"I wanna make a million dollars, I wanna live out by the sea..."

"Have a husband and some children, yeah, I guess I want a family."

So screams the headline, anyway. Luckily, the paper has elected not to name the head:

The Advertiser has withheld the name of the school and head teacher to protect the children.

Which also spares the blushes of the idiot, since there's no proof whatsoever that this is why they are tarts:

"What has shocked us is all these cases have come to our attention in the past six months – it must be more than a coincidence," she told the Advertiser.

You're a Croydon school. There's your coincidence!

The head teacher believes the "suffocating" cost of childcare may be pressuring some women.

A recent study found childcare in London costs an average of £119 per week for a child under two years old, a third higher than elsewhere in the UK.

"The cost of expensive childcare must be a factor," the head said.

Must it?

Of course, there's always a charity or two waiting like vultures:

Care, a charity that campaigns to end sexual exploitation in the UK, is alarmed.

Director Dan Boucher said: "Any new evidence that suggests mothers with no previous involvement in prostitution are selling themselves is deeply concerning."

Is it? Well, how about you do some research, rather than rely on the suppositions and fevered imagining of the head nose-wiper?

Criminal Stupidity

Two yobs who prevented an air ambulance from taking a dying man to hospital by dazzling the pilot with a laser pen walked free today.

Well, of course they did! FFS!

Alex Cox and Luke Fortune, both 21, directed the green laser at the helicopter as the pilot desperately attempted to reach the critically-ill heart patient.

But after three attempts, the pilot had to give up and return to base in Devizes, Wiltshire.

The tragic pensioner, in his late 70s, had to be driven to hospital in a road ambulance but died en route.

And why aren’t they charged with manslaughter?

Well…

It was unlikely the helicopter would have saved the man who had suffered a cardiac arrest, the ambulance service said.

It didn’t help, though, did it? Particularly the delay.

Cox and Fortune pleaded guilty to directing or shining a light at an aircraft in flight so as to dazzle or distract the pilot - but walked free from court with a conditional discharge.

*sigh*

Magistrate Felicity Dowell told them: 'This was a very stupid, thoughtless thing to do.

'I am sure that you did not do it to make the helicopter crash but it would have had that effect.

'You are very lucky it wasn’t very serious.'

Does it get more serious than ‘dead’? Not for the patient!

'One of you plays rugby - imagine if you were lying on the field with a broken leg waiting for the air ambulance and someone did the same thing. '

That, love, would be karma. Just as it would be if you were awaiting that vital helicopter assistance…

Taking ‘Identifying With Your Pupils’ A Little Too Far…

Katrina Mann, 49, principal of a teaching centre in Dagenham for students expelled from other schools, was held by officers with fellow teacher Darren McCarthy, 38, outside Barking railway station after missing the last train home.

The pair have been charged with being drunk and disorderly in a public place and using threatening words and behaviour.

Oooops!

A spokesman for Barking and Dagenham council said they had both been suspended from work pending the outcome of the court case and a disciplinary investigation.

The latter, presumably, awaiting the outcome of the former?

The pair, who denied the charges at Redbridge magistrates’ court last month, will be tried by magistrates in Havering on March 27. The charges carry a maximum penalty of 12 months’ jail or a £10,000 fine.

Ms Mann, who lives in a large Victorian property in a quiet road in Hornchurch, Essex, and Mr McCarthy, who lives in a flat in Walthamstow, were both released on unconditional bail.

So….just who missed the last train home, then? Since they were going in opposite directions?

When contacted by the Standard they refused to comment about the alleged incident in Station Parade late on January 26. But a friend of the pair said: “It’s all been blown out of proportion and as a result the school is having to operate without two dedicated members of staff.”

Mmmm, definitely one to watch. One thing I do know; Barking Stn is very well served by CCTV.

Shouldn’t This Read ‘An Ex-Driver For The Disabled’..?

A driver for the disabled threatened a motorist with a knife during a road rage incident, a court heard.

Oh, this one'll be good...

*gets popcorn*

Victim Paul Bryan was parked in Church Street, Alfreton, on February 7, waiting to collect his partner when a minibus driven by Ian McLaughlin pulled up in front of his car.

Chesterfield magistrates were told that McLaughlin flashed his lights, wanting Mr Bryan to move, but he stayed put.

And, if he was legally parked, not in an 'Ambulance' marked bay, he was quite entitled to do so, surely?

And those 'Please keep your distance - Wheelchair ramp' signs on the backs of specially-adapted minibuses are requests for courtesy, not legally-enforceable demands.

He didn't, after all, have to pull up in front - by his own actions, he placed himself in the position of difficulty.

But it seems Mr McLaughlin is a person for whom everything is someone else's fault:

McLaughlin helped a passenger in a wheelchair to get off the Peugeot minibus and then tapped on Mr Bryan's car window.

Mike Treharne, prosecuting, said: "Mr Bryan opened the window and the defendant shouted and swore at him saying: 'You could see I had a disabled passenger'.

"Mr Bryan said he hadn't realised and he tried to apologise and the defendant said 'You'll move next time or I'll cut your throat'.

"He had a knife in his left hand."

Pretty stupid behaviour, given that, as it turned out, McLaughlin wasn't exactly incognito:

McLaughlin, 46, drove away and Mr Bryan noted the registration number and called police, who traced the minibus to the Ripley-based People's Mobility Network.

And as it turned out, not only wasn't he incognito, he wasn't even supposed to be driving!

"They found he was employed as a taxi or bus driver and a check showed he was a disqualified driver and had deceived his employers with a duplicate driving licence.

"His employers said he had been driving their vehicles since December 5 and he had received £3,198 in wages," said Mr Treharne, adding that a lock-knife with a three-inch blade was found under a seat in the minibus.

Oh dear. It doesn't look good, does it?

McLaughin told police he had been having "a manic day" and his behaviour was "way over the top".

That's putting it mildly!

He said his partner was a trustee for the mobility organisation and was unaware he had been disqualified last August for drink-driving.

Someone really needs to vet their staff a little better, rather than relying on the current squeeze of one of the trustees!

McLaughlin, of Station Street, Mansfield Woodhouse, admitted using threatening behaviour, possessing a blade in public, fraud and driving while disqualified and without insurance. Magistrates committed him to Derby Crown Court on March 21 for sentencing.

"He accepts his behaviour was nothing short of abhorrent," said Joe Harvey, for McLaughlin.

"He worked to earn the money and there was no loss to the employers other than they were exposed to a risk of which they were unaware."

'Unaware' because, well, they didn't check?

Gosh, All Those Police Campaigns About Leaving Valuables In Cars, And Then This?

Lucas Cebataviciute was seen on CCTV taking the items from the vehicle in Normacot on February 8.

Prosecutor Clair Moss yesterday told North Staffordshire magistrates that the 20-year-old defendant said he had been to a friend's house and when he walked past the Fiat Punto he saw it was not locked.

He took a bag from the front seat and then returned for the sat nav, which he sold for £70 at a takeaway.

It was a police car...

Here’s One I Made Earlier!

Andrea Edwards, prosecuting, said the incident occurred on March 12.

Parkes and another builder were working on a house in Bourneville Road when a neighbour, Richard Ives, asked if he could take his washing inside before they started work.

"Parkes began acting aggressively and called him 'a queer'," said Ms Edwards. The court heard Parkes shouted and swore at Mr Ives, subjecting him to more homophobic verbal abuse. "Mr Ives went inside and then left the house to pick up his partner," she said.

And that’s where it all went wrong…

"When they got back there was a piece of chipboard outside his house with a drawing of a penis and a homophobic slur written on it. There were also two models of penises that had been made out of cement, placed on his wall."

Sadly, there are no pictures, so we can’t grade him for anatomical accuracy…

Michael Parkes, 34, pleaded guilty in absence to using threatening words and behaviour at Bristol Magistrates' Court yesterday.

Bridget Sanger, defending, explained that Parkes could not attend court because at a separate hearing in November he had been thrown down the stairs by a co-defendant.

She said that Parkes, of Butlers Walk, St George, had broken his ankle and was housebound.

It just gets better and better…

Ms Sanger, defending, said Parkes maintained he did not make the models but had pleaded guilty to get the case dealt with quickly.

She said he used to be a heavy drinker but had tried to change.

Riiiight...

Magistrates fined Parkes £200 and ordered him to pay Mr Ives £200 compensation. He must also pay £200 costs plus a £15 victim surcharge.

Oh, look! It’s that ‘victim surcharge’ again!

H/T: Gareth Lewis via email

All That Proofreading...

A Tube advert spotted a few weeks ago:

And yes, I know I goofed in the headline here in not spotting the autocorrect, but I'm not a professional advertising company with (supposedly) several lines of approval!

Sunday Funnies

It all started with Andrew Jackson? Really?

Ramping Up The Rape Rhetoric...

A Powys woman jailed for falsely retracting rape allegations against her husband has lost her Court of Appeal bid to overturn her conviction for perverting the course of justice.

