Two sided stories blog

How not to, not make people panic...

The job I do includes getting Department of Health warnings issued to NHS and Local Authority managers that are listed as "highly confidential, do not alarm patients, clients or the public by spreading this information..."

I then track back the links to the DoH website and find that exactly the same information has been put in press releases that have already gone to the entire British media...

This has led to the title linked story in the BBC - one of the more restrained reports but still, the effects are not as one might have been hoping the DoH might achieve.
The following are quotes from that story and my interpretation (in italics) showing how the public will most likely react to them.

'Armageddon' Virus

I bet the BBC journo salivated when he heard the professor say that!
This sub headline achieves a very high panic potential score - it says that this is a "I'm a geddon oudahere!" bug that will kill you if you don't. Of course running around in a panic will help rapidly spread any flu virus if the person already has it.

The virus is thought to have killed nearly 160 people in Mexico.

The number of swine flu cases globally is rising, though no-one outside Mexico has died.
The emphasis of a short one sentence paragraph becomes interpretable as: DEATHS! Oh my God its killing us by the hundreds!
This might have been better phrased in one sentence - "there are no fatalities among those tourists who have caught the virus and then traveled back from Mexico. It appears that the small number of deaths (less than 30 confirmed) are entirely in Mexico".

"We are urgently looking into how we can increase our current stockpiles of facemasks for healthcare workers who would come into close contact with symptomatic individuals during an influenza pandemic."

Scientific evidence did not support healthy people wearing facemasks while going about normal life, he added.

The Scottish government says it already has a high number of facemasks and does not need to stockpile more.

When combined with the mass reproduction of images as above, what the public read is: "FACEMASKS! I am going to need a facemask and there aren't enough"

small political interlude:
The Conservatives have criticised the government over the national flu helpline, which was supposed to be ready in early 2009.
Shadow health minister Stephen O'Brien said the line would be crucial in giving people access to information and medication without having to visit GPs or hospitals.

Well that's helpful, Tory knobheads, - "there's no help line! there's no helpline! its the government's fault!"
because there is, now (thanks to all this publicity) a panic, perhaps we should have a 'panic helpline' with a looped tape recording that just says "RUN!".

linked pages from the BBC also state the WHO figures show 26 confirmed Flu deaths in Mexico as of 9.30 GMT today.
yet other pages, including this main piece, keep saying things like this:
"WHO says the virus, which has killed more than 150 people in Mexico, is showing a "sustained ability" to pass from human to human and is able to cause community-level outbreaks."
...on a page titled "How serious is the threat?"

we then get a quote from Prof John Oxford,
"If the avian flu H5N1 virus had spread from human to human like this then I would be extremely worried. It would be top of my Richter scale.
But this swine flu worries me less because as a population we have a basic immunity to H1N1. Outside of Mexico there have been no deaths, so it doesn't seem so aggressive.
And not only are we coming up to the summer, which makes it less likely for these viruses to spread as well, but Britain has enough antiviral drugs for half of the population.
So we should not panic in any way. This does not look as though it is going to be a virus that sweeps the world and causes huge mortality."

Wha..?! so how come the BBC quote the same virologist in the main article, earlier, uttering a panic spreading piece thus:
"The virus could spread to south-east Asia where it could mix with the highly virulent H5 form to create an "Armageddon" virus", said Prof Oxford.

To me, this says Prof Oxford is a major plonker at PR. To the public this backs up the fear and panic of the dumb headline. Note - Prof Oxford was not featured in the DoH press release

...

Just as the first casualty in war is truth, so it is in media health panics...
Do you remember the necrotizing fasciitis panic back in the 90s? the tabloids were full of pictures of this rare but often fatal disease that killed 6 people in that year in the UK. Everyone was talking about it, and what to do, what not to do, where not to go, avoiding cuts etc.

Is there anyone panicking about it today? - not one,
has the risk reduced at all since then ? - nope - its exactly the same.

These media frenzies occur over all sorts of things -
Terrorists are an ongoing, government-sponsored panic tool.
Knives are still current but fading
remember joy riding as a panic?
these last two are examples of a very popular media obsession: youth culture panics.
Some panics have led to panic buying... men going out shopping for groceries and coming back with ten sets of table mats... "I panicked!"

Health panics have also been frequent occurrences; in 1990 "Mad Cow disease" was predicted by "experts" to lead to thousands of deaths from new variant creutzfeldt-jakob disease by the year 2006 (19 years to date its actually 163, and is anyone interested? No.)
HRT has been the subject of panics (rather than the cause of them) I doubt the national dosage figures are now down on their pre-panic levels.

the point is - it is very, very, hard to "uncry FIRE" in a crowded theatre. The media have a strong vested interest in panic (it sells news) and little interest in explaining that the odds of you getting killed by an asteroid hitting the earth are greater than those of being killed by terrorist activity.

So the message,
in this crowded theatre of Little Britain, is:
"Calm down, calm down."

but the headline of this main article says that we are spending a small tax payers' fortune sending out leaflets to EVERY household about the flu pandemic we should now be completely and utterly scared about...

Top CEO in not so major (now) financial institution - £800,000 to £1,400,000 per annum
Top Civil servant in Whitehall - £200,000
Prime minister - £194,250 (plus allowances)
Ordinary MP - £62,391 (plus allowances)
Care worker, residential home - £17,500 (fridges etc to be bought from salary)
Average salary in the UK - £37,000

My suggestions - apart from having all secretarial and office needs met, both in Westminster and in the constituencies (via a serviced office in both Whitehall and their constituency council main buildings) MPs should be paid the national average income, plus three times the percentage they increase the average for those in the bottom quartile during their time in power. - Oh and why do they need their second homes in London? - surely a good YMCA style hostel for the lot of them should be very good at helping them understand the needs of the homeless they walk past on their way to work...

Why can they not see the service as the main attraction rather than the ridiculous gravy train that we all see and despise them for..?

tying it to the average wage and raised bottom levels is a good performance related pay scheme in its own right.

Following some contradictions between the findings of the first and second inquests into the death of Ian Tomlinson the Metropolitan Police self congratulatory unit have announced the findings of both the third inquest and their inquiry into the 44,563 complaints about police violence towards peaceful protesters during the past four years.

In a statement released to the media from their Scotland Yard headquarters, Chief Inspector Ivor Theorem told waiting journalists, "it appears from the third inquest report that Mr Ian Tomlinson died as a result of internal bleeding, the result of having drunk 2 litres of cyanide and then falling onto a police baton that was lying on the ground".

"The results show conclusively that there were no metropolitan police officers within 3 miles of Mr Tomlinson on the day in question and no one from any police force, not just the Metropolitans, had hit him for at least 7 years."
Mr Theorem went on to detail the findings of the investigation, which has yet to be undertaken, into the 12,000 demonstrator's head wounds, 14 suspicious deaths and 32,549 other complaints by members of the public about the thuggish and brutal behaviour of the metropolitan criminal force.

"Our initial findings confirm that in fact it was the police themselves that were the victims." he said "They suffered violent attacks from all the 44,000 plus demonstrators, who were caught on camera inflicting lethal doses of sunshine on unprotected officers, setting wasps on the ranks of uniformed men, and assaulting their nostrils with body odour and farts."

When it was put to him that the video evidence alone pointed to at least 97 officers covering their ID numbers and attacking, punching, baton thwacking or slapping members of the public who were clearly doing nothing but stand still, Mr Theorem coughed and laughed before revealing video footage that he said showed the precise opposite.
The images that were shown to waiting journalists appeared to show police officers buying ice creams for members of the public and helping an old lady on the countryside alliance march wrap herself in a fox fur coat.

...

The title linked piece is to the proven manslaughter case (also pictured above) that precedents sending all the police officers involved in the Ian Tomlinson event, and ID number covering, directly to jail,
- without passing go and without collecting £200.

the local country market has plenty of women who like to knit - little hens that cover easter eggs, toilet rolls covers, scarves, clothes peg containers,
and the above...

I think they have made "accidental art".

Hell, I love the movies - more than the average senior social work manager.

I have been having some friendly discussions on the issue, and just wanted to reassure folks - I love the movies, and don't like censorship - at least not for those over 17.

I made a fair few movies in my earlier career as a location sound recordist, a decent living for 8 years or so, and most of the stuff I helped make was OK but not earth shattering.
Boy Soldiers was probably the film with the most merit - it won an award at a major German film festival. It also freaked me out that my name as sound recordist was fourth in the title credits...real ego trip.
I doubt that has happened to any other sound recordist in any other mainstream movie, ever.

The attractions of working in the movies are obvious to many and lead to a trail to Los Angeles for those who want to be at the centre of the industry. Many stories, and films, have been made on the seedier end of Hollywood, some feature the waitress/prostitute come failed actress, some the writer falling on hard times, (Sunset Boulevard). There is also Tim Burton's wonderful treatment of Ed Wood, showing how belief without talent can still produce a story of some kind.

I have always scoffed at those on the louder edge of public life who want to try and censor "explicit lyrics" on CDs or insist that no sex should be shown on TV even after the watershed. I remember the fuss over the earlier slasher films like "Driller Killer" and then about snuff movies, (whether these were ever found to be real or not is a tribute to just how real Hollywood's effects have become). I think that the arguments, whilst over-blown by the moral majority types, touched on some of our human failings and sadder desires.

I just want to say - generally, I don't like horror movies. Even the good ones pale to me now, but most out there are just plain bad.
The best frights in films are had from well written drama, suspense and off-screen implication, rather than explicit blood and gore.

If any of my family feel that a career in the movies is the way they want to go, you shouldn't come to me for advice.
I know I did use to encourage people, and did believe in it as a career in the arts. I got out myself because I found it was too shallow, everyone always on about the money, no real creativity. If not a drama with the ensuing boredom of crews always on about money, actors always on about themselves, it became just a boring industry job, TV shows, Farming today programmes... the fun travel documentaries were few and far between. All that plus the demand was shrinking, just as it has again since, due to technology and union busting laws...

I never made horror movies. I do have a view that dressing like a zombie or stabbing some half naked girl in an abandoned old house is dull, and the "frights" not effective.

I went to see "The Texas chainsaw massacre" with my American brother-in-law's brother on my first night in Virginia when I was 19. It was also my first time ever in a drive-in, very exciting. In fact I was more interested in the details of the drive-in: the clip on speaker, the number of pick up trucks steaming up, the isolation from the rest of the audience.
- The movie scared me, but left me with no real feelings of having seen a good film (though it is in many ways seminal) -it was enough for me to be bored with every other similar film that has come my way since.

Why should you not want to be an actor, especially in horror movies?

1. As a career, being an actor is one where the industry that employs you relies on, and ensures, a permanent 90% unemployment rate.

2. What we crew sometimes called "The Talent" very rarely had that spark one expects from movie actors - vain, self centred, egos that needed constant preening, and a profession where you pretend to be someone you are not. The rare actors who were nice, happy, reasonable secure people, I remember very clearly...there were about five during those eight years...

3. Casting is generally a search for the best looking, young, yet able to talk convincingly...
At the average casting call session for a minor TV role that seeks a 26 year old slim blonde - the queue will be 600+ long of identikit blondes with absolutely nothing wrong with how they look...

4. Talent does win through in some situations, but there are hundreds, nay thousands, of quite talented actors who have never got past that one commercial, 2 voice overs, 900 casting sessions and a brief scene in Chicago Hope they did over ten years ago...

Horror films are a genre where looks don't dominate quite so much, but neither does talent. It seems that even the hopelessly unoriginal low budget gore-fests still get some kind of release and people want to keep making them. It feeds a demand that comes from people with similar problems...I'm sure Driller Killer has made a considerable sum for its creators by now.
I do not wish to mix with those creators however, I cannot help but think that the drive to make these films is not a healthy one, just like the drive to make porn movies. If people say, "somebody has to do it", I would say, No, that applies to cleaning, shelf-stacking, manufacturing, and many other jobs I would prefer my children to take up...

The UK has moved increasingly smoothly into being a society that actually accepts porn to be almost mainstream; they call it an industry on the news. Fairly explicit celebrations of this industry can be found on UK free-view channels after 11.00 p.m.

I used to resent adults telling me I couldn't watch this or that because it was violent/explicitly sexual whatever, but I remember how this changed when I became a parent, and a daughter managed to get a copy of Grand theft auto for her play-station and I watched her play it. In the game she tended to concentrate on driving and shooting, but the way it works it leads the player down certain routes, as all these games do. She proceeded to move her character into a car with a prostitute, and then after sex had been finished, (see car wobble and vague movements inside) shot her to pieces to get the money back. This resulted in her character being healthier and richer. The ironic nature of some of this game play was not lost on me, but I don't think it was good fun like I want the children of the society I inhabit to enjoy.

I am sure this caused her no long term damage but she sensed my unease then, and I still feel it now.
I feel very uneasy about the use of horror and violence, in any form of realistic visual entertainment, especially when mixed with sexual gratification. There is no doubt in my mind that societies that resist the encouragement of violence and reject revenge as a solution, always turn away from the search for a cheap thrill, these become happier and healthier places to live.

Once again I cite Norway and Sweden, where gun crime, and all violence is just 99% rarer than in the USA, and from where some excellent movies have originated (though I prefer some of the sexy ones to The Seventh Seal...)

Then there is this hugely common desire to be famous
- why?

I long ago recognised fame to be that hollow failed substitute for parental love that those who reach it discover, and would not wish the absence of this discovery to prolong such a futile attempt at filling that needy hole inside.

Noel Coward, being famous himself, slightly missed the point in his famous song, Don't put your daughter on the stage, Mrs Worthington. It has need of an update, perhaps I can manage one...

Don’t put your child in the movies, Mrs. Tomlinson
Don’t put your child in the movies
The profession is overcrowded
The struggle’s pretty tough
And admitting the fact he’s burning to act
That isn’t quite enough
he’s a nice boy and though his teeth are fairly good
he’s not the type I ever pay to see
I repeat, Mrs. Tomlinson
sweet Mrs. Tomlinson
Don’t put your child in the movies

Regarding yours, dear Mrs. Tomlinson
Of Wednesday, the 23rd.
Though your son has all the looks for a zombified career
How can I make it clear that this is not a good idea
For him to gain sufficient fame
Is a notion that is lame
His personality is not in reality quite big enough, inviting enough
For this particular sphere

Don’t put your child int the movies, Mrs. Tomlinson
Don’t put your child in the movies,
He doesn't have De Niro's range, you must honestly confess
And the width of his tum would only become a character role at best,
It’s - it’s a loud voice, and though it’s not exactly flat
It needs a little more than that to earn him any fees
On my knees, Mrs. Tomlinson, please Mrs. Tomlinson,
Don’t put your child in the movies.

Don’t put your child in the movies, Mrs. Tomlinson
Don’t put your child in the movies,
Though they said at the school of acting
He was fine as "second man"
I’m afraid, on the whole, a horror role is the most that he can
hack and the sight of pay is far away,
so please, away! don't insist, I say,
and don't put your child in the movies Mrs Tomlinson,
don't put your child in the movies.

I have received some criticism for being negative on this blog - (since my website is almost exclusively about positivity and making as many people as happy as possible).
I do mention on the jokes page that I do believe that some targets for satire, ugly truth telling or even rage, might be a sensible by-product of a concern I have that people shouldn't fall asleep and allow organisations, powerful people or groups to run roughshod over their beliefs and liberties - and so I allow myself to do the same here.

Maybe I stray into the personal occasionally (only when that individual is trying to influence large numbers of the general public.) In general circumstances I will try to avoid that, I don't want to encourage attacks on, or even rudeness to, non famous named individuals.

The Scientologists used the term "Fair Game" (title linked) to describe tactics of attacking those who were attacking their beliefs and behaviours. I can't help but say that they have made themselves "fair game" by how they applied such tactics whilst also claiming tax exempt status and other privileges as a religion when their religion is less valid than that of the Taliban.

My fair game list then - so you know where your group or favourite celebrity might feature on my viciously effective blog over the years!

virtually all religions - but especially the Catholics, the Muslims, Zionist Jews, and the weirder offshoots that manifest, such as the Taliban, Kaballah, and numerous "Christian" sects.

then Scientology of course - not a religion - just a money making scheme that L Ron Hubbard, the well known crook and liar, made up. (his own words damn him on this).

Politicians who preach one thing while practicing another.

"Moral" spokespeople who get publicity for expressing views I find to be destructive to human development.

Right wing bloggers, news, radio, or other pundits who promote knee jerk responses to issues that their audience have no hope of ever properly understanding. (I will name Rush Limbaugh and Bill O'Reilly as examples, simply because more people need to know how desperately awful these influential people are).

Phil Collins - "I'm talking Nonce - sense".
4x4 drivers who live in cities.
Jeremy Clarkson
Brian Mawhinney and all in charge at the FA.(need I explain)
Anyone who believes they know the solution to British poverty who also went to Eton (Tory cabinet is in trouble here)
Paul Dacre.

ooooh! I could add to this again later - but lets publish and these fair game folk be damned.

Police in London, and those Daily Mail types who have never got on their wrong side by looking scruffy whilst standing, and who think they are doing a "very tough job".
Anyone who thinks the Daily Mail is related to the truth.

There is the protestant work ethic.
There is laziness.
There is Eastern philosophy,
and there is this thing I call mystic laziness.

Mystic laziness would definitely not be sitting in front of the TV with a beer.
I am advocating something that has been proposed by many Zen masters and other learned philosophical types for centuries.
I am doing it now because I have had such a great weekend being in this state. Sure I have "done some things", cooked, cleaned a bit, made a shelf, worked the garden, but I have deliberately and frequently chosen to do nothing - absolutely nothing but stay awake and observe.

A Christian would probably quote the bit of the gospel where it says, "Consider the lilies of the field, they toil not neither do they spin". but like Ghandi said, ...“I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ.”

How come we have a "protestant work ethic"?, why do we have such a drive to do more - and guilt if we haven't done the jobs we know need doing?
I get it, this feeling I should have done things I haven't, but this weekend I seem to have cracked it better than most weekends. Sitting in the sun and being aware of all the "nowness" the buzz of insects the occasional bird song, just being. Just breathing.

It helped that I had seen Jackson Browne in concert on the Saturday night. Lovely feelings emanated that helped me glow, but the real reason is in the finding of a loving companion who shares this feeling so readily.

If you are on your own, it can be very hard, the mind plays such tricks and old patterns reassert themselves so very sneakily. Eckhart Tolle seems to have explained how to treat this extremely well and reading an interview with him it was fascinating to see a sceptical journalist unable to find the ego trappings that he suspected any such popular mystic guru would be falling into.

Everybody, when they feel this thing, tends to express their wishful thinking of belief that there is some wider change going on out there that matches their experience - this can never be properly perceived, just as neither can be any notion of a metaphysical reality of other life, beyond our own.

Chilling out, not falling asleep or getting lost in the TV or druggy stupor - I highly recommend.
Doing it with someone you love - even better.

Some may recognise the paraphrased quote in the title - for those who don't - It's Pete Townsend's lyric from "Won't get fooled again".
(There is another potential link between the Pope and Pete Townsend but I won't go there)

Good morning to all my Catholic reader!
and any searching guests, especially Tony and Cherie Blair, who have made their views on contraception more pragmatically available than this latest celibate in charge of the most ancient, unreformed anti-religion for the gullible.

...and congratulations on appointing another obedient greasy-pole climber to the top job in England for people who like to wear insane hats. Like all of the Catholic priesthood, he is, of course, celibate (cough, choke, splutter).This morning he tried vainly to persuade radio 4 interviewer, Sarah Montague, that the Church he represented was not obsessed with sexuality but had spiritual teachings to offer, (child buggery, conspiracy, crime, cough) such as gathering around the table as a family to pray.
At which point I think of the need for families to sit around a table to eat a meal being far more of a practical need, in order to develop social skills.

I can't wait for the practical ways in which the Catholic Church (child buggery, conspiracy, crime, cough) starts to tackle this need for prayer. Perhaps they will manage to get a script of Eastenders to go from the incest squabbles and revenge scenarios straight into Babs Windsor calmly sitting her entire family down and them all praying for an end to all the child buggery, conspiracy, corporate crime, ... and coughing, etc. in the world.

