Not a good week for Britain’s image

There’s actually not very much wrong with this per se:

A company director who fitted a laser jammer to his Range Rover and made rude gestures as he drove past police safety cameras has been jailed.

Timothy Hill, 67, threw the device in a river behind his home in Grassington when he found out that officers had launched an investigation.

Timothy Hill, 67, threw the device in a river behind his home in Grassington when he found out that officers had launched an investigation. But today he was jailed for eight months at Teesside Crown Court and banned from driving for a year for perverting the course of justice.

Now we might quibble over whether using a device to jam a speed camera constitutes perverting the course of justice and whether that deserves a custodial sentence, but what I’ve quoted above doesn’t seem too concerning. Ah, but this is Plod, and he just couldn’t keep his mouth shut:

Traffic Constable Andrew Forth, who led the investigation for North Yorkshire Police, said afterward: “If you want to attract our attention, repeatedly gesturing at police camera vans with your middle finger while you’re driving a distinctive car fitted with a laser jammer is an excellent way to do it.

“It’s also an excellent way to end up in prison. As Hill’s case shows, perverting the course of justice is a very serious charge which carries a custodial sentence.

I suspect the police are as incensed at the lack of deferential behaviour as the laser jammer, and in modern Britain that will do more than anything to bring the full weight of the law down on your head.

“It’s our job to keep road users safe across all 6,000 miles of North Yorkshire’s roads. Mobile safety camera vans are an important tool to do that – they are proven to reduce collisions and they help save lives.

“Drivers who fit laser jammers may mistakenly feel smug about ‘getting one over’ on the police. But we can tell if motorists are using these devices, and we will always endeavour to bring them to justice.”

Perhaps, but Timothy Hill isn’t the only one looking smug here. The public are getting increasingly fed up with Plod harrassing drivers and using speed traps as revenue generators, passing them off as safety measures. Condescending remarks like “it’s also an excellent way to end up in prison” only serve to illustrate the yawning chasm between the police and the public. Bad enough that Forth’s comments were, North Yorkshire police then decided to brag about it on Twitter:

The reaction to this has been absolute fury from Brits and, having crossed the Atlantic and gone viral, disbelief and mockery from Americans. Many people read the above tweet and noted the smug, condescending language from the police and, with good reason, believed this guy was jailed in part because he’d flipped off the police. Now you wouldn’t expect the tin-eared idiots who run the media accounts of British police forces to realise this, but perceptions matter. In the same week, this story did the rounds on the internet:

A teenage refugee who molested and tried to strangle a young woman as she waited for a lift home outside McDonald’s has been spared custody.

Eritrean Filmon Kbrom targeted the lone 25-year-old at 5am on July 18 last year after a night out in Maidstone.

Having urged her to follow him while grabbing at his crotch, the 18-year-old grabbed her by the wrists before trying to throttle her.

But a judge decided that there were exceptional circumstances which enabled him to avoid sending Kbrom to a young offenders’ institution.

He instead imposed a sentence of 19 months’ youth custody suspended for two years.

But Judge Philip Statman was unable to include a condition that he attends a ‘vigorous and intensive’ sex offender treatment programme, as is usually imposed in such cases, due to Kbrom’s basic knowledge of the English language.

Now perhaps the stories in the papers don’t adequately reflect the details in each case, but nevertheless you have millions of people seeing a policeman crowing about jailing a British citizen who flipped them the bird while an Eritrean asylum seeker is spared jail for sexual assault due to his poor English. Does anyone in this shambolic, idiotic government we have realise how bad this looks? Obviously not, because a few days before we had this story:

A teenager who posted rap lyrics which included racist language on Instagram has been found guilty of sending a grossly offensive message.

Chelsea Russell, 19, from Liverpool posted the lyric from Snap Dogg’s I’m Trippin’ to pay tribute to a boy who died in a road crash, a court heard.

Russell argued it was not offensive, but was handed a community order.

Prosecutors said her sentence was increased from a fine to a community order “as it was a hate crime”.

She was given an eight-week community order, placed on an eight-week curfew and told to pay costs of £500 and an £85 victim surcharge.

That’s right: a teenager has been successfully prosecuted for hate crimes for posting rap lyrics on a restricted Instagram account. So how did Plod come to hear of it?

She was charged after Merseyside Police were anonymously sent a screenshot of her update.

The screenshot was passed to hate crime unit PC Dominique Walker, who told the court the term was “grossly offensive” to her as a black woman and to the general community.

So a policewoman was sent an anonymous screenshot and decided to make it all about her. Those wondering where the crime is are not alone. Then on Monday we had this, (the background to which I wrote about here):

A man who filmed a pet dog giving Nazi salutes before putting the footage on YouTube has been fined £800.

Mark Meechan, 30, recorded his girlfriend’s pug, Buddha, responding to statements such as “Sieg Heil” by raising its paw.

The clip was viewed more than three million times on YouTube.

Meechan, of Coatbridge, North Lanarkshire, was sentenced at Airdrie Sheriff Court after being found guilty of committing a hate crime last month.

He had denied any wrong-doing and insisted he made the video, which was posted in April 2016, to annoy his girlfriend.

But Sheriff Derek O’Carroll found him guilty of a charge under the Communications Act that he posted a video on social media and YouTube which was grossly offensive because it was “anti-Semitic and racist in nature” and was aggravated by religious prejudice.

I am sure Meechan will crowdfund the £800 within minutes, and whatever it costs him to appeal this ruling, but the point is that a man can be arrested and prosecuted for making a joke, albeit a very stupid and tasteless one, and posting it on the internet. Were it not for the massive publicity surrounding his case and the outrage his prosecution generated on both sides of the Atlantic, I am sure he’d have been given a custodial sentence.

This week, many Brits and Americans have referred to these stories and made the point I made myself here:

The thing that always enrages me about governments is they are doubly shit at performing vital state functions: murdering scumbags go free and innocent people get banged up; police harass citizens over trivial matters while serious crime remains a problem; jihadists are let into the country to carry out terrorist attacks but Canadian right-wing journalists are turned back at the airport and banned for life.

The police are happy to ignore gangs of rapists preying on underage girls and take pity on foreign refugees who sexually assault British women, but make a joke, post “offensive” lyrics, or stick a middle finger up to a speed camera and you’ll be prosecuted and fined or jailed. This might be overly simplistic, but it is a perception that has been created by the British government and, as I said before, perceptions matter. Why? Because of cases like this:

The parents of seriously ill toddler Alfie Evans will challenge a High Court ruling preventing them from taking him to Italy for further treatment.

The family’s lawyers told the BBC that a hearing has been scheduled at the Court of Appeal on Wednesday afternoon.

The 23-month-old’s life support was withdrawn on Monday after the court ruled Liverpool’s Alder Hey Children’s Hospital could end his care.

Tom Evans and Kate James want to move their son to a hospital in Rome.

On Tuesday a High Court judge ruled that the family could not take him abroad for further treatment, but that he may be allowed home.

Now I don’t know the details, but these sort of medical ethics cases are fiendishly difficult moral dilemmas, particularly those that require a decision over whether to switch off life support (I remember the Terri Schiavo case well). Regardless of the facts, it is perfectly reasonable for the public to ask why, if the child is condemned to die anyway, his parents cannot seek alternative treatment or better palliative care in Italy. The government’s response, although perhaps reasonable (I don’t know), is cloaked in an air of callous indifference, oblivious to the distress of the parents and ordinary human reaction to the case. Certainly, lining up policemen outside Alfie’s hospital room is appalling optics, but then this is what this post is all about. The Times, a mouthpiece of the ruling classes whose writers look down their noses at oiks who hold opinions on things they’re not clever enough to understand, tells us:

The heartrending case of Alfie Evans has been exploited by groups more anxious to advance a broad ‘pro-life’ agenda than to support a family in desperate circumstances.

By “support a family” they mean persuade them to accept whatever choices the state makes on their child’s behalf, and deal with the consequences. A “broad pro-life agenda” is hardly something beyond the pale in such a case, especially when the alternative, state-approved option is just to let the kid die in a government hospital under police protection. Americans in particular are absolutely apoplectic over this, and see it as a clear example of arrogant, government-employed doctors disliking their expertise being questioned, and supported by judges who believe the state has a greater claim over a little boy’s life than his parents.

Now the criticism in this case might be unfair, but the British government has nobody but themselves to blame for being seen to consist of incompetent, nasty, vindictive, petty, individuals who hold the ordinary citizen in utter, absolute contempt. Theresa May, who exhibited these precise characteristics while Home Secretary and continues to do so as Prime Minister, must shoulder much of the blame for this state of affairs. What a disgrace of a country Britain has become.

Share

73 thoughts on “Not a good week for Britain’s image

  1. Britian really is like this now. It’s turning into East Germany.

    Well, yes. Perceptions matter because quite often they are accurate.

  2. I’m thinking of setting up a Twitter account specifically to taunt Plod… although when I say ‘taunt’ I really mean ‘repeatedly tell them they’re a bunch of thick bullying jumped-up two-bob cunts’.

  3. I’m thinking of setting up a Twitter account specifically to taunt Plod

    They’ll block you in seconds. Plod is as thin-skinned on Twitter as he is in real life. They block you even if you don’t taunt them, the slightest sign you’re not going meekly accept everything they say they start blocking.

  4. But a judge decided that there were exceptional circumstances

    Two exceptional circumstances that I can see: firstly, the pervert was a foreigner, and secondly the judge is a total bellend.

    Not sure the second is that exceptional.

  5. They’ll block you in seconds.

    True, and I see from the link that several thousand people might have beaten me to it…

  6. @MC I never reply to anything plod tweets. Suspect it is all just bait to harvest key words, usernames and IP’s for their database. It is the only way I can fathom the bullshit they put out; clickbait.

  7. Thing is, the UK has been like this to a certain degree since about 2001. It’s just been a slow frog-boiling exercise and now a bunch of these stories come out at once.

    Glad I got out early.

  8. “But going after criminals is dangerous!!! They fight back. And have dogs. And mean going out of the nice warm office.”
    So much easier to find a few nice well behaved people to bully, get the ‘solved’ stats up. No trouble making up a few ‘crimes’.
    “Bonus is we collect on the ‘fines’ too, no point fining some travellers, they’ll not pay it.”
    The Aztecs didn’t really believe that human sacrifice appeased the gods, but it was a sure good way to keep the proles in order: Stay compliant, or you’ll be next in line for heart removal.
    Not much changes.
    Before long, the Police and their ilk will have to live apart. They will no longer be able to mix with the community they have ceased to defend and now oppress. So sad.

  9. You are wrong on the Evans case Tim.

    The reason why there is loads of police is because the case attracted grief tourist lumpens who think it’s appropriate to loudly protest a hospital disturbing the kids who are severely ill and dying in there. Abusing the staff and even attempting to storm a children’s hospital. There was a bouncy castle too for some reason.

    The police would have been justified in banning the protest. I can’t imagine what the parents feel and they get a free pass as I am sure this would make anyone tweek. But they called for a protest outside of a working hospital. While they implored people not to cause trouble and apologised for others behaviours this has attracted the worst of Britain, the types of people who drag their kids to pelt a prisoner van despite having no link to the offender and putting their kids in an unecessary stressful situation.

    Check out the grief tourist here: https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/alfies-army-alder-hey-protest-14569113.amp

  10. The disbelief from Americans is probably because the police merely gave him a condescending lecture. Dissing them over here will get you summarily executed by the offended officer.

  11. Any 67 year old who makes a rude American gesture rather than a British one should certainly be locked up. Well done the courts!

  12. From my childhood I seem to recall that in The Wind in the Willows, Toad is sentenced for stealing a valuable motor car – 12 months, driving to the public danger – 3 years and gross impertinence to the rural police – 15 years.

  13. The reason why there is loads of police is because the case attracted grief tourist lumpens who think it’s appropriate to loudly protest a hospital disturbing the kids who are severely ill and dying in there.

    I’m sure it did, which is all the more reason why the government should be handling the optics of this a lot better than they are.

    You are wrong on the Evans case Tim.

    In what way? I’ve conceded more than once that the government might be doing the right thing and criticism might be unfair; my main gripe is the perception they’re giving, and that it seems to dovetail nicely with the arrogant, vindictive perception they have earned for themselves elsewhere.

  14. Some of my fellow scousers are being arsey about the Alder Hey situation but it doesn’t alter for some of us the fact that apparently only the state decides when and where a child dies and parents have no power to decide otherwise. Its not like they want to drive him off in some old banger, there is an Italian govt jet on standby and a place in a Vatican hospital prepared, my children belong to me….fuck the state….oh and judges,police and pretty much everybody else too.

  15. There are arguments over whether the traditional English two fingered gesture stemmed from our victorious archers mocking the French at Agincourt (who had promised if they won to cut off the fingers used to draw a bow string) or something else, but may I say I despise this obsession with the one-finger ‘salute’ of the US being used in these islands. If my history is correct, I’d rather go with winning at Agincourt.

    (A good number of years ago, btw, I recall an old age pensioner being beaten up by some yoof and subsequently dying because said young idiot believed the old man had given him ‘the finger’ and deserved to be violently assaulted. As this was a good while ago I doubt if elderly man knew what one middle finger raised was for.)

    But perhaps the real reason Mr Range Rover driver went to clink was he was using a device to defeat the Power of Plod instead of just sitting back and accepting that though technology — especially ‘official’ technology — has weaknesses, one should not go there. Also, as he poses little threat to society and thus diversity was not harmed by his prosecution the man can be sacrificed.

  16. “I’m thinking of setting up a Twitter account specifically to taunt Plod”

    thebritishpoliceareabunchofcunts.uk would only be a quid & has much more style.

    And it’d produce an excellent e-mail address to write to them from.

  17. @ Tim

    “it is perfectly reasonable for the public to ask why”

    It is none of the Public’s business to the private health of a private citizen being cared for by medical professionals who know things none of us know.

    “The government’s response, although perhaps reasonable (I don’t know), is cloaked in an air of callous indifference, oblivious to the distress of the parents and ordinary human reaction to the case. ”

    It is a matter for the courts and law, how is it appropriate for any government to stick their oar in and respond to the evidence and advice presented by medical professionals and the rulings by judges?

    “By “support a family” they mean persuade them to accept whatever choices the state makes on their child’s behalf, and deal with the consequences.”

    The pro-life groups in question in the UK and the USA simply cannot accept the evidence and argument presented by medical professionals who are not in the business of killing children, or even neglecting children who have a chance of survival. Like with the Gard case, the American groups are pretty colourful in their words about it all. These groups are not groups you want to regard as allies. They simply do not give two shits about what is medically best for a child who will die. The reason why they have not released him to be flown to Italy or whatever is because moving such a patient is a huge cost, dangerous and likely to increase suffering with the result heading towards absolute zero in terms of chances of success.

    These groups call medical professionals and hospital staff murderers and encourage disgraceful acts of disruption. They are beyond the pale, they are not reasonable and will never accept what is in the best interests of a child.

    Look up twitter man. The pro-lifers are nuts about this.

    Medical professionals do know more than you, I and the parents in this case. They have a duty to save lives but also provide a comfortable death, it is their opinion that one of those options is not possible therefore they recommend the good death. We would all be up in arms if a hospital released some patient who said they should go home because they said so, despite being utterly incapable of taking care of themselves or being a danger and then suffered and died as a result.

  18. I’m with Rob Harries on the Alfie case. The poor boy has practically no brain left, his condition is incurable and progressive.

    And this is costing the taxpayer a fortune. Sad as the individual case is, imagine if all cases like it (including ectopic pregnancies, for ex) were treated when there is no hope. Someone has to decide, I expect the judge cursed the day he was put up for it, but a qualified judge must be a better choice than leaving it to some of the fruit loops doing grief tourism outside Alder Hey.

  19. Politically I lament the weakness of small-state Tories right now. Assuming May gets us through Brexit and then gets knifed, I’d like JRM to be next because the ‘heavyweight’ contenders like Hunt or Rudd or most of the others at the top of the Tory party right now are also statist bellends.
    If you are a moderate old school Labour voter you have no party to vote for right now. If you are a small state conservative you are likewise disenfranchised. It can’t end well.

  20. If the Range Rover driver slung out the laser jammer, & shut up, what the heck could he be jailed for?
    Middle finger?
    “No speed registered on photos of me? Can’t help you there Constable, I’m not a speed camera, sorry safety camera, technician.”

    “Laser Jammer? (splash) I’m afraid I’ve no idea what you’re talking about. Good day to you Constable, sorry I can’t be of more help.”

  21. North Yorkshire Police also have a Facebook page.

    A quick skim through comments reveals they’ve set back any hope of a “Hearts & Minds” campaign by about 20 years.

    Plenty of Americans posting very..er.. frank.. comments. Clearly they’re not too concerned about retribution from North Yorkshire Plod.

  22. Agree with Thud. The pro-life part of this is not the core issue. It is doing whatever the hell you want to with your kid. Mr. Harries, you can kneel down before your beloved state. My allegiance is to my family, as it should be. Jesus Christ, the state is barring citizens from leaving the country. Where have I heard that before?

  23. Have you been watching Ben Shapiro?!? He covered much of this on his show yesterday. It’s quite interesting getting a US-conservatives take on UK politics.

  24. Jesus Christ, the state is barring citizens from leaving the country.

    Precisely! If the NHS quacks have given up & said “Nothing we can do, let this one die“, then who the farq is the government to prevent someone else from having a go at saving him?

    It’s not as if a bunch of Irish travellers want to take him to their campsite and try some of Gypsy Rose’s hocus pocus for curing sick draught horses.

    It is the Pope, with a jet ambulance on standby to take him to a modern Italian hospital. And the British government is using resources to prevent this happening? FMD, what a bunch of wankers!

  25. “The pro-life groups in question in the UK and the USA simply cannot accept the evidence and argument presented by medical professionals who are not in the business of killing children, or even neglecting children who have a chance of survival. ”

    You mean like they had the best interests of Ashya King? The lad they wouldn’t let go to Prague for proton beam therapy? The lad who is now 8 years old and going strong?

    Its very easy for doctors to be always right about their diagnoses if they always ensure the ones they say are going to die actually do die.

    ‘This child is incurable, he cannot survive, we must remove his life support’

    [removes life support]

    ‘Look he’s died, we told you so!’.

    Doctors, like PC plod, don’t like being made to look stupid, by having their decisions questioned, and proved to be wrong. They therefore behave like authoritarian fascist arseholes to ensure that their initial assertion was right all along, regardless of the effect on the patient, or justice.

  26. Jim +1
    I had remembered that case and was meaning to look up the outcome.

    It is sickening to see the government spending all this time and money to stop parents having their child treated by another team of doctors because the first team disapprove.

    On a side note, see how the headlines about the NHS being dangerously under-resourced disappeared once the government offered to pay the same number of doctors and nurses more money. Not sure how that fixed the alleged capacity constraints but it definitely fixed the headlines.

  27. Steve at the pub:“It’s not as if a bunch of Irish travellers want to take him to their campsite and try some of Gypsy Rose’s hocus pocus for curing sick draught horses.”

    That’d get allowed so quick it’d make your head spin, and the police would probably provide outriders for the cortege!

    Jim:“‘This child is incurable, he cannot survive, we must remove his life support’

    [removes life support]

    ‘Look he’s died, we told you so!’.”

