That someone from St Helens had technical ability..
An IT support bod who reportedly stole more than £30,000 in Bitcoin, Litecoin and Ethereum has been jailed. Mark Andrews of St Helens, northwest England, was sentenced to prison by Liverpool Crown Court after pleading guilty to one charge of theft and one charge under the Computer Misuse Act. By day 38-year-old Andrews was a …
I am always shocked with the anglo-saxon usage to publish the name and the picture of a convict. That guy made a mistake and will pay the price for it, but does he really deserve to be shamed on the web, with an article that will be visible forever (that is as long as the web exists )? When the sentence will be accomplished, why should the guy carry the load of his fault forever through a simple web search? What does giving his name and a picture bring to us readers, is that so valuable compared to the life-long effect it will have on this man?
I think it's part of the principle of English law that the Law should take place in public. A few hundred years ago this extended to executing sentences in public too.
It's worth pointing out that English law also allows some convictions to become "spent", which reduces the effects you have described. Depending on the length of sentence, after some time you no longer have to disclose convictions when, for example, applying for job interviews. This extends even as far as the libel laws. Referring to someone's spent conviction can count as libel, and land you with a hefty bill (the truth is NOT an absolute defence to libel in England & Wales.)
I'm pretty sure that a 20-month sentence will become eligible for this. As long as the criminal does not commit any more crimes. So as long as you stay on the right side of the law, past crimes do not have to follow you around for ever.
This was also part of the fight with Google over right to be forgotten. I think most of those cases in the UK centre around old convictions.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2020