Maybe in Coronation Street, a strange character wearing purple striped robes and a huge gold embroidered hat will walk into the Rovers return and announce the revocation of Vatican 2 and a return to all soap operas being in Latin.

I am not sure how far out of touch with the real world you have to be to get to the top of the unholy dinosaur of the Catholic (child buggery, conspiracy, crime, cough) church, but it would seem his position is, by definition, far enough off the planet for the media to fully justify emphasising the more insane pronouncements of his institution - if they can justify giving it any publicity at all.

When I think of Christ, the probable real person - really good person, throwing the hypocrites out of the temple, I see someone who taught that doing good works was what mattered, and building wealth and institutions that supported state oppression and exploitation of the people was an abomination.
In fact, if he was around today, Jesus would have been in with the G20 protesters seeking justice for the world's poor, and mocking hypocrites in purple robes who conspire to cover up...to cover up...?

you know by now...

The title linked video is the now oft viewed piece that shows just how senseless violence is more of a problem among our policemen than it is among the general public.

I have heard all the arguments - the police being put in an impossible position - the protesters taunts being provocative etc.

The facts remain, and more importantly my own experience and knowledge of trusted others tells me that the police get away with much more when there are no cameras immediately around.

So questions remain:
Why do some police - in particular the one who assaulted Mr Tomlinson, wear balaclavas hiding their faces?
Why do we have this notion of a law to make it illegal to photograph the Police on duty?
Why did Maggie Thatcher say that Tony Blair was her best legacy?

The notion that power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely is most dangerous when it comes to police and government acting hand in hand against the freedom of the people.
If anybody thinks we have come a long way since Maggie's pet police army assaulted and arrested miners at will - the Jean Charles de Menezes affair, repeated blunders, and the evidence of cameras at the G20, show just how dangerous is the state we live in.

Amusingly - in the middle of a Today programme interview in which a top politician was saying that "This is not a resigning matter", the news broke through that Mr Bob Quick had resigned.

Obviously, when racing in his car to Downing Street yesterday, Mr Quick was too slow in covering up his papers that held crucial top secret information...
Top secret information on how terrorists were planning to beat up and push innocent civilians over in the street, causing death by heart attack and panic among the population...
of the decadent western states where their parents had funded their university education - for the glory of Allah.
Confused?
you will be in the next episode of "Fundamentalist Hogwash"

Confident that she has a good handle on the political flavour of poverty, Jill Kirby, director of a Tory think tank, was on Radio 4 this morning attacking charities for political campaigning, (read her times article via the title link).

She is wrong - and ignorant.
Her main arguments seem to be about how charities attract public funds to save starving children in Africa - she says she doesn't mind dipping in her pocket for these life saving activities but objects to the money paying to campaign for the government to change policies - or stick to its promises to eliminate child poverty.

Well she didn't actually say that last bit, but the banners she was referring to were about exactly that. The implications of her stance can be clearly read as follows:-

Governments should not be lobbied by charities at all.
Rich people don't mind sharing a bit of their pocket money (say 0.05% of their disposable income) if it is only used so a small black child far away can smile instead of cry on a TV news report.
Charities should not be doing anything for the "fat" poor in this country - because they are undeserving.
Such campaigning is right out because it might actually embarrass our politicians (ours when they get into power at the next election).
It does not matter that campaigners are supported by the less rich public who can see more sense in building a fence at the top of the cliff rather than constantly running ambulances and hearses to the bottom...

This interpretation of her account she may dispute - but the delightful picture she portrayed of rich people being bothered by the supposedly inappropriate use of charitable funds is one I hope she shouts about more.
- the Tories are on a loser here.

The role of many charities will always involve a duty of campaigning, just as the role of newspapers will always include the duty to expose MP's sleaze (not too tricky at the moment).
Charities campaign because they can see what is needed to prevent the disasters they are constantly being asked to clean up. It even makes economic sense, never mind moral correctness.
Private companies lobby (and far more extensively and expensively) because they want government to allow them more money, more tax relief and give less to the poor.

which lobbying would you want to disallow?

...not much of a contest there. Bring it on Jill Kirby and Saatchi wealth lobbyists incorporated.

