Is it on YouTube yet?
If not why not...
An NHS care assistant who stole from a grandmother dying of cancer was nabbed in the act by an electronically enhanced teddy bear, according to reports. The Guardian brings us the news that Yvonne Allen, 28, of Halewood, Liverpool, admitted two counts of theft last week and agreed to pay back the stolen £60. The larcenous …
well, she will do 3 months... to be honest she should get more - stealing from an ill pensioner! plus they have no idea how much cash had gone over a longer amount of time... how many other people has she done this to?
she would get more like 2+ years for both of what you mentioned above
Should'nt this be tagged under Rise Of The Machines?
First the Robobears will be bluetoothing data to the police (for convenience you understand), then they'll be given arrest powers (as part of the governments on going value enhancement measures) then they'll be suited up and given engage / destroy subroutines (to address the governments concern over terrorism).
Next thing you know you've got a furry paw pressing your face into the dirt and a lascannon on the back of your head.
"to be honest she should get more [...] plus they have no idea how much cash had gone over a longer amount of time... how many other people has she done this to?"
And think how many red lights she might have run while illegally speeding at 31mph! All those times she has littered and never been proven for it. She might have let her dog foul the walkways too! If she hasn't got a dog then she clearly has and is lying about it. Lying! Now she's a terror suspect and needs to be held without charge for 42 days. SHE MIGHT BE A MURDERER!!!
However in the real world we usually look for something called evidence before making accusations (government excluded of course).
Can no-one be trusted these days? A friend of mine had an almost identical situation. Money appeared to be missing regularly from his elderly mother`s house after a cleaner/helper had visited, who I believe was connected with Social Services here in the UK. Bank notes were planted with serial numbers noted and police waited. When she left the house and was stopped by police, she dropped the money, but rather foolishly said it was hers when the police asked her, so she was banged to rights, as the saying goes. Don`t know what happened to her, but to abuse a position of trust like that makes my blood boil!
'(I'm in the states, does the UK do capitol punishment?)'
Nah, you've got the 'Capitol' we've got a 'Capital'. Your punishment is having the Capitol.
As for witches -- if she weighs as much as a duck then she's made out of wood. Wood floats and so do witches. (just bung monty python witch quote in Google)
Capitol punishment? Would that involve being flogged on the White House lawn? That should get a good audience...
As far as the death penalty goes, I think only treason, and arson in a Royal Dockyard still carry that, and I'm not sure about the arson. Polls suggest that a majority of the population are in favour, especially for terrorist crimes (real ones, like planting bombs in restaurants, not the ones like downloading a DIY Osama bin Laden beard kit), but the politicians wimp out every time they're given a vote :(
Death penalty in the UK has gone. Not even for treason or arson.
The care worker probably thought she was taking from someone who no longer needed it, or some kind of justification like that. To be honest she's just following New Labours policies - raid the pension funds to provide more tax credits.
"Can no-one be trusted these days?"
Try reading, oh, any newspaper's crime column from the Victorian period - stuffed with (allegedly) larcenous housemaids. Ditto the Edwardian. "Low-paid menial worker nicks from employer" is hardly a *new* headline, mate. it's always happened, in fairly small numbers.
Steve: the death penalty has been abolished in the U.K. for all crimes, including those old chestnuts, for quite a while, now. It's those dastardly Europeans, poking in their interfering noses and telling us who we can and can't kill. Humbug!
You can't comment on the length of the stretch without knowing on what basis the decision was made. For example did the accused ask for umpteen seperate offences to be taken into account?
Also the length of the sentence would be decided in accordance with the circumstances. Some chav walking in through an unlocked door and lifting the cash would probably have got a more lenient sentence, but somebody in a position of trust should get a longer sentence.
As for the CCTV being admissable in court, it wouldn't necessarilly have been used. The fact that she had in her possession the notes with the recorded serial numbers should be evidence enough to secure a conviction.