Hang 'em high!!! Then hang 'em again!!

#1
Red or Black liar could lose his £1m prize money: Real victim was his girlfriend | Mail Online


Shit like this making the "news" does my head in. Now,I'm not saying that the fucker who won the million isnt a low-life rat for battering his bird (at the time) but he was punished and that should be that.

But, predictably, since he won the dosh he's been investigated and theyve come up with this story. Even more predictably, wimmins groups and victims groups are demanding the whole lot should be given to charity.

How many times should people be punished? And should they be be punished 5,10,20 years down the line because they come into a bit of luck? Move on for fuck's sake.
 
#2
I agree. I can't condone what the guy did, battering his mrs, but whats done is done. He served his time.
 

the_boy_syrup

LE
Book Reviewer
#3
Yep agree time done nuff said.

Anyway we don't know if the cheeky cow deserved it.
 
#4
Red or Black liar could lose his £1m prize money: Real victim was his girlfriend | Mail Online


Shit like this making the "news" does my head in. Now,I'm not saying that the fucker who won the million isnt a low-life rat for battering his bird (at the time) but he was punished and that should be that.

But, predictably, since he won the dosh he's been investigated and theyve come up with this story. Even more predictably, wimmins groups and victims groups are demanding the whole lot should be given to charity.

How many times should people be punished? And should they be be punished 5,10,20 years down the line because they come into a bit of luck? Move on for fuck's sake.
I agree. He has been punished and hopefully won't do it again, so ITV have no right to strip him of his winnings. However, do I care if he is or not? No, I couldn't give a shit about this low life scum.
 
#5
Its the same about criminals that enter the National Lottery, then when they win there is uproar. They have every right, they paid their money (unless they mugged some old lady for it) and take the same chance as everyone else. No one complains if they dont win.
 
M

Mark The Convict

Guest
#6
Has he changed his ways as a result of doing porridge, or is he still a gutless woman-beater? I suspect he is, but IDGAF either way. Agreed that this isn't 'news', but most 'news' isn't, these days.
 
G

goatrutar

Guest
#7
Maybe if he sucked Simon Cowells knob he might keep the money. They'd make a lovely couple.
 
#8
I agree. He has been punished and hopefully won't do it again, so ITV have no right to strip him of his winnings. However, do I care if he is or not? No, I couldn't give a shit about this low life scum.
They do if he lied on his application.
I auditioned for Deal or no Deal last year and they were absolutley adamant (over several signed forms) that if any discrepancies were found in your application then you could forfeit any winnings at the discretion of the show's prodcuers. It'll all depend on how truthful he was and how much shite ITV & Syco are prepared to take
 
#9
The current bimbo needs to change that sour face with a few bob,she looks likes she's lost a million.Although,he will no doubt become a bit more desirable with that much dosh, she may even get the elbow.....or fist.
 
#10
They do if he lied on his application.
I auditioned for Deal or no Deal last year and they were absolutley adamant (over several signed forms) that if any discrepancies were found in your application then you could forfeit any winnings at the discretion of the show's prodcuers. It'll all depend on how truthful he was and how much shite ITV & Syco are prepared to take
Agreed, but I doubt there was any questions about previous convictions.....but then I can only say I doubt it as I don't know what was on any forms he signed, just cant see that sort of question coming up.
 
#11
Agreed, but I doubt there was any questions about previous convictions.....but then I can only say I doubt it as I don't know what was on any forms he signed, just cant see that sort of question coming up.
You'll be surprised. We had to complete and sign a form detailing all convictions, dates and IIRC details. The form(s) was worded very cleverly, it asked to declare all convictions but never mentioned anything about spent convictions or the Rehabilitation of offenders Act 1974 (although it has no bearing on this case). I checked the Governments website regarding disclosure, and they have no rights regarding spent convictions as they're not exempt from the act, so I didn't declare. :wink: I reckon a few must have disclosed everything, regardless of if it was spent or not. BTW that was with Endemol.

Again, it's all down to how much they ask, and as he got through the audition into live play, I suspect that they asked loads. Syco has had it's fingers burnt on a couple of occasions
 
#12
Agreed, but I doubt there was any questions about previous convictions.....but then I can only say I doubt it as I don't know what was on any forms he signed, just cant see that sort of question coming up.
It says in the article he told them his conviction was for hitting a man...

So at aguess his criminal past WAS brought up and he LIED about it... see the point made above about discrepancies in forms.

So ITV probably do have the ability to take the cash back.

