I was fuming after reading this, what about you?

[rolfw]

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/printFriendly/0,,1-2-1524886,00.html

Trespasser who fell through roof wins payout of £567,000
By Joanna Bale







A TEENAGE boy who fell through a roof while he was trespassing on private property has received £567,000 in compensation.

Carl Murphy, now 18, sued the owner of a warehouse after suffering serious head injuries when he plunged 40ft to the floor as a nine-year-old in 1996.

Victims of crime groups yesterday reacted angrily to the payout, which is 50 times more than the family of a murder victim can expect to receive from the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority.

Mr Murphy, of Seaforth, Merseyside, suffered brain damage in the accident which was said by doctors to have caused such severe behavioural problems that he was expelled from two schools in the two years after his recovery.

“After all I’ve been through, I feel I really deserve this money,” he said.

Clive Elliott, of the Victims of Crime Trust, said, however, that the payout reflected a massive inconsistency in the payments offered to victims and criminals.

He said: “All rights to compensation should cease the moment that person breaks the law. In victims’ compensation the most a family will receive in a murder case is £11,000. There is a real flaw in the system.

“If the Government makes a gesture by allowing money to go to people who have been wronged, it should equally penalise anybody who does anything wrong when they are claiming.

“Wrongdoers think they are beyond the law, and in this case they can become quite well off by breaking it.”

Mr Murphy fell through the roof of Container Care park in Bootle docks after trespassing with a group of friends.

He was expelled from his primary school in Bootle within a week of returning after the accident, given a home tutor, but that ended when he threatened her with violence. He missed ten months of school before being enrolled at Nugent House, Billinge, a school for children with behavioural problems, in November 1998, but was expelled 18 months later.

His family took the now defunct company to court four years ago, claiming that it should have repaired security fencing to prevent children from playing on the site. Their claim was successful and he received the money on his 18th birthday yesterday.

Mr Murphy is currently living with his grandmother because his mother Diane and her boyfriend, Kevin Parsons, both 36, are serving three years in prison for setting up a heroin and crack cocaine business from their council house.

A neighbour said: “We knew Carl was going to get this money, but it’s frightening a family like that could receive so much.

“There are surely more deserving people out there who would benefit from a payout like that.”

It's you and me who are paying for this (if you live in the UK), but I guess that similar cases are appearing all over Europe. The frightening thing is that there doesn't appear to be anything we can do about it.

Even if you are not in the UK, or even Europe, please vote.

 

[Llew]

The insiduous taking up of the US compensation culture I'm afraid, Rolf.

Llew

 

[Analoguesat]

Can we have an option "None whatsoever - and execute the b*st*rds" please!

 

[rolfw]

This is what concerns me about allowing judges to make some decisions, they follow the law to the letter, but do not necessarily apply common sense or make moral judgements. I was originally against the idea of the government making decisions to detain people under the new terrorism act, but after hearing something like this, I am all for it.

 

[Lancelot]

Blast - didn't see the last option till I voted.

Can I change my mind.

 

[rolfw]

Just done it for you.

 

[Topper]

Scandalous, the payout is sending out the wrong message to the lowlife community of petty thieves and irresponsible parents. He should be made to give that money back to help rehabilitate the drug addicts his parents helped create.

 

[allans17]

hey guys they should all have one right



the right to be TERMINATED

 

[Analoguesat]

Friendly lot arent we . My vote has been registered for execute the b***trads

:-flame :-uzi :-banned :-boom

 

[Channel Hopper]

In this case the parents have shown absolutely no instincts in keeping with a caring family. They, along with the parents of Carls 'friends' should be held accountable, both for the trespass, and any damage caused by passing through what was clearly a security fence, which is usually designed more as a warning, rather than a complete deterrent.

As for Carls 'brain damage', there is a cure for that (involves another 40ft drop and the donation of all compensation to the CICA for distribution to worthy recipients )

 

[BGonaSTICK]

Well, I have to say two things.

Firstly, I don't think that there is enough information in the report as posted here to make a proper moral judgement. Having said that, the evidence does seem rather weighted against the recipient of the clearly excessive payout.

It could however just be trial by media. Can you honestly say that you didn't climb on factory roofs as a kid? If the report is correct, he was only nine at the time. The picture is painted for you. Are you surprised he has behavioural problems after falling 40 feet onto his head and smashing it all to hell? Are we to tar all folks who live in council houses with the same brush? Is the fact that he lives in a council house at all relevant?

"All rights to compensation should cease the moment that person breaks the law" - WHAT??!?! Are you nuts?!?! We all break some stupid law or other every day!

Yes, he's probably a f**kwit little scrote who deserves a good kicking, but I don't need some snot-nosed newspaper to make my mind up for me.

Secondly, as far as the legality of the situation is concerned I have no opinion as I no longer subscribe to UK law. I didn't write it, and I didn't agree to it. In fact I disagree with so much of it, I no longer give a stuff.

Not like me to speak my mind

Blo-O o-O dy good topic anyhow.

 

[rolfw]

I think that we all climbed on the odd roof here and there when we were kids Stick, but unfortunately sometimes it is left to the newspapers to expose these abuses of the legal system. He was not a victim of crime, more a victim of misadventure, was his behaviour due to the accident, or was it due to his upbringing, the arrest of his parents would perhaps indicate upbringing.

What is more upsetting is the huge disparity in awards for legitimate criminal injury compared to this.

 

[BGonaSTICK]

What is more upsetting is the huge disparity in awards for legitimate criminal injury compared to this.

Well I certainly don't disagree with that, but I find the rest of the drivel pretty nauseating.

I'm not about to sentence the guy to 'Option5' based on what Joanna Bale thinks will sell more newspapers this week.

 

[T_G]

I have to say that I am not sure the fact that he comes from a socially defect family should be a concern. Also, what was the reason they gave the money, is it because the factory did not make sure their old buildings or yards are dangerous grounds for children? There should be a law that makes sure these old and derelict buildings are secured.
Now regarding the right of burglars to anything, I agrre they should be locked up, but a 9 year old kid playing on the roof is no burglar, he is just a kid. His life is ****ed, so there should be some compensation, but surely not more than what other victims get...

 

[Channel Hopper]

Ah, he may be a victim, but (unless the report is seriously flawed), the damage was done on a building site which the kids knew they had crossed into.

Nine years old or otherwise, faulty security fence or otherwise, this is trespass, climbing 40' on top of this is bordering on stupidity, and to fall off confirms gene pool dilution is good for the community as a whole. Unfortunately this muppet has lived to claim another day, and will probably sire offspring that will reach for the law book each time they want something for nothing.

 

[BGonaSTICK]

There's no mention of it being a building site and he didn't fall off the roof he fell through it, thus indicating that it was inherently unsafe.

If it can't hold the weight of a few nine year olds, then it wouldn't hold the weight of a good layer of snow.

Negligence seems highly possible.

I don't think it's fair to make a judgement based on the evidence presented, so I'm just playing devil's advocate.

 

[rolfw]

Many a perfectly sound older style factory roof will not hold the weight of one, let alone a few nine year olds, and crawler boards are required for safe working.

A large proportion of nine year olds these days are nothing like the innocent nine year olds of my youth and capable of far more than mischief, being very streetwise.

 

[Donzo Bonzo]

This country is crazy. An old man of 82 was fined for hitting a burlgar over the head with a poker, AFTER the burglar had assaulted the old man!!!

Is that madness or what?

The burlgar got compensation!!!

 

[Analoguesat]

There's no mention of it being a building site and he didn't fall off the roof he fell through it, thus indicating that it was inherently unsafe.

If it can't hold the weight of a few nine year olds, then it wouldn't hold the weight of a good layer of snow.

Negligence seems highly possible.

I don't think it's fair to make a judgement based on the evidence presented, so I'm just playing devil's advocate.

Thats a question of surface area. Get some average tubby 9 years old wandering around a roof in his size 6 nikes, and you have a large pressure on a very small area - result roof failure and kid plunges 40 feet

A couple of tons of snow evenly distributed exerts very little pressure in any one place, so collapse is less likely ubless the safety tolerances are exceeded.

The site below shows what can happen when roof trusses exceed their safe working load:

h**p://nevadanorthernrailway.net/throttle/throttle030803.htm &

h**p://www.readingrailroad.org/news/info_news_03.html

2 feet of snow falling in winter 2003 caused the collapse of the roof at a rail preservation site in north eastern USA.

 

[RedDevil_UK]

50 times more than the family of a murder victim

an absolute Joke!!!

he was expelled from two schools in the two years after his recovery

nothing to do with him being a thug to start with, and probably selling drugs to classmates?

In victims’ compensation the most a family will receive in a murder case is £11,000. There is a real flaw in the system

flaw in the system.... your kiddin!!! really?

given a home tutor, but that ended when he threatened her with violence

maybe she should make a claim against him now then....

his mother Diane and her boyfriend, Kevin Parsons, both 36, are serving three years in prison for setting up a heroin and crack cocaine business from their council house.

being brough up properly then with good role models eh!! with the money he has he will be able to expand the family business now.

OK, some of the above comments are a bit tongue in cheek....but i still think this is an OTT payment.

its like a story i heard about years ago, about a dog being put down after seriously hurting a burglar breaking into a house in my local town.... that caused a real stir here.
if someone broke into my house i would EXPECT my 2 dogs to eat them.... if i get a burglar, all i want is a pile of bones on the kitchen floor in the morning