Should Prisoners Be Allowed To Sue?

[anotheoldgit]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/10341373/Muslim-prisoners-sue-over-contaminated-halal-pies.html

/// It is feared that if the legal cases are successful, they could leave the way open for a flood of similar claims from other prisoners. There are 11,248 Muslims in prisons in England and Wales, accounting for 13.1 per cent of the jail population. ///

[FredPuli43]

Yes, prisoners should be allowed to sue; they don't lose all the protection of the law because they are prisoners.

And the instant actions should be struck out as being, at best, injuria sine damnum i.e. without any loss to the complainantan and de minimis, too trivial. In any case, does not infringing human rights involve some conscious action on the part of the other party? There is none here.

[Orderlimit]

The figures quoted by sir-prize sounds about right for Eng & Wales i.e 13%

[FredPuli43]

It might be added that a Muslim who inadvertently eats pork or anything non-halal is not condemned in Islam, surely? You cannot be liable for eating something of which you were completely unaware and had no reason to believe was there

[Gromit]

Petal54,
It is not difficult to supply kosher/halal food in this country. There are many reputable suppliers. Unfortunately mistakes were made and the wrong food was supplied. We have control over suppliers, and do our best to feed inmates accordingly. We have no control over what foreign prisons supply as food and it shouldn't have any bearing on what we do. Just because prison meals may be crap in Islamabad does not mean we have to go down to their levels.

[Gromit]

Fred,
I was in Turkey a few months ago and the local muslims were tucking into Wild boar, which had been hunted locally. But then the Turks are big p*ssheads as well.

[FredPuli43]

Indeed, Gromit. You can get pork in Israeli restaurants too, but it is not called the Hebrew for pork; you have to know the correct term. But the fact that some Turks (or Jews) do not obey their religion's dietary laws would not justify our deliberately feeding the rest something which does offend those laws.

[Peter Pedant]

yes of course prisoners have rights

altho I am more worried about bullying and drug abuse in Y O Is
and if it takes a court order to do it
then roll on the judges !

[New Judge]

The nub of this matter is

(a) if pork was given to Muslim inmates it was not done deliberately; they were not pinned down and force fed pig meat. The prison authorities ordered non-pork products in good faith but were misled by their suppliers as many people in the UK were with the horsemeat scandal. Nobody died, nobody became ill, they were just swindled.

(b) the damage done is of no consequence, deserves no monetary compensation (giving them a few grand will not salve their religious conscience) and simply merits an apology.

(c) there is no "Human Rights" breach. I cannot see that any of the Articles of the convention have been breached (though a panel of judges in Strasbourg will no doubt see it differently).

Nobody is suggesting that our prisons should descend to the levels of squalor seen in some hell-holes across the globe but accidentally serving up a bit of pork in Strangeways is hardly reducing it to the Black Hole of Calcutta.

This country needs to get a grip.
(b)

[Gromit]

NJ

I wonder if these establishments have any form of insurance to cover the likelihood of being sued. If they don't, they should have.

[New Judge]

They are government establishments, Gromit and government departments do not trouble with insurance - they use the taxpayer to indemnify them against their incompetence and bad fortune. It's a pity actually because a decent insurance company would probably get its lawyers to fight such a frivolous and unworthy claim. The government, no doubt, will simply capitulate and shell out handfuls of taxpayers' dosh.

[naomi24]

Will financial compensation negate the perceived affront to their religion or to their human rights then? Like other Muslims who make a fuss about everything they choose to regard as an insult, they’re taking the p – and the human rights brigade is stupid enough to encourage it. They chose their way of life and if the result doesn’t suit them, tough. No, they shouldn’t be allowed to sue.

[anotheoldgit]

Gromit

From one of your recent posts AOG

// what about the risk to those other prisoners if they happen not to smoke? Will these prisoners not be able to sue the prison authorities at a later date if they happen to contact a lung disease? //

/// You seem to be accepting the right for prisoners to sue in that instance. Why are you questioning that right now? ///

And where did I ever say that? If you read the whole thing it was a post about prisoners not being allowed to smoke, to which I commented that it could lead to riots yet if they were allowed to smoke what was stopping some prisoners and prison officers from suing if they contacted passive smoking diseases in years to come.

Nowhere did I say that I agreed with them suing.

[ck1]

Should anybody be allowed to sue, incompetent doctors screwing up operations, prisoners not allowed to smoke, police falling over, what does a payout do to help? Medical negligence where a patient needs special care or changes to a house should be covered but I don't get the concept of being handed a sum of money for being 'wronged' anyway

[Old_Geezer]

They should e able to for prisoners do have some rights and ought not feel they are being treated badly outside the court prescribed punishment. However such should not be trivial, and a system should be there to ensure only genuine serious incidences get to court, where common sense will hopefully be applied. Genuine errors such as pork being used as an ingredient, when a Muslim is allowed to eat it if they are unaware, are clearly trivial. An official complaint and the public knowing is appropriate, suing in court, in the hope of gain, is not. Each complaint should be considered on its own merits.

[bednobs]

urrgghh i can't be bothered to read 50+ posts of what i will *assume* to be people aog bashing re the fact this story is about muslims, and AOG retaliating in the obscure way he normally does, so will just stick to the question. Yes, prisoners should be allowed to sue (in my opinion) but only if they have the money to do so, like any ordinary citizen would have to

[anotheoldgit]

It would seem from the usual Muslim Defence League, that this thread is appertaining only to Muslims.

Now let us READ the HEADLINE:

SHOULD PRISONERS BE ALLOWED TO SUE?

No mention of Muslims there, seeing that not ALL prisoners are Muslim.

Incidentally Gromit since you fight the Muslim corner with such vigour, may I suggest that you put a Niqab over your latest Avatar, it would be such an improvement.

[sp1814]

AOG

Errr...the headline didn't mention Muslims, but the text you copied under the question did.

[anotheoldgit]

bednobs

/// urrgghh i can't be bothered to read 50+ posts of what i will *assume* to be people aog bashing re the fact this story is about muslims, and AOG retaliating in the obscure way he normally does, ///

Then don't bother, is that 'OBSCURE' enough for you?

[FredPuli43]

AOG, if you wanted to ask whether prisoners should be allowed to sue, you could have settled for that simple question. Why then, did you choose your link about Muslims? It is irrelevant to the simple question, which speaks for itself. It is but an example of prisoners suing. Did you need an example ?If so, why did you choose that one?

[anotheoldgit]

sp1814

/// Errr...the headline didn't mention Muslims, but the text you copied under the question did. ///

I have no control over what is written or reported by the media.

Prisoners being allowed to sue was the subject matter of my thread, which I was prompted to enter due to a Telegraph report which stated that some prisoners (who happen to be Muslim) are suing the Government.