Tags
(not satire – it’s UK justice today)
While the British establishment twitters on – literally – about poor old Lord McAlpine being ‘mistaken’ (by North Wales Police not the BBC or Steven Messham by the way) for another close member of his family who liked to abuse little children, it’s easy to forget that the UK justice system in its perverse wisdom has already decided that child abuse victims themselves should receive nothing or next to nothing in the way of compensation.
So let me remind everyone.
Most of the victims from Bryn Alyn got nothing at all because UK courts decided the children’s homes’ insurers were not liable.
Mind you, even if they had received something in compensation it wouldn’t have been anywhere near the hundreds of thousands McAlpine has already received (without even having to go to court).
When children have received awards for abuse in care homes in the past, they have typically received between £1,000 and £2,600 each in compensation for what happened to them.
Is it only me who despairs of a system which values the reputation of the rich and the powerful more than the rape and abuse of defenceless little children?
.
Related articles:
I hope Lord McAlpine isn’t going to sue me for saying this?
Why are UK police helping McAlpine sue twitter users when he’s a tax exile in Italy?
Lord McAlpine in his own damning words – The New Machiavelli?
It was the police – not the BBC – who wrongly named Lord McAlpine in abuse allegations
How did Cyril Smith get away with paedophilia? By threatening tweeters and bloggers with libel!
Child abuse scandal can of worms – just who is Daily Mail reporter David Rose?
High level child abuse cover-up? Why has Theresa May barred a US journalist from the UK?
Murdoch attacks BBC when his own press abused a dead schoolgirl and her whole family?
.
By the way, if you click on any of these buttons below, you’ll be doing me a favour by sharing this article with other people. Thanks:
Pride's Purge 
Pingback: Justice? McAlpine gets hundreds of thousands in compensation while child victims get next to nothing | Welfare, Disability, Politics and People's Right's | Scoop.it
This may be unreliable as it is circulating on Twitter, but I understand the police/soco have said that further Twitter prosecutions will have to be a civil matter. We’ll see.
LikeLike
The values represented by the huge difference between the compensation for victims and that of people wrongly accused – or accused without incontrovertible evidence – is as obscene as the crime discussed. I commend you for continuing to keep the matter of elite criminal behaviours towards the vulnerable in the public mind, especially when so many other media outlets have mysteriously changed their focus to less important things in recent days. There is a silence now that is truly sinister. I’m sure you have no illusions about the power of those concerned to prolong such silence in unpleasant ways. However, please keep a wary eye over your shoulder now and again. Your bravery – for that is how i see it – is more important than ever to maintain. Keep up your good work.
LikeLike
To paraphrase the bible – to him that hath shall be given more, to him that hath not even the the very little that he has shall be taken away.
It is a perversion of our times that people who have money command more respect than those who have nothing. The poor are always punished for being poor, the abused and the handicapped are punished for not being “normal”. Compassion is not very evident these days and when the role models are greedy psychopaths the it is easy to see why.
Mcalpine is behaving predictably and true to form, in line with his ancestors (scottish royalty) who trod on the peasants. Noblesse oblige et droit du seigneur and all that bollicks.
LikeLike
It appears that justice is blind to victims and wide eyed to the wealthy.
LikeLike
Pingback: Justice? McAlpine gets hundreds of thousands in compensation while child victims get next to nothing | SteveB's Politics & Economy Scoops | Scoop.it
This is another example of just how we’ve all been saturated and beaten into submission by the abortion of the 1%! Sickening
But I’m beginning to get almost as angry with my peers continuing to behave like baby seals sitting waiting to be culled by the those deemed to have Power!
LikeLike
I am so looking forward to Christmas with my Daily Fail indoctrinated step mother. It never fails to amaze me how people can believe the falsehood that is printed in “news” papers. Why didn’t Lord M just ask that the people who named him send out a retraction by the same method stating that this was a case of mistaken identity? Machiavelli has nothing on these people.
LikeLike
Why didn’t the fat greasy filth McAlpine sue the policeman who originally (and we are told, erroneously) pointed to a picture of ‘someone else’ and stated it was him?
LikeLike
Pingback: What’s the bad link between the Hillsborough and child abuse scandals? Royal and Sun Alliance! « Pride's Purge
Pingback: Senior Tory accused of abusing millions of children « Pride's Purge
Pingback: McAlpine to sue 9,990,000 UK Twitter users for not mistakenly naming him as paedophile « Pride's Purge
Pingback: Real men prefer women (or men) not girls (or boys) « Pride's Purge
Pingback: Are McAlpine’s lawyers breaking the solicitors’ code of practice? « Pride's Purge
Pingback: Daily Mail ‘fixer’ David Rose defends paedophilia accused and attacks child abuse victims. Again. « Pride's Purge
Pingback: How Lord McAlpine is exploiting exactly the same libel laws that Savile used to cover up his crimes « Pride's Purge
Pingback: Just 4 billionaire tax exiles – friends of Cameron – will benefit from weak press regulation | Pride's Purge
Pingback: The Sun, The Telegraph and The Mail – we’re above UK laws so we’ll ignore them | Pride's Purge
Pingback: Leveson deal after late-night ‘session’ ends with Cameron lying under the table ‘as pissed as a fart’ | Pride's Purge
Pingback: Old celebrities arrested for child abuse are all very well. But what about the politicians? | Pride's Purge
Pingback: Cock-up, cover-up or conspiracy in the North Wales child abuse scandal? You decide. | Pride's Purge
Pingback: Something odd in the McAlpine v Bercow case – is legal precedent being ignored? | Pride's Purge
Having come across this web-site and the mostly spurious points being taken, in this part of the site, against McAlpine, it is astonishing how poisonously ignorant most of the posts are.
Whatever one might think of Lord McAlpine and his political life, probably the most destructive allegation that can be made about anybody is one of paedophilia. In McAlpine’s case it was effectively implied by the BBC in public television. Mrs Bercow was merely a self-regarding Cow in comparison. The BBC broke its own rules in the acceptance of source allegations and did not even check the assertions. It deserved every criticism and Lord McAlpine every £ he was awarded. The Statutory scheme for the compensation of victims of crime is no longer related to the awards of damages in Civil Courts, but bloggers are confusing the CICA scheme and the possible liability for a civil Insurer for the criminal acts of employees.
It is worth reminding the ignorant peasants who have blogged on this site that the “belief” by numerous crowds of Paedophilia has resulted in the murder of innocent people and in one case the murder of a Children’s Meducal Specialit because the ignorant murderers couldn’t understand the difference between a Paediatrician and a paedophile.
LikeLike
Thomas – you don’t like to let facts get in the way of your opinions, do you?
Firstly, there’s no confusion between civil and criminal compensation here. The comparison I’m making is how can any society accept that more damages should be given to a millionaire lord who was (supposedly) libelled rather than the poor victims of child abuse?
You may think that is OK. I don’t. I think it is an example of how sick our society has become.The fact that this happens because of the differences between civil and criminal law is entirely irrelevant to my argument.
These are not laws of nature. They were made by people. Us.
Secondly, McAlpine was not named by the BBC so why should they have paid him so much (taxpayers) money?. It was the North Wales Police that named him. If someone should have been sued by him it should have been the police.Why didn’t he sue them?
Thirdly – this site is not written by a group of people, it is written by just one person – me. If you don’t like what I write – don’t read it.
Fourthly – the murderers who attacked a paediatrician instead of a paedophile were whipped into their ignorant frenzy by the Sun under the editorship of one Rebekah Brooks and owned by one Rupert Murdoch – someone who is a great friend of our Scottish lord. I don’t see anybody – including you – blaming those people. Why is that?
Oh and ignorant peasants? Oh dear. Are you an old Etonian by any chance?
LikeLike
Pingback: Warning – sharing this blogpost (in the UK) might be libellous | Pride's Purge
Pingback: Lord McAlpine in his own damning words – The New Machiavelli? | Pride's Purge