Sir Cliff Richard
Discussion
Presumably his point that, if the police had done their job quietly and efficiently rather than jumping on the paedo bandwagon, and helping the BBC to splash the search of CR’s flat all over the news in the hope of digging up some dirt, rather than just the scam artists who actually came forward, you, me and every other taxpayer might have saved £400k which would have been better spent by the police on something else.
loafer123 said:
Presumably his point that, if the police had done their job quietly and efficiently rather than jumping on the paedo bandwagon, and helping the BBC to splash the search of CR’s flat all over the news in the hope of digging up some dirt, rather than just the scam artists who actually came forward, you, me and every other taxpayer might have saved £400k which would have been better spent by the police on something else.
Oh, you mean like this?loafer123 said:
Presumably his point that, if the police had done their job quietly and efficiently rather than jumping on the paedo bandwagon, and helping the BBC to splash the search of CR’s flat all over the news in the hope of digging up some dirt, rather than just the scam artists who actually came forward, you, me and every other taxpayer might have saved £400k which would have been better spent by the police on something else.
What useful purpose is served if we take £400k from the police and give it to Cliff Richard?Brads67 said:
Th idea is that it makes the cops think twice about being lying dicks, making up evidence and harassing people for no good reason.
I suspect.
This helps - whom, exactly?I suspect.
The £400k + + has to come from somewhere in the police budget.
I suggest it's one fewer policeman available to investigate Mrs Miggins' burglary - or the theft of your car, say?
The only person who actually gains is Cliff Richard.
The Mad Monk said:
What useful purpose is served if we take £400k from the police and give it to Cliff Richard?
I don’t think anyone can comprehend what it must be like to be wrongly identified and then in all media as being a pedo. The hate mail the fact people spit on you as they walk past family and friends maybe believe it or question it. The stress must be unimaginable. Look at Freddie Star utterly innocent but the pic just before and at the end he was a broken man.
As for the cash - clearly he doesn’t need it that’s not the point. Those who made the error of judgement which had such an impact on an innocent victim need to pay.
As another said I’d wager he will give it to a worthy charity
Mud sticks. If it were Joe Bloggs he might never be able to find work again say he was a senior mgr and after this all he could find was say public toilet cleaning and even getting that work would be a struggle. CR is in some way doing this also for those the many innocent who’s lives are ruined
The Mad Monk said:
What useful purpose is served if we take £400k from the police and give it to Cliff Richard?
None whatsoever. It would have been better if the necessity to do so didn't exist. So why did they cause him sufficient unnecessary grief that the judge saw fit to award damages on this scale?Don't even attempt to blame CR for receiving damages for the crap he went through due to the incompetence of the chaps in the blue uniforms. Blame the guys who made the cock-up, not their innocent victim.
Before anyone jumps in to suggest that there were no errors, no poor judgement, no cock-ups: the judge clearly decided that there were & I'm inclined to support his judgement over the words of any apologists for the clowns responsible.
By the time we add on legal costs etc, I guess the total bill will be a multiple of £400k.
I repeat, what useful purpose does that serve to the community? Cliff Richard may well give the money to charity, the lawyers will say 'thank you very much' and the community will have a lot less money to carry out its policing.
Who benefits?
Explain to me why it is a good idea.
I repeat, what useful purpose does that serve to the community? Cliff Richard may well give the money to charity, the lawyers will say 'thank you very much' and the community will have a lot less money to carry out its policing.
Who benefits?
Explain to me why it is a good idea.
The Mad Monk said:
By the time we add on legal costs etc, I guess the total bill will be a multiple of £400k.
I repeat, what useful purpose does that serve to the community? Cliff Richard may well give the money to charity, the lawyers will say 'thank you very much' and the community will have a lot less money to carry out its policing.
Who benefits?
Explain to me why it is a good idea.
Because what other way is there to 'punish' the Police and BBC for this?I repeat, what useful purpose does that serve to the community? Cliff Richard may well give the money to charity, the lawyers will say 'thank you very much' and the community will have a lot less money to carry out its policing.
Who benefits?
Explain to me why it is a good idea.
Lord Marylebone said:
Because what other way is there to 'punish' the Police and BBC for this?
Fire the police involved and/or severely curtail benefits (reduction in pension;demotion) for gross misconduct or worse.Ditto the BBC editors who approved the running of the story and a significant reduction in license fee payments available to the BBC.
Tune both to cover multiples of the cost of both the damages payable to CR and the legal costs.
Direct punishment is required to ensure those responsible carry the can and others are discouraged from doing the same.
Damages are still warranted though. What CR does with it is up to CR.
The BBC and the Police conspired to ruin a man's reputation - it really was beneath contempt what they did.
Interesting to read the first few pages of this thread, the typical PH view being 'I've always thought there was something odd about him'. A kind of 'no smoke without fire' view.
Interesting to read the first few pages of this thread, the typical PH view being 'I've always thought there was something odd about him'. A kind of 'no smoke without fire' view.
Lord Marylebone said:
The Mad Monk said:
By the time we add on legal costs etc, I guess the total bill will be a multiple of £400k.
I repeat, what useful purpose does that serve to the community? Cliff Richard may well give the money to charity, the lawyers will say 'thank you very much' and the community will have a lot less money to carry out its policing.
Who benefits?
Explain to me why it is a good idea.
Because what other way is there to 'punish' the Police and BBC for this?I repeat, what useful purpose does that serve to the community? Cliff Richard may well give the money to charity, the lawyers will say 'thank you very much' and the community will have a lot less money to carry out its policing.
Who benefits?
Explain to me why it is a good idea.
k ups like this expensive so that people will think a little harder in the future. I actually think there should be some personal responsibility as well.The other thing is that a big court case and a settlement will re-enforce that he is innocent. Just saying we investigated and found no evidence still smells of "he got away with it".
Rovinghawk said:
The Mad Monk said:
What useful purpose is served if we take £400k from the police and give it to Cliff Richard?
None whatsoever. It would have been better if the necessity to do so didn't exist. So why did they cause him sufficient unnecessary grief that the judge saw fit to award damages on this scale?Don't even attempt to blame CR for receiving damages for the crap he went through due to the incompetence of the chaps in the blue uniforms. Blame the guys who made the cock-up, not their innocent victim.
Before anyone jumps in to suggest that there were no errors, no poor judgement, no cock-ups: the judge clearly decided that there were & I'm inclined to support his judgement over the words of any apologists for the clowns responsible.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff