Monday, 18 February 2013

Are They That Easy To Interfere With..?

If so, I think we should be told:
Rebecca Gallanagh used nail glue to spell out her name in fake diamonds on the ankle tag which was meant to ensure she kept her curfew.
Tacky, chavvy, indeed. But affecting the device?
The company argued in court that Gallaghan had 'compromised the integrity' of the device with her diamanté design.
Ummm... I don't think so. Not do their own employees:
When staff from Serco Home Affairs fitted the tag they told her she would be allowed to decorate it however she wanted, she claims.
'The lady who fitted the item said she saw a girl from My Big Fat Gypsy Wedding who had blinged her tag, and she said I could do that,' Gallanagh said.
'I saw pictures of it online and checked the leaflet, and nowhere did it say I couldn't decorate it.'
Well, quite! Who would be stupid enough to believe they...

Oh. Right:
Magistrates agreed, telling the defendant she had committed a 'very serious offence' and slapping her with a £55 fine, along with £85 court costs and a £20 victim support surcharge.
Good grief! No-one comes out of this one looking good, do they?

10 comments:

  1. A £55 fine - which she won't pay

    £85 court costs - which she won't pay

    A £20 Victim Surcharge - who's the bloody victim?

    So some table thumping Magistrate got to make a point, and us taxpayers got to fund the CPS's valuable time to the tune of £160 - everyone's a winner then eh?

    *bangs head on desk*

    ReplyDelete
  2. Top comedy marks to her lawyer for this:

    'This is a young girl who was coming up to Christmas - there were opportunities where she was out and about, and she was trying to make the tag look nice.'

    ReplyDelete
  3. I suspect there is more to the 'tampering' than we have been told.

    Most folk would be seriously displeased by exterior decorations to their property - even the transformation was purely of the 'superficial, glue-on bling' type, Julia. On the other hand, impromptu graffiti may be a source of great pleasure; even when it is unilaterally commissioned by a dishonest, violent piece of worthless dross.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I thought the tag was so that she WASN'T "out and about"

    ReplyDelete
  5. Macheath - Oh, the lawyer was deadly serious. Christmas... with it's abundance of semi-conscious blind-drunk males on the loose... does indeed bring opportunities for certain females of the species.

    From "F*** Me Shoes" to a "F*** Me Tag"... nothing quite says "classy bird" like it.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Typical sign of the times,she has absolutely no shame about being on tag.
    It's like a badge of honour amongst the chavistocracy.
    Jaded

    ReplyDelete
  7. It's like a badge of honour amongst the chavistocracy.

    I'm waiting for one particular fashion to make its return...

    Tar & Feathers

    ReplyDelete
  8. Dr Cromarty = "I thought the tag was so that she WASN'T "out and about"

    You and many many others, as witnessed by the comments from readers however, "buried" in the 5th paragraph of the article

    "She was ordered to observe a strict curfew requiring her to stay at home between 9pm and 7am for a period of three months" ..

    I read some "interesting research" a few months back about how people consistently fail to read beyond the opening paragraphs of certain types of banner headlined "outrage" articles and therefore fail to get "the whole picture" ... At the time I only got about three paragraphs in before flinging the paper aside and declaring "Rubbish!" :-)

    ReplyDelete
  9. Bunny

    The young lady in question had a job in a bar, this punishment meant that she lost that job, but with the current benefits system she then is able to claim some form of benefit. Which obviously pays the fine, which means that you and I pay the fine. Which muppet thought this one through?

    This is an electronic tag, surely the curfew could have been arranged so that she kept her job and actually paid the fine. New fine for putting some fake diamonds on the tag, which was cut off and made irreparable anyway is also paid out by the tax payer. Bloody useless.

    Its an electronic tag, they can monitor the tag where she is located and at what time, surely they could have made the curfew operable for enough time for her to carry on working and get home and no other nights out. Or is that showing a modicum of sense here, she works, she pays off the fine, she doesn't go out clubbing. The money comes out of her own pocket ergo its punishment.

    ReplyDelete
  10. "So some table thumping Magistrate got to make a point, and us taxpayers got to fund the CPS's valuable time to the tune of £160 - everyone's a winner then eh? "

    Exactly! Her's isn't the only vanity on display, is it?

    "Top comedy marks to her lawyer for this:"

    I wonder if 'chutzpah' is something they are taught?

    "I thought the tag was so that she WASN'T "out and about""

    Indeed! *sigh*

    "Typical sign of the times,she has absolutely no shame about being on tag."

    Shame is something we don't do anymore. We've evolved past it, according to the sociologists.

    " Or is that showing a modicum of sense here..."

    Sense is another thing we don't do, it seems...

    ReplyDelete