A Romanian gypsy family were flying back and forth
from Romania courtesy of ‘FLY BY TAX PAYER’ to cheat tax payers out of their
money. The fraudsters used forged home office documents and job references to
illegally obtain national insurance numbers which they used, to claim state
handouts. Now they have been caught and brought to justice the Judge sitting at
Southwark Crown Court ordered them to reimburse tax payers an astounding sum,
£17.65 of the £800,000. An interesting point to note is what the same Judge said
when jailing
the family last year, ‘this fraud was a large scale fraud which deliberately targeted the UK benefit system’. Britain, Britain, Britain so often envisages on doing justice and right for others but forgets about itself. No country in the world is as great as, however immigration, fraud, welfare, has now become common and intolerable to the law abiding citizens of the UK. As mentioned in the last issue something needs to be done immediately, without delay, to tackle external hands digging into the pockets of internal citizens. British taxpayers will be happy to know that they have a share in a Beverly Hill style mansion. The Romanian family used the money to transform a street in their scruffy homeland village of Tandrei into a Beverly Hill style boulevard lined by sensational villas and mansions. Do people believe they can blindly do as they wish and take as they wish? Clearly so. Why else would the judge have been compelled to say what he did? The shocking fact is, there are still people residing in another country having their benefits paid by British tax payers into their UK account. What did the judge mean by his statement? Is it something to the effect that the system has allowed this to happen? For instance a normal working class family would live in a modern 2 bedroom house with an average rent of say £600. Yet if you are not working there is a high possibility of being put up at the tax payers expense in a £8,000 a month home, as was the case with Somali asylum seeker Saeed Khaliif was given a £2million home in one of the country’s most exclusive neighbourhoods. This is one of many examples that endorse our contention. On the facts and decision of this case whosoever denies H.L.A.Hart’s contention on Judges complete discretion will be deemed a fool. This decision was not based on rules or principles if this was the case then why was such a pleasant sum imposed on the family? Because as H.L.A Hart illustrates in his Book Concept of Law a judge has complete discretion and even though there are rules on punishment a judge is not obliged to follow those rules.
the family last year, ‘this fraud was a large scale fraud which deliberately targeted the UK benefit system’. Britain, Britain, Britain so often envisages on doing justice and right for others but forgets about itself. No country in the world is as great as, however immigration, fraud, welfare, has now become common and intolerable to the law abiding citizens of the UK. As mentioned in the last issue something needs to be done immediately, without delay, to tackle external hands digging into the pockets of internal citizens. British taxpayers will be happy to know that they have a share in a Beverly Hill style mansion. The Romanian family used the money to transform a street in their scruffy homeland village of Tandrei into a Beverly Hill style boulevard lined by sensational villas and mansions. Do people believe they can blindly do as they wish and take as they wish? Clearly so. Why else would the judge have been compelled to say what he did? The shocking fact is, there are still people residing in another country having their benefits paid by British tax payers into their UK account. What did the judge mean by his statement? Is it something to the effect that the system has allowed this to happen? For instance a normal working class family would live in a modern 2 bedroom house with an average rent of say £600. Yet if you are not working there is a high possibility of being put up at the tax payers expense in a £8,000 a month home, as was the case with Somali asylum seeker Saeed Khaliif was given a £2million home in one of the country’s most exclusive neighbourhoods. This is one of many examples that endorse our contention. On the facts and decision of this case whosoever denies H.L.A.Hart’s contention on Judges complete discretion will be deemed a fool. This decision was not based on rules or principles if this was the case then why was such a pleasant sum imposed on the family? Because as H.L.A Hart illustrates in his Book Concept of Law a judge has complete discretion and even though there are rules on punishment a judge is not obliged to follow those rules.
No comments:
Post a Comment