6 year sentence over £500 bribe for Court Administrator
6 year sentence over £500 bribe for Court Administrator
Author
Discussion

scenario8

Original Poster:

8,003 posts

210 months

Friday 18th November 2011
quotequote all
You may recall the case of Munir Patel who was filmed by a newspaper accepting a £500 bribe to avoid putting details of a minor motoring offence onto the Court database.

He has been sentenced to 6 years in prison.

Wow. That is a lot of time for a little money.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-156898...

As they said in Grange Hill; Just say "no".

mgtony

4,220 posts

221 months

Friday 18th November 2011
quotequote all
That's not "a little money" if you multiply it by at least the 50 people they know of that he done it for! smile

Mojooo

13,291 posts

211 months

Friday 18th November 2011
quotequote all
Will the bribers be charged for bribery?

scenario8

Original Poster:

8,003 posts

210 months

Friday 18th November 2011
quotequote all
mgtony said:
That's not "a little money" if you multiply it by at least the 50 people they know of that he done it for! smile
Yes, apologies for the Daily Wailesque simplification. Assuming his rate was consistently £500 a pop and genuinely only 50 cases exist that is still a lot of time for what he probably considered a little bit of dodging. I'm not defending his actions at all, I was commenting that the sentence sounds steep. Especially so in comparison to other sentences one reads. Let's hope others in positions of privilege have a good long think.

MX7

7,902 posts

205 months

Friday 18th November 2011
quotequote all
I don't think that's a harsh sentence. He's employed to record public offences, but instead used his position to line his own pockets.


JagLover

46,837 posts

266 months

Friday 18th November 2011
quotequote all
MX7 said:
I don't think that's a harsh sentence. He's employed to record public offences, but instead used his position to line his own pockets.
Agreed

We would expect court officers to uphold the highest standards of honesty. A sentence such as this is justified by its deterrant value alone.

Ayahuasca

27,590 posts

310 months

Friday 18th November 2011
quotequote all
Nothing to do with the amount - the courts alway hate anyone who is perverting the workings of the justice system itself.

matchmaker

9,076 posts

231 months

Friday 18th November 2011
quotequote all
And dishonest court staff are not dealt with leniently by judges!

Countdown

49,519 posts

227 months

Friday 18th November 2011
quotequote all
anonymous said:
[redacted]
Why would it be "too sensitive" ?

Mojooo

13,291 posts

211 months

Friday 18th November 2011
quotequote all
tonker has assumed they will all be brown.

Countdown

49,519 posts

227 months

Friday 18th November 2011
quotequote all
Mojooo said:
tonker has assumed they will all be brown.
Oh right. Because the Police don't like arresting brown people....

zcacogp

11,239 posts

275 months

Friday 18th November 2011
quotequote all
Mojooo said:
tonker has assumed they will all be brown.
Tonker is not the only one who assumed this.


Oli.

zcacogp

11,239 posts

275 months

Friday 18th November 2011
quotequote all
... which raises a number of questions, not least of which is why was it allowed to go on for so long before being stopped? Will there be a process to recover the ill-gotten gains, or will he become another dodgy-looking guy with a flash motor and no apparent means of paying for it?

He only offered the 'favour' for others of his type. Funny how those groups who are quickest to point the finger of racism are so often the most guilty.


Oli.

Soovy

35,829 posts

302 months

Friday 18th November 2011
quotequote all
anonymous said:
[redacted]
This.

It's got zero to do with the amount of money, and everything to do with the fact that he abused a position of trust.

He also only did it for those of his "commoon-ity innit".



Bang on sentence. Dirty corrupt little scumbag. He'll suffer in prison.




Edited by Soovy on Friday 18th November 14:18

Mojooo

13,291 posts

211 months

Friday 18th November 2011
quotequote all
They could do proceeds of crime possibly.

If he only offered it to simialr people to him then clearly they will be his customers (especially as they were locals of east london). That is not to say others wouldnt jump at the opportunity if offered.




Ozzie Osmond

21,189 posts

277 months

Friday 18th November 2011
quotequote all
Soovy said:
It's got zero to do with the amount of money, and everything to do with the fact that he abused a position of trust.
In which case there should be a lot more MPs in jail over their expenses thefts! The principle is right, though.

zcacogp

11,239 posts

275 months

Friday 18th November 2011
quotequote all
Soovy said:
He'll suffer in prison.
I do hope so.


Oli.

MX7

7,902 posts

205 months

Friday 18th November 2011
quotequote all
Ozzie Osmond said:
In which case there should be a lot more MPs in jail over their expenses thefts! The principle is right, though.
I'm not going to defend the MPs guilty of expenses fraud, but is there any suggestion that any of them manipulated our justice system to profiteer?


anonymous said:
[redacted]
So downplayed that I can't find any mention of it anywhere. Where did you see it?

Countdown

49,519 posts

227 months

Friday 18th November 2011
quotequote all
anonymous said:
[redacted]
Tonker - what makes you think the police are too sensitive to arrest brown people?

ETA - no doubt that Chief Constable is wishing he was "brown" as well.

Soovy

35,829 posts

302 months

Friday 18th November 2011
quotequote all


Crooked scumbag said:
'It goes into the computer innit, you've got to input that data, so the buck stops with you really innit, so you're in charge of it. So you just don't bother putting it into the system and you get no comebacks.'