Luton fans turned out to the tune of nearly 40,000 at Wembley today - and celebrated a glorious 3-2 win over higher division Scunthorpe, a result that sent my brother into explosions of ecstasy and champagne cork blasts.
To me it was not quite the great celebration it was for others.
My team, Luton, are still facing relegation to the Blue Square premier league because of the unjust and vindictive actions of the FA.

Well today Mr -10 Brainless Mawhinney was the representative sent out to shake hands with the team.

I am not complaining about the 20 point deduction for administration we agreed to take at the end of last season - that was punishment that was accepted and savagely in keeping with how the lower league teams are generally treated by the football league,(West Ham and other higher league sides manage to avoid such just punishments).
No, we - or rather an observant company administrative worker, blew the whistle on some minor transgression via agent payment methods, of the previous management - and this little twit Mawhinney decided to kill off Luton, on top of the league's punishment, by adding another 10 points off - like no sane judge would ever do in the courts of this land to a burglar already sent to 20 years jail for the burglary, who gets another ten years because he also had an out of date tax disc on his getaway car...

So it is with great joy I recall the resounding booing he got at the kick off - and I noted his wry regret that Luton whooped his Scunthorpe favouring ass with a magnificent display of football that one neutral described as better than a hundred cup finals he had seen.

And, if he is trawling the web for what Luton fans think after this season, and comes across this site - I offer him this image of a bus trip I shall endeavour to organise - as soon as he dies, for all who so wish, to make a commemorative trip to his memorial site or grave - where we can toast Luton FC with a nice bevvy, then give his grave the filtered same....

You have the power to meter out justice!
Let us say, just for this thought experiment, you are a supreme/highest court justice and have one final case to try...

you have one case you can deal with that has a maximum sentence of ten years, with the other the maximum is life...
there are only these two cases to choose from.
You know that one will go unpunished, whereas with the other you can dole out the right punishment - the one you choose.

The first case involves a murder - a young child has been murdered, almost accidentally, but very dead and caused by the actions of another (teenage)child. The police made this a high priority case and eventually found the culprit, but would have found him much sooner except his mother lied to the police when they questioned her about the boy.
The mother is the defendant. The son was found guilty and is now in prison.
She is being prosecuted for conspiracy to pervert the course of justice, relating to this murder.
The law is quite clear, she only knew of the act after it was committed (accessory after the fact), but she lied to try and prevent her son being caught.

She is guilty, the evidence is undeniable, she has pleaded guilty.
She pleads for mitigation in that she was only trying to be loyal to her young son, she was raised to be more loyal to her family than to the police.
You know that this cannot be a consideration, and the sentencing guidelines suggest 2-6 years for such an offence.

The second case involves multiple suicides, physical and psychological trauma, abuse of power, sexual abuse, rape, and child molestation. The victims number well over 5,000 and many of those, who have not either committed suicide or otherwise been psychologically too damaged, are helping with ongoing investigations.
The defendant is an older man who helped the many principal perpetrators of these crimes escape justice, he drew up the policy, the letter of guidance that ensured a powerful organisation kept these men (multiple abusers, numbering well over 200) in the organisation's employment, enabling them to continue to perpetrate their crimes.

The evidence is undeniable, this defendant is also guilty.
He denies any wrongdoing. The police have much evidence of the multiple crimes and have convicted some of the hundreds of prime perpetrators. They have not really bothered to build a case against this individual, many of them belonging to the very same organisation he runs.

The laws of accessory and of conspiracy both apply here. Punishment for conspiracy to commit multiple acts of child sexual abuse can be an 'A1' felony in the US courts - punishable by various lengths of custodial sentence including life imprisonment.

The second case will make history in the world of western politics and justice - definitely leading to the prosecuting judge (you) becoming more famous than Baltasar Garzon Real - the Spanish judge who sought the extradition of Pinochet for the crimes he committed as president of Chile.

Which case do you decide to choose...

...to administer your last act of justice?

Perhaps this is unethical
but pictures of the two perpetrators in the garb they used to be seen in public court may help you make up your mind...

That's the first defendant.

here's the second

...

...

...

scroll down...

...

...

...

...

...

No contest in my book...life imprisonment is just about right...