    Inconveniently for the infallible NHS medics, this one hasn’t.

  28. “It’s not as if a bunch of Irish travellers want to take him to their campsite and try some of Gypsy Rose’s hocus pocus for curing sick draught horses.”

    Oh, they’d be allowed to do whatever they wanted, no one in authority would dare say otherwise. Partly because of PC sensibilities, pikeys are a protected species to the inhabitants of the State sector, and partly because they suspect that if they did the entire clan would descend on the hospital and trash it. Which they undoubtedly would.

  29. Also Rob Harries the Plod have no problem with “grief tourism” when it is pikeys doing it on behalf of a thief and thug. No fucking problem at all. So they can fuck off and let the lad have whatever chance he has. If this fuckwit Marxist Pope is paying that about qualifies as his one good deed.

  30. Despite all the examples of official fuckwittery, Rob Harries’s point still stands. We (more or less) voluntarily delegate tough decisions to people trained and competent to make tough decisions. Otherwise it’s just a shouting match.

    There are also questions of triage. The money spent on Charlie Gard and this little lad would pay for a million mosquito nets, rape counselling for Oxfam workers, 24 hour surveillance of half a dozen Islamists… etc.

  31. If, as people seem to argue, children should be treated in accordance with their parents’ wishes, where does that end? Jehovahs Witnesses letting their children die for lack of a blood transfusion? Keeping no hope cases on a ventilator for ever – “well he’s only decaying a little…”

  32. “There are also questions of triage. The money spent on Charlie Gard and this little lad would pay for a million mosquito nets, rape counselling for Oxfam workers, 24 hour surveillance of half a dozen Islamists… etc”

    This is absolutely true. Having lost most of my sympathy for the parents and their hangers on I would love to enquire if they’re aware that all the money they’re wasting can’t be spent on treating other, salvageable children.

  33. If, as people seem to argue, children should be treated in accordance with their parents’ wishes, where does that end?

    There is no perfect solution, but I’d suggest it is best to err on the side of saving life.

    In the ‘Alfie’ case, it seems there are reputable doctors who claim they can treat him. There should be no impediment to giving this a go. Doctors are frequently wrong, so why not see who is right?

  34. Erring on the side of saving life is fine, but to get to this point they have already erred on the side of saving life. People die, prolonging the process is not generally a good idea.

  35. Jim

    In regard to Ashya King, you might also recall that plod issued an arrest warrant for the parents for taking the child out of hospital rather than letting him die as the doctors said he would. The parents were then arrested and detained in Spain and extradited back to the UK.

    All that because they thought that a Czech clinic offered a treatment that they thought could save his life, rather than conform to our doctors in the “wonderful NHS”, who said he was doomed to die and who managed to persuade the courts of that too.

    As you say, eight years later and he’s still alive.

  36. Gasman, its pretty much certain he will die so why not let him die in Italy at no expense to our super govt and NHS? It would at least make those who count, believe they had done the best for a kid they so obviously deeply love and as a bonus the public is not so angered . As others have said if it was a member of a favoured minority at risk here then it would not have been an issue, they need to let the boy go and die in peace. I can only see this as a father and I understand the arguments against but if it was my boy I’d fight as in this case the state to me would mean nothing.

  37. “Rob Harries’s point still stands. We (more or less) voluntarily delegate tough decisions to people trained and competent to make tough decisions. ”

    Yes, about State resources.

    I have zero problem with the State saying ‘We have spent too much on this one person, any more is not justifiable given the prognosis and the opportunity cost of that expenditure. There will be no more NHS treatment provided.’ That is perfectly reasonable management of scarce healthcare resources.

    What I do have a problem with is the State then kidnapping the child, and refusing to allow anyone else to treat the child at their own expense – We are right, no one else can achieve anything, the child cannot survive, so we’re going to make damn sure it doesn’t by not letting it go out of this hospital.

    It’s authoritarian fascist cuntism of the highest order.

  38. Robert Harries,

    I fear you are missing my point, which is that the reason so many *ordinary* people are outraged by this case is because:

    1) They don’t trust the government (which includes judges and the courts) to do the right thing having seen far too many examples of them doing the wrong thing;

    2) They are fed up of the arrogance and obnoxiousness displayed by government employs as soon as they are in a situation where they have any power over someone. Consider this quote from the BBC article I link to:

    A doctor, who cannot be named for legal reasons, said for Alfie to be allowed home would require a “sea change” in attitude from the child’s family.

    Because doctors in the UK are seen as the High Priests to the Church of the NHS, this is seen as reasonable by some. But to others – particularly foreigners – remarks such as this are absolutely appalling.

    It might be worth mentioning too that a lot of people have noticed Alfie’s parents are young and working class, i.e. easy to push around. If they were connected and had money, I bet half of this wouldn’t be happening. This thread concerns the USA, but it gives a good insight into the mindset of far too many government employees.

  39. @Recusant
    “In regard to Ashya King, you might also recall that plod issued an arrest warrant for the parents for taking the child out of hospital rather than letting him die as the doctors said he would. ”

    My understanding was that in the King case, the British doctors were not just going to let the child die, but were intending to treat him with a course of chemotherapy and radiotherapy, and it’s this which his parents disagreed with – they thought the proton beam would have a better chance of success/fewer side effects? As such it isn’t an exact parallel.

  40. Seems heartless but yes there should be a limit to the amount of resources dedicated to one individual. When the limit is reached let them crowd fund the excess from their many vocal supporters.
    Well it seems to be working very well for the Nazi dog man who has surpassed his goal in just one day.

  41. So many have used this case for their own purposes. The notion that the Pope’s private jet is gassed up and running at John Lennon airport is competing for the most sickening of this grief circus.

    Doctors and hospices are now allowing old people to go home to die. They should extend the courtesy to children too. But to imagine that Alfie is not going to die is to lose all reason.

  42. “My understanding was that in the King case, the British doctors were not just going to let the child die, but were intending to treat him with a course of chemotherapy and radiotherapy, and it’s this which his parents disagreed with – they thought the proton beam would have a better chance of success/fewer side effects? As such it isn’t an exact parallel.”

    That is correct I think – the ‘discussions’ between the parents and the doctors were ongoing as to what would be allowed to happen (one suspects it was less of a discussion and more of a dictation), and they decided to remove him from the hospital, presumably as they feared (rightly) that the authorities would refuse to allow them to decide what was best for their child.

    So while it wasn’t a case of life and death exactly, it was a similar point of who has control over a child’s best interests – the parents or the State. And the State didn’t like the parent outwitting it, so cut up rough. Like any protection racket, if you try and pull a smart-ass move, they tend to send in the heavy mob…..its not so much the money involved, its the disrespect…….which brings us back to the point of the OP – the State doesn’t like being disrespected by the proles, and tends to get nasty when they do.

  43. Zut, other than a vocal minority I think most of us here know he is going to die, as for the plane and grief circus…what the fuck do you care, it isn’t costing you.

  44. “the Evans case … I’ve conceded more than once that the government might be doing the right thing …”: what’s it to do with the government? Has something happened that I’ve missed?

    The proposition that parents own their children and can do whatever they like with them is wicked. There’s plenty of scope for arguing about the conditions when somebody else may interfere but I can’t see any merit whatever in the argument that nobody else may ever interfere. Otherwise you’d have parents committing abortions, infanticides, torture, and murder whenever they felt like it.

  45. Merseyside Police – “We’ve issued a statement this evening to make people aware that social media posts which are being posted in relation to Alder Hey and the Alfie Evans situation are being monitored and may be acted upon.”
    —————
    Americans on twitter are now freaking out about this tweet. British State is not even bothering to try to hide it’s authoritarian tendencies any more.

    My problem with letting Alfie die is that doctors are going to allow him to slowly asphyxiate instead of just giving him some drugs to kill him. Civilized countries don’t purposely kill children by denying them oxygen.

Comments are closed.