't deserve. It's not. It's standard procedure.

But you haven't put forward a single valid argument. So I'm not convinced that your perspective is "as valid"?

Wtf does that even mean, are you high OP?

It's incoherent, and not logically consistent.

Resorting to name calling usually means you've run out of actual arguments. If the only way you can defend your point is by imagining a 'damned if she does, damned if she doesn't' scenario, you aren't debating the facts, you're just venting..

Well the body has to be disposed of somehow and there are no ways of doing that which don't incur some costs. I would imagine it will be a simple cremation and then the ashes will be scattered somewhere or buried in an unmarked plot. It's not like the state will be funding a large funeral service and a marble memorial, just disposing of the body in a legal and hygienic manner.
I have had a few patients over the years who have been estranged from their families or had no living relatives so nobody has claimed the body after death. In that case the local authority arranges a public health funeral. I presume it will be similar to that but the time and location may well be kept secret.
I don't really see the alternative. I don't think the family should be forced to pay for or arrange the funeral and the disposal has to meet the legal and public health standards.
There are lots of things that I would prefer my taxes not to be spent on but unfortunately it doesn't work that way. I can certainly think of a lot of misuse of public money that has occurred in recent times that bothers me a lot more than paying for what is likely to be the cheapest way of legally disposing of a dead body.

I agree ☝🏻

His mother didn't commit crimes.
His mother if I remember correctly gave evidence against him.
His mother is an elderly woman, who possibly doesn't have money to deal with his remains.
He himself was murdered, his remains may have to be buried rather than cremated (laws may have changed in 30 years & maybe different in England)
His murderer wasn't exactly a nice bloke.
He is unlikely to have assets to pay his funeral
Can you even get life insurance for someone in prison?

All things consider, the state needs to pick up the tab.

God bless his poor mum. She's the one who's had to live her life with people pointing the finger 👉.
He didn't turn out like that from her. What was his Dad like?
Has she already suffered at his hands?

Don't bother trying to engage with empathy with the OP. The facts are, a criminal died in the government's custody and the only way to deal with the dead body is burial or cremation. And not dealing with the dead body would cost the tax payer a whole lot more money than 0.007p. There's just no reasonable argument that the state shouldn't dispose of dead bodies. That's just not debatable.

Not to mention their siblings of which there four, grandparents, friends, teachers, aunts uncles etc.

Well that point is slightly invalidated by the arguments that I've posted throughout, and in the same post below my insult. Whereas you haven't posted a single one apart from some nonsensical ramblings about perspectives and the laws of physics.

Why won't you actually answer any of the points put to you - why do you think she's being prevented from paying if she wants to, why do you think she's responsible for his funeral costs, what difference do you think her visiting makes to that, what do you think should be done with his body as an alternative to a no frills govt funded crem?

Agreed.

It is debatable. It it wasn't there wouldn't be any votes in favour on the post.

This is not a hill to die on OP, you come across as angry and vengeful. He's dead, has paid the ultimate price - the debt is clear.

That's not an argument as to the validity of your statements.