Digging up the Past, and the cost, is it worth it?

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by sebcoe, Dec 20, 2012.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. The state of the UK economy is fairly shite at the moment, we have investigations that is costing the tax payer perhaps millions on past happenings
    Jimmy savile.....the ***** dead, if victims could not be bothered years ago to come forward why now? and should we pay for these investigations.

    Hillsborough....How long and how much is it going to cost the taxpayer?

    Finucane.......who really gives a shite! and will this open up the flood gates to any "paddy" who feels that he/she has been agreived

    I think there should be a 6 year cut off period, if its not sorted by then, then it becomes a non issue!
     
    • Like Like x 7
  2. I concur!
     
  3. Bloody Sunday investigation part 22, dont bother.

    A combination of ambulance chasing lawyers and self important clebs have made the Levvinson report meaningless, nothing has ever been achieved by these inquiries.

    Pointless waste of time and money.
     
  4. Thats what I thought! but Cameron keeps on apologising, and cases from yester year keep on getting dug up, that only benefits lawyers and thats it!

    Oh and sells shite news papers!
     
  5. Can't be done...

    Hillsborough grief whoring is the biggest business on scouseside.
     
  6. Cold_Collation

    Cold_Collation LE Book Reviewer

    Mixed feelings on this one.

    Savile? Yes, he's dead but recently so and it's taken his death for many to have the courage to speak. I think we could do with fewer column inches of sensationalist re-reporting but given that the investigation has led to charges against some of his still-living cohorts, who can be punished for what they did... valid.

    Hillsborough? Put joshing about Scousers being grief whores aside for a moment. A wrong was done and there was huge police/official complicity in a cover-up. It's happened now because it's taken this long for officialdom to bend to pressure. So a long time coming but... valid.

    Bloody Sunday, etc? Political appeasement which isn't matched by anything coming back in the other direction. Valid? Possibly - politically. But morally? Without a quid pro quo, then by **** it sticks in the throat.

    Edited to add:

    Somethiing to consider: Nazi war criminals, or others involved in genocide/war crimes past? Do you not bother 'because it was a long time ago and it doesn't matter now'? Some issues are more emotive than others, just as some are more serious than others. Hence why I don't think we can have blanket rules.
     
  7. You really dislike scousers don't you.
     
  8. I don't think you are being specific enough

    Are you saying that if a child molester (prolific or otherwise) gets away with it for 6 years after the last offence, they are home and dry ?

    Or if there is an institutional cover-up or mishandling of something (1950's nuclear testing or Gulf War syndrome) that it isn't worth following through or putting things right ? Despite the fact that those affected have been campaigning since day one ?

    I don't include Savile or Hillsborough or Bloody Sunday though - there I'm in total agreement with you. However, I don't think one simple law will cover everything properly.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  9. Cold_Collation

    Cold_Collation LE Book Reviewer

    dogs_bollox - same hymn sheet, couldn't agree more.
     
  10. It would be dead and buried, but for the conspiracy by the guilty to conceal what had happened.

    They told big fibs the first time around, so it's still going on. Hillsborough, for example, the bereaved families had no grounds to sue the police because the police hadn't been negligent, according to the accounts by the police. Now it seems they do have grounds, the 6 year clock will start.

    The 6 years only applies to civil actions, suing for damages. Criminal acts don't have time limit in the Uk, so sex offenders are being convicted for offences committed 20+ years ago, before DNA analysis was discovered.
     
  11. At what point does a investigation become pointless due to the time passed?

    There can be NO fresh evidence coming in from Hillsboro or Bloody Sunday participants.

    Rehashing old ground, until the 'right' judgement is met is just silly.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  12. Correct. How can an eyewitness to incidents 20 years ago add anything other than alleged memories and half truths.
     
  13. It isn't just old decisions. The police ombudsman for the PSNI has announced they are re-doing the investigation his predecessor did on the Loughinisland murders because the families aren't happy with his findings. That investigation was only completed last year.
     
  14. I don't know much about the case you mention but I think there needs to be a review as to why the family isn't happy with the findings first. They may have an agenda or there may have been genuine mistakes or omissions in the original report. I also think that those involved in the original report should pay back their salaries if they have been found to have produced crap.