Only slacker ID thieves target the poor
ID fraudsters target well-off aged 26-45:
High-earning professionals aged 26-45 who own their own home are most at risk of falling victim to identity fraud, according to a survey published today.
The credit information firm Experian identified company directors, well-off couples and families in their thirties and forties, and young people in rented accommodation as key groups at risk. People earning more than £50,000 are almost three times more likely than average to become a victim, while directors of companies employing more than 50 people are five and a half times more at risk.
I thought it would’ve been pretty freakin’ obvious that you’re more likely to be targeted by ID thieves if you have money / assets / credit to be abused. You’d have to be a pretty fucking stupid criminal to go after personal details of people who either have bad or no credit histories.
Pretty interesting, though, that certain residential areas seemed to be far more likely to fall prey — their disposable income isn’t getting spent on crosscut shredders or something.
Re-opening an old case
One hopes the police have more forensic or circumstantial evidence connecting Peter Tobin and Vicky Hamilton, because the media is not reporting anything other than, “GASP! They were in the same town in 1991!”
Her father Michael Hamilton has said he plans to visit Tobin in jail to ask if he killed Vicky.
The case was reopened last November and police are planning to speak to Tobin in jail.
I mean, it’s POSSIBLE, his known behaviour shows that he is the TYPE of person who could’ve done it, but that doesn’t mean he did. If he’s the manipulative sort, he could cop to the crime and send the police and the missing girls’ family all over the place on a wild goose chase — he’d be controlling them.
No sympathy for Madeleine McCann’s parents whatsoever
It appears that any sympathy the older folks in our small town had for the McCanns has completely evaporated. At first it was, Oh, how sad, tragic, I’m crying, etc. etc. Now that they’ve been on the teevee daily, vowing to do whatever it takes (stay in Portugal, travel Europe) to find her, it’s They are paying for their callous neglect in leaving their kids alone.
When I was in Australia, I was taught about what is known as the Tall Poppy syndrome. With all the media coverage, the McCanns have been perceived as getting too big for their britches, and so deserve no pity for what has happened to their family.
There isn’t enough information at the moment for casual observers with an obsession with criminal profiling (like myself) to make any useful speculation (if any speculation is useful)*, but compared to earlier cases I’ve read about where the victim’s family has taken a very proactive role, the McCanns have received a lot more financial support and are more able to travel widely. Not knowing much about them, it’s hard to say if their behaviour is a reasonable reaction to a traumatic event (given that being able to stay on in a resort in Portugal or travel in Europe using donated money isn’t a bad way to holiday — sounds terrible of me to even think that, I know, but I can’t be alone in having been struck by that evil thought).
The WORST worst case scenario is that they are responsible for her disappearance, and they are milking the public outpouring of support to for personal benefit (eg. future selling of story to the tabloids). The BEST being that she has been kidnapped — although if there hasn’t even been a smidgen of kidnapper’s demand after so long, it’s unlikely that she will be returned for any reason.
Worst case scenarios tend to be really shitty like that.
* I do believe that the authorities need to withhold some information in order to successfully investigate a case, and sometimes they need to take on a more proactive approach to get help from the community (or get the perpetrator to make a mistake).
PC-crazy
The convicted armed robber who lodged a Legal Aid ‘human rights’ case about telephone calls (i.e. that a recorded message identifying the origin of the calls was a breach of his human rights) WON.
Judge Lord Glennie said this policy was not made with the authority of parliament.
He said: “In some societies, it might be regarded as obvious that a person convicted of a criminal offence and sentenced to a period of imprisonment should, for the duration of his imprisonment, be deprived of his civil rights.
“Such a notion has no place in our society.” said the judge.
Because, you know, convicted armed robbers showed due respect to other people’s civil rights and private property when they held a knife to their throats.
Scottish Conservative leader Annabel Goldie said: “Back in February when we first heard about this, I warned that we would be a laughing stock if this man won his case.
“There is a clear issue here - are the rights of the law-abiding majority being served ahead of the rights of a minority who happen to be in jail? It appears not.
“Prisoners forfeit a number of rights when they go to jail for their crimes, which should include the ability to dictate on what terms they make a phone call.”
Yup. I’m laughing.
First post from our own Internet connection
Well, we’re connected. Unfortunately, we’ve not got our wireless router plugged in yet, so it’s my turn to download e-mails (several thousand in spam, last week it was over 2,000!) so I’m posting while I wait.
The craft fair(s) were cool, two for the price of one, and I got some supplies (card stock, a cutting surface, cheap yarn). I was also given a lesson in learning to knit and