Is this just a money-making business??

[mumpleasehelpme]

I was wondering, what with all these false allegations and such..could it possibly be a money- making business for this Government?..The amount of money they have off each person is huge, surely there must be money left over after paying the defence team etc!..It just seems a bit strange that this Government is really pushing for charges and a lot of the cases are just getting stupid now!..Is there any study on the amounts used to pay the courts etc, and what is left over after and we here does that money go!!?

[sooty]

Making money

I was wondering, what with all these false allegations and such..could it possibly be a money- making business for this Government?..The amount of money they have off each person is huge, surely there must be money left over after paying the defence team etc!..It just seems a bit strange that this Government is really pushing for charges and a lot of the cases are just getting stupid now!..Is there any study on the amounts used to pay the courts etc, and what is left over after and we here does that money go!!?

The Government is a group of people. They are all well connected and likely to be shareholders in firms of solicitors.

Firms of solicitors claim legal aid funding and taxpayers foot the bill.

The Government are the creators of thousands of Laws, Rules and Regulations that most people are not aware of.

Yes. It is all a huge money-making business.

[LS]

It's probably more to do with the fact that most individuals are far-right in nature, and want crime to go down - no one wants to live in a crime-ridden area.
Rather than catch burglars, muggers or thieves, as the police would actually have to leave the confines of the comfy police station and their doughnuts, it is far easier to catch and prosecute two groups of people that are easy meat.

1. Motorists - they usually commit their crimes right in front of the police, repeatedly, so not a chance of plod even getting out of breath.
2. Sexual crimes. These are the only offences in the statute book that can and will be taken to court without so much as a hint of evidence. DNA would be nice, but even a lack of any isn't a bar to being prosecuted and it's one word against another. Get the defendant in front of a thick jury and wahey, there's another conviction to show that the Government are cracking down on crime.
It's like taking candy from a baby.

[lawlessone2009]

It's probably more to do with the fact that most individuals are far-right in nature, and want crime to go down - no one wants to live in a crime-ridden area.
Rather than catch burglars, muggers or thieves, as the police would actually have to leave the confines of the comfy police station and their doughnuts, it is far easier to catch and prosecute two groups of people that are easy meat.

1. Motorists - they usually commit their crimes right in front of the police, repeatedly, so not a chance of plod even getting out of breath.
2. Sexual crimes. These are the only offences in the statute book that can and will be taken to court without so much as a hint of evidence. DNA would be nice, but even a lack of any isn't a bar to being prosecuted and it's one word against another. Get the defendant in front of a thick jury and wahey, there's another conviction to show that the Government are cracking down on crime.
It's like taking candy from a baby.

What he said... ^^^^

[Rights Fighter]

It's probably more to do with the fact that most individuals are far-right in nature, and want crime to go down - no one wants to live in a crime-ridden area.
Rather than catch burglars, muggers or thieves, as the police would actually have to leave the confines of the comfy police station and their doughnuts, it is far easier to catch and prosecute two groups of people that are easy meat.

1. Motorists - they usually commit their crimes right in front of the police, repeatedly, so not a chance of plod even getting out of breath.
2. Sexual crimes. These are the only offences in the statute book that can and will be taken to court without so much as a hint of evidence. DNA would be nice, but even a lack of any isn't a bar to being prosecuted and it's one word against another. Get the defendant in front of a thick jury and wahey, there's another conviction to show that the Government are cracking down on crime.
It's like taking candy from a baby.

How lovely to see you posting again here!! Don't forget t'other forum too!! x