Rant Of The Day

[AndyRM]

Yeah, it would be more worthwhile if they were spoiling some kids from a charity or local hospital with a day out rather just making money from some rich people trying to compensate for not spending time with their kids.

I believe quite a few clubs do: I know that at Killie our mascots come in the main from local hospices and charities, with a few paying a nominal fee of around £50 which I think is reasonable.

But then there are others where they categorise the offer based on opponents, which is really poor.

 

[BoldonLad]

I believe quite a few clubs do: I know that at Killie our mascots come in the main from local hospices and charities, with a few paying a nominal fee of around £50 which I think is reasonable.

But then there are others where they categorise the offer based on opponents, which is really poor.

Yes, not exactly a football fan, but, I seem to recall that Sunderland had a mascot who was a child with cancer (sadly, i think his cancer won)

 

[Evil_Breakfast]

Yes, not exactly a football fan, but, I seem to recall that Sunderland had a mascot who was a child with cancer (sadly, i think his cancer won)

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news...adley-lowery-dies-aged-six-after-cancer-fight

 

[Psamathe]

Today (from Me): The idea of "Corporate Crime"
Companies don't make decisions people do. eg One lawyer "In England and Wales, establishing corporate criminal liability in order to convict a company requires proving beyond reasonable doubt that the company committed the illegal act" - it was people in that company making decisions.

When you get to a position with responsibilities within a company you need to be made aware of those responsibilities. When I was made a company director the (formally trained) Company Secretary sat down with me for a few hours and went through in detail my legal responsibilities. When that company became a plc she sat down with me again and went through additional legal responsibilities steming from our new status.

I wonder if that a corporate entity can be found guilty and be "liable" can encourage individuals actually making those decisions to be more prepared to not meet their responsibility (as they won't be personally liable).

 

[BoldonLad]

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news...adley-lowery-dies-aged-six-after-cancer-fight

that is the one I was thinking of, no doubt there are others

 

[briantrumpet]

Today (from Me): The idea of "Corporate Crime"
Companies don't make decisions people do. eg One lawyer "In England and Wales, establishing corporate criminal liability in order to convict a company requires proving beyond reasonable doubt that the company committed the illegal act" - it was people in that company making decisions.

When you get to a position with responsibilities within a company you need to be made aware of those responsibilities. When I was made a company director the (formally trained) Company Secretary sat down with me for a few hours and went through in detail my legal responsibilities. When that company became a plc she sat down with me again and went through additional legal responsibilities steming from our new status.

I wonder if that a corporate entity can be found guilty and be "liable" can encourage individuals actually making those decisions to be more prepared to not meet their responsibility (as they won't be personally liable).

It's one legal area where the US seems to be much better at dealing with: in the UK, the people who do illegal things never seem to be personally held to account; in the US they serve long jail sentences.

 

[Pblakeney]

It's one legal area where the US seems to be much better at dealing with: in the UK, the people who do illegal things never seem to be personally held to account; in the US they serve long jail sentences.

I'm going to suggest that there is a glass ceiling in the US though.
Call it the "Epstein Class". With one obvious and notable exception, Epstein himself.

 

[BoldonLad]

It's one legal area where the US seems to be much better at dealing with: in the UK, the people who do illegal things never seem to be personally held to account; in the US they serve long jail sentences.

I would agree.

Not sure why this is so?, but in UK, it appears to be acceptable for things to just more or less just "time out". An example being Grenfell Tower, coming up to 10 years later, and, no real accountability. There are of course more examples. It appears to be not just our legal system which suffers this, but, the "regulatory bodies" for the so called professions appear to be just as bad. There is an example in Private Eye, relating to a Solicitor, where an enquiry is not concluded after several years.