I thought at the time, when I started getting the news of this on Twitter, 'There will, of course, be much frothing at this'. And I wasn't wrong. First out of the traps was our old pal, Vera 'I Scoop No Poop For Anyone!' Baird.

She concentrated on the 'injustice' of the case, and how it would prevent women from coming forward, despite the fact that, as a lawyer herself, she should have known full well it's unlikely to be repeated, as the comments by the judge prompted the DPP to issue fresh guidance:

Giving the decision on the woman's appeal against conviction on Tuesday, Lord Judge said: "The reality of this case is that the appellant was undoubtedly guilty of a serious crime, from which police officers did all they reasonably could to dissuade her.

"Compassion for her position, and indeed for any woman in the same or a similar position, should have produced a non-custodial sentence.

"That is why this court acted speedily to quash the custodial sentence and replace it with a community order which would offer practical assistance to the appellant in the immediate aftermath of her release from prison."

He added: "The court also expressed itself in clear and direct language, which was immediately considered by the Director of Public Prosecutions, who has now issued fresh guidance about how cases involving false retractions of true allegations by vulnerable defendants will be addressed in the future."

In other words, we don't expect to see these sorts of charges laid against these women in the future?

If true, that's a monstrous injustice, isn't it? To the men falsely accused, that is. But does anyone speak for them?

Meanwhile, there's no subject so controversial that those axe-grinders Mumsnet can't make it just that little bit worse:

Another online survey, this time from Mumsnet, concludes that one woman in ten has been raped, and over a third have been sexually assaulted. The best data we have, from the British Crime Survey, suggests this is an overestimate.

Heh! I'll say. And how the hell can such a self-selected group be considered representative of anything?

The BBC reported it at length, but without challenging the Mumsnet figures. Doesn't the BBC College of Journalism include a course on statistical scepticism?

I don't think 'scepticism' is even in the BBC vocabulary.

It seems that, when it comes to rape sentencing propaganda, the booting out of such frothing feminists as Vera Baird and Harriet Harman did absolutely nothing. The myth persists that rape convictions are out of kilter with all other crimes, no matter how many times that myth is debunked.

It feels like I'm shouting into the wind, sometimes...

H/T: Mark Wadsworth and PJH via email

We Do ‘Banning’, But Draw The Line At ‘Naming And Shaming’…

A man has been banned for life from 10 pubs in Cowley for allegedly abusing a bar worker.

Oh? And who is this mysterious man?

The man has been barred from entering and drinking in a string of licensed premises under the Pubwatch scheme, but his identity is being kept secret after one of the landlords said police had told them not to talk to the Oxford Mail.

Really?

No. Not really. Well, not really to the ‘police’ bit, anyway:

Pcso Anna McCormack, a member of the Cowley neighbourhood police team, said the scheme worked by landlords and bar staff discussing the man, whom she insists is known to them already.

She said the Cowley Pubwatch, which meets every two months, had been in contact with pubs in neighbouring areas to tell them to keep an eye out for the man, who she said had attacked a bar worker.

And they named him to each other, no doubt, but Plastic Fantastic Anna Mac didn’t want them naming him to you plebs, oh, dear me, no…

Refusing to name him, she said: “At the moment, because it was a serious incident, his ban is down for life.

“He is known to a number of the pubs for a string of antisocial behaviour. That will be reviewed in five years though.

“If he does return to the pubs in the scheme the landlords and staff can call us and we can either ask him to leave or use trespassing, antisocial behaviour, or public order legislation to move him.”

Right, OK, just one question for you, sweetie. How are they going to ‘review it in five years’ if he’s barred, and they therefore don’t see him? Hmm? What are they going to review?

Oh, sorry, did I say one question? I’ve got another. Why don’t you use this legislation now?

It is understood that despite the ‘serious’ nature of the incident, the man is not facing criminal charges.

Thames Valley Police head of communications Michelle Nichols said not naming the individual was a decision only for Pubwatch and the police should not be involved.

Well, since she’s ‘sort of’ police, maybe you are involved?

Oooooh, Michelle backpedalled at the speed of sound at that one!

However, when informed that a landlord had been told by police not to talk to the Oxford Mail about it, she added: “If they were told that by a police officer or member of police staff then that is incorrect.”

Hah! Sucks to be you, Anna!

Pubwatch chairman Steve Baker said guidance was not to name anyone who had been banned, although he did say there was merit in the argument that if the wider public knew who had been banned it would help with its enforcement.

“But from our perspective that’s like a naming and shaming exercise and that is not what Pubwatch does,” he added.

Because being banned from a pub or a series of pubs is clearly nothing to be ashamed about..?