Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!
You are not logged in or you do not have permission to access this page. This could be due to one of several reasons:
You are not logged in. If you are already registered, fill in the form below to log in, or follow the "Sign Up" link to register a new account.
You may not have sufficient privileges to access this page. Are you trying to edit someone else's post, access administrative features or some other privileged system?
If you are trying to post, the administrator may have disabled your account, or it may be awaiting activation.
Logging in...
Previously on "The Common Sense is Finally and Completely F*cked!!"
Don't see what the problem is, it's just a way of calculating a figure. The award will be made up of X due to stress, loss of quality of quality of life etc. plus Y to compensate for actual financial losses. The latter part will inevitably take all factors into account. The real question to consider is, is the final amount adequate compensation for what he has gone through?
PS I am assuming of course there is an X. Not totally sure from the article.
There is no 'X', and the 'Y' is a very stingy little 'y'. From what I've read he's done really well, for someone who's not a lawyer, only about 100k out of pocket.
The thing to remember, in all these things is: never leave a witness, and the lawyers always win.
Don't see what the problem is, it's just a way of calculating a figure. The award will be made up of X due to stress, loss of quality of quality of life etc. plus Y to compensate for actual financial losses. The latter part will inevitably take all factors into account. The real question to consider is, is the final amount adequate compensation for what he has gone through?
PS I am assuming of course there is an X. Not totally sure from the article.
The purpose of the compensation is to put an individual back into the financial position they would have been in but for the miscarriage of justice, but not to a better position."
Mr Blackwell said there was no chance of that happening in his case because his legal bills were huge.
"My parents contributed tens of thousands of pounds and friends added to the fighting fund."
The amount of Mr Blackwell's compensation is yet to be decided, although he said he thought it would be in the region of £100,000.
So basically he's freed, no worse off except he spent 3 years in jail FFS!!
The Common Sense is Finally and Completely F*cked!!
Innocent man to pay for jail time
A 37-year-old man jailed for a crime he did not commit is being charged almost £7,000 for his time in prison.
Warren Blackwell from Woodford Halse, Northamptonshire, has been told the sum will be deducted from compensation to cover savings on rent and food.
Leave a comment: