Snakes will be snakes..

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/top-stories/2011/06/30/brit-snake-fan-killed-by-king-cobra-days-after-saying-they-would-never-harm-him-115875-23236516/

Summary

47 year old Luke Yeomans had been breeding king cobra’s to save them from extinction for 30 years when he was bitten by one and died. Luke had dedicated his whole life to saving the snakes and he had a huge collection at home in a sanctuary. He was convinced the snakes would never turn on him because they knew he would do them no harm. Unfortunately one of the snakes decided otherwise. The paramedics believed he suffered from a heart attack.

Reaction

This is a sad story, I think he was doing a good thing by breeding this snakes to prevent extinction. But I think it is really naive to think that the snakes are not going to harm you because they know you feed them and take care of them. They’re predators and they do not turn into pets because you treat them nice. That is just not their nature.  And when you have spent 30 years of your life learning about these creatures you should know better. But maybe because in all those years he was never harmed he started to believe the snakes would never turn on him.

No more smoking in the streets?

http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/255860/Now-smoking-will-be-banned-in-the-streets

Summary

Stony Stratford may be the first town where smoking in the street will be prohibited. Next month the Stony Stratford town council will discuss a motion to pass the ban. Anti smoking organisations and the British Medical Association are in favour of this idea. But there are also a lot of people against it saying that after the current smoking ban business has suffered and that this will probably make it worse. People might choose not to go out anymore because of this ban.

Reaction

I do understand how annoying it is to stand next to a smoker when you do not smoke yourself. Because of the passive smoking and the smell is awful. But I think if you ban smoking in the streets it would indeed be bad for business. Maybe they should make areas where you are allowed to smoke as some sort of compromise. Although the risk is that you get large groups of people gathered in one place which might cause the next irritation.

Little Britain is evil!

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2009773/Little-Britain-style-benefits-cheat-Blackburn-Lancashire-jailed.html

Summary

Peter Dixon lied about not being able to walk to receive 7,600 pounds. He said he needed a wheelchair and fooled the doctors together with his carer Rachel Langlands.  In 2005 Mr. Dixon had a stroke and was left with serious health difficulties. But when his health improved after a couple of years he did not notify the authorities, neither did his carer so that they would keep receiving disability living allowance and carer’s allowance.

Reaction

Little Britain is clearly a bad influence. Therefore this program should be banned, all dvds should be burned and no one should be allowed to ever talk about this program ever again. From now on we ‘will call it “the program that must not be named”.

Old couple left alone for three days by social service carers

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2009792/Pensioner-left-die-wheelchair-frail-wife-lay-floor-social-services-left-unattended-days.html

Summary

Kenneth Mills, an 82 year old pensioner died in his wheelchair while his feeble wife lying helplessly on the floor besides him. This happened because social service carers did not call in on the couple for three days. Mr. Mills had Parkinson and his wife was in such poor health that she could not take care of him. They had a care package which meant that the couple was supposed to be visited several times a day. On the 24^th of September they were meant to leave home for respite care but the couple refused, therefore their sons had asked to restore the previous care package previously in place. But that did not happen because of the overload of phone calls social services received.

Reaction

I feel so sorry for the family, especially the wife who saw her husband die but could not do anything. How horrible that must have been. Of course this did not happen on purpose but I do feel social services are responsible for the trauma they have caused on the wife and her sons. This should not have happened and I think the social service carers should have made sure the previous arrangements would continue since the couple refused to go with them for respite care.

Police officer fired

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/jun/23/metropolitan-police-officer-sacked-abuse

Summary

A 35 year old police officer has been fired because he posted offensive messages about a colleague on Facebook. He also harassed a female co-worker with whom he had a very short and casual with. The Crown Prosecution Service decided there would be no criminal charges. The case went before a Metropolitan police gross misconduct hearing. There it was decided that the men did not belong in the police service.

Reaction                  

I think the police officer behaved himself very childish and unprofessional. And I agree that this man does not belong in the police service, I wonder if he is able to understand this? The relationship with the co-worker was described as brief and casual so I wonder why this police officer kept harassing this woman. “He sent the woman a series of abusive text messages and subjected her to verbal abuse and threats”. This goes a bit far if the relationship was brief and casual. Well of course this behavior always goes too far but I mean it sounds like the man really over reacted.

Prison because of chat conversations

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/3641586/Facebook-juror-is-jailed-for-8-months.html

Summary
Joanne Frail a mum of three children has to spend eight months in jail because she contacted Jamie Stewart, a defendant. Joanne served as a juror at a drug trial concerning 6 million pounds. At the time Joanne contacted Jamie, she had been aquitted but the other defendants were still on trial. Jamie told her solliciter about the chat conversations she had had with Joanne and Joanne was being sent to prison.
　
Reaction
Well I do not think it is a very smart thing to do, contacting a defendant when you are a juror on a trial. And I do not really understand what the purpose of this was other than to show sympathy. From what I read in the article she did not take it very serious anyway since she says that she had been doodling on her notepad to kill time. I also think it is very low of Jamie to participate in these messages and say to Joanne that she deleted them all and then turn her in anyway.

Swords and bodybags..

http://www.guardian.co.uk/music/2011/jun/15/joss-stone-arrests-police-question-time

Summary

Two men from Manchester have been arrested because they behaved suspiciously. This was near the house of Joss Stone in Cullompton, Devon . The pair was initially arrested because they were equipped to steal and because they had weapons on them. It is said that the men were carrying body bags and swords but this has not been confirmed by the police. The police have been granted extra time to question the two men.

Reaction

Seems to me that the story is made more sensational because it happened to happen near the house of Joss Stone. Nowhere in the article has it said the men where after her but when you read the headline you might think they were. I understand it is troublesome that these men were wandering around the neighbourhood while they were obviously up to something. But it has nothing to do with Joss Stone so why put her name in the headline?

An affair gone bad :P

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/shame-of-affair-boss-outed-online-2297652.html

Summary

Timothy Haynes, an insurance firm director has been involved in a long time affair with Leena Puddick. It started in 2002 and in 2009 her husband found out when he found a text message on her cell phone. Instead of confronting Mr Haynes he set up an internet campaign, build a website, posted videos, used twitter and wrote on blogs about the affair. In court he admitted to all of this and Mr Haynes complained about how he and his wife needed counselling after the harassment.

Reaction

Well I think this has gone way too far. I understand that Mr Puddick is angry with Mr Haynes but with this harassment he does not only make life difficult for Mr Haynes but also for his wife and children. What I found to be really strange is that Mr Haynes wife Anya is still with him and only talks about how difficult it was that the information had been posted online. She never talks about the affair or says that she is angry with her husband.