1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Tube suicide bomber left mystery £121,000

Discussion in 'Speaker's Corner' started by crashuk, 19 Jan 2006.

  1. crashuk

    PermaBanned

    Joined: 7 Dec 2005

    Posts: 2,691

  2. tb2000

    Wise Guy

    Joined: 7 Jul 2003

    Posts: 1,636

    Location: West Country, England

    Totally agree, but we all know this probably won't happen. :mad:
     
  3. mejinks

    Mobster

    Joined: 28 Oct 2002

    Posts: 4,971

    Location: Port Toilet

    ^^^ Agreed, however the likelyhood is that it will be spent on converting yet another church into a mosque.
     
  4. crashuk

    PermaBanned

    Joined: 7 Dec 2005

    Posts: 2,691

    or pay for the trains that were damaged.
     
  5. JimmyEatWorms

    PermaBanned

    Joined: 18 May 2003

    Posts: 4,686

    Location: Londinium

    Churches are being turned into mosques? Are you talking about churches that are actively being used? Where? When?
     
  6. Visage

    PermaBanned

    Joined: 13 Jan 2005

    Posts: 10,708

    We should send them all back.
     
  7. afraser2k

    Sgarrista

    Joined: 18 Oct 2002

    Posts: 7,515

    Location: Glasgow

    Why should any of his money be paid to the victims of his bomb?

    We still have inheritance laws in the UK and unless the law can prove his money was gained from being paid to bomb London then the money goes to his family, simple as.

    And so there we have the main point to this non-story.

    The newspaper has no evidence that the money was gained from terrorism or business venture(s) and is just out to cause "moral outrage" amongst the public.
     
  8. peter_hutson

    Wise Guy

    Joined: 30 Oct 2003

    Posts: 1,387

    Location: Aberdeen

    If a loss of churches upsets you mate, don't ever come to Aberdeen. They are all being turned into pubs! I await the onslaught of angry "send the publicans" home posts. Or maybe I'm missing the thrust of your disapproval?
     
  9. cleanbluesky

    Capodecina

    Joined: 2 Nov 2004

    Posts: 24,654

    Who cares how it was 'earned'? I'd still rather see the money go to a nice memorial or something
     
  10. @if ®afiq

    Soldato

    Joined: 3 May 2003

    Posts: 6,080

    That money belongs to his and, according to the Law, now belongs to his family. There is no evidence that it was money he got for the terrorist act - unless you are advocating collective punishment?
     
  11. afraser2k

    Sgarrista

    Joined: 18 Oct 2002

    Posts: 7,515

    Location: Glasgow

    Then the bomber's family goes to court and sues the government for even more money. Unfortunately unless it's proven he got paid to bomb London then it goes to the family.
     
  12. Weebull

    Capodecina

    Joined: 18 Oct 2002

    Posts: 13,308

    Location: Belfast

    His father isn't guilty of anything, why should he be punished by having what is now rightfully his money taken away from him?
     
  13. cleanbluesky

    Capodecina

    Joined: 2 Nov 2004

    Posts: 24,654

    Why should I have my money taken from me for speeding? Because there are no rules and I'd say the money would be best serve as repayment... it would also serve as a good message to the next potential suicide bomber not to take kickbacks ...
     
  14. Event Horizon

    Wise Guy

    Joined: 18 Oct 2002

    Posts: 2,169

    Location: Let me out!



    Edit* From the initial posts it looked as though the money had been "Left" at the scene. That changes what i said before. He should face the same investigation as anyone else who has large ammounts of money yet cant prove their earnings.
     
    Last edited: 20 Jan 2006
  15. skiba

    Mobster

    Joined: 27 Aug 2004

    Posts: 2,955

    Location: Singapore ExPat

  16. Bear

    Capodecina

    Joined: 24 Oct 2002

    Posts: 12,593

    Location: Bucks and Edinburgh


    Because you would have broken the law, the father didnt.
     
  17. cleanbluesky

    Capodecina

    Joined: 2 Nov 2004

    Posts: 24,654

    The son did, and the money doesn't belong to his father yet.
     
  18. crashuk

    PermaBanned

    Joined: 7 Dec 2005

    Posts: 2,691

    ok if i damage a train i have to pay for it, if i chop of some1s limb i have to pay conpensation for it. why is he different?
     
  19. JimmyEatWorms

    PermaBanned

    Joined: 18 May 2003

    Posts: 4,686

    Location: Londinium

    Erm...maybe because you breaking the law. This guys father has not.

    :confused: :confused: :confused:

    Edit: oops...already been said. Must remember to read the whole thread. :)

    WOuld you also support all convicted criminals being stripped of all their assetts irrespective of how they earned the money?
     
    Last edited: 20 Jan 2006
  20. afraser2k

    Sgarrista

    Joined: 18 Oct 2002

    Posts: 7,515

    Location: Glasgow

    Because the guy is dead. It's a completely different scenario.

    Actually from reading the article it appears that the bomber has not left any will at all and that his father is making legal moves to take over the estate. From what I can tell (from Google) this document is merely issued by the High Court to a person to allow them to administer the estate of the deceased who died without a will.

    So in that effect it's merely a legal move by the bomber's father to control the finances left over.

    While the situation of the son's death is terrorism legally there is nothing anyone can do, as far as I know, to stop him becoming the administrator and thus no compensation. I don't think it will stop any civil action being taken for a compensation payout though.