If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨
Options
Innocent Man Has To Pay For Time In Jail
BillieTheBot
Posts: 8,721 Bot
Beep boop. I'm a bot.
0
Comments
He should be fully compensated. If i was him I would sue the government for breaching his human rights, he can claim legal aid for that
No
Well at the current rate of £1800 a day charged to the tax payer I think we should be quids in if we are making prisoners pay for their stay.
Its a petty admin thing - he'll be claiming for loss of earnings &c. against which a sum
I don't follow
If he had been out then he would have incurred costs - such as rent and food. Both of these were "provided" by the state during his imprisonment
He will claim for loss of earning etc, the state will reduce the claim for reduction in costs...
unnecessery costs on his part though, not as if he asked to be locked up
How are they unneccesary, 3 years of food and accomodation for 7k - thats a good rate!
Irrelevant. If he is claiming for loss of income then he should also have his claim reduced for reduction of outgoings...
Damages for false imprisonment are different.
This is absurd, and symptomatic of a system that thinks monetary value can be placed in everything, or that it is the only meaningful source of value;
These are inhuman comments; they show no compassion or concern for the mental health or emotional state of the person, much less the effect on his life of being imprisoned.
I'm no legal scholar, but thats irrelevant to my point. There is an utter lack of humanity in the language being used.
I don't see anything too bad about it based upon how it is worked out.
It's not fair especially when murderers and rapists are eventually released and don't have to pay a penny but an innocent man does. It's absurd.
That would be where I mentioned that "damages" is different to loss of income.
But they don't get "loss of income" either, so you aren't comparing like with like there, are you?
yes, but i was making this point in relation to the case as a whole rather than the specific legal examples you were explaining; which as i said, i know little about.
I think what Squeal is trying to say is that it's wrong that an innocent man has to pay for his housing and food for the time he spent in jail, yet a guilty man doesn't.
That is the real difference here.
Assume everyone earns £50k and serves three years. He will walk away with £150k less food/rent.
They will walk away with fuck all.