If this bloke had walked in to a a Recruiting Office and said he had hit a man, but then it transpired it wasa woman would the Recruiting Sgt just say 'oh, well. You've done your time'.

Why did he lie? Well, maybe he has changed and is embarressed about slapping a bird, but hey, he made his bed.
 
#13
I wasnt aware that when asked for previous convictions you had to give details.

I'd always assumed your answer could be "Convicted of common assault, fined £500" or words to that effect not the more detailed "Got pished,came home, burd got a bit lippy so I smacked her around a bit.Police lifted me and gave me a lie-in and a week's remand. 3 months later I got fined £500."
 
#14
No idea, but that is what seems to be implied by the article.

Maybe the family show doesn't want this sort of b0ii0cks if someone wins...
 
#15
Its the same about criminals that enter the National Lottery, then when they win there is uproar. They have every right, they paid their money (unless they mugged some old lady for it) and take the same chance as everyone else. No one complains if they dont win.
Yes, although of course presumably there is a formula for agreeing how big a share the old lady would get? Not that I have mugged an old lady for lottery stakes or indeed got five numbers and the bonus ball, get in!!
 
#16
I wasnt aware that when asked for previous convictions you had to give details.

I'd always assumed your answer could be "Convicted of common assault, fined £500" or words to that effect not the more detailed "Got pished,came home, burd got a bit lippy so I smacked her around a bit.Police lifted me and gave me a lie-in and a week's remand. 3 months later I got fined £500."
I believe they asked us for details on our declaration form although I'm not 100% as I've a shite memory, but there were plenty of columns to fill in.
Also, I'm certain it would have been brought up in any final auditions/interviews, as the researchers I experienced (I've done two game shows audtioning processes now) are quite explorative and nosey.

Also, as this story shows, a shitty backgound revealed on a feel-good story can produce a fair number of column inches.

Anyway, good luck to him, sentence served an' all. Just adds-to what the current girlfriend already knows; it'll not just be a stop to her Gucci lifestyle that she'll get if she ever fucks him about :nod:
 
#17
You'll be surprised. We had to complete and sign a form detailing all convictions, dates and IIRC details. The form(s) was worded very cleverly, it asked to declare all convictions but never mentioned anything about spent convictions or the Rehabilitation of offenders Act 1974 (although it has no bearing on this case). I checked the Governments website regarding disclosure, and they have no rights regarding spent convictions as they're not exempt from the act, so I didn't declare. :wink: I reckon a few must have disclosed everything, regardless of if it was spent or not. BTW that was with Endemol.

Again, it's all down to how much they ask, and as he got through the audition into live play, I suspect that they asked loads. Syco has had it's fingers burnt on a couple of occasions
Well, I am surprised. I wouldn't have bothered, just would have told them to sling it....even though I have no convictions etc. I don't see they have any reason to ask such questions....one, because as you have stated, they have no right and two, because it has no bearing on the show.
 
#18
It says in the article he told them his conviction was for hitting a man...

So at aguess his criminal past WAS brought up and he LIED about it... see the point made above about discrepancies in forms.

So ITV probably do have the ability to take the cash back.

If this bloke had walked in to a a Recruiting Office and said he had hit a man, but then it transpired it wasa woman would the Recruiting Sgt just say 'oh, well. You've done your time'.

Why did he lie? Well, maybe he has changed and is embarressed about slapping a bird, but hey, he made his bed.
I just assumed that it was due to what the papers had found out, not that he had actually declared it in his forms. That makes him a double fool then. One for hitting a woman and two for declaring and lying about it.

Still no sympathy for the cunt.
 
#19
Well, I am surprised. I wouldn't have bothered, just would have told them to sling it....even though I have no convictions etc. I don't see they have any reason to ask such questions....one, because as you have stated, they have no right and two, because it has no bearing on the show.
I totally agree with you mate, but to some the disclosure is outweighed by the possible rewards you can reap and the producers know that. Supply and demand!

For me, I just wanted to wined and dined for free in a top Hotel in Bristol for a fortnight. Oh, and I had nothing to dislcose anyway :wink:
 
#20
Well, I am surprised. I wouldn't have bothered, just would have told them to sling it....even though I have no convictions etc. I don't see they have any reason to ask such questions....one, because as you have stated, they have no right and two, because it has no bearing on the show.
I don't see a show trying to hit a certain family demographic just letting any fcuker on the show...

'And tonight Mathew I will be singing 'Bring your daughter to the slaughter by Iron Maiden'

'Put your hands together ladies and gentlemen for ian huntley from Grimsby!!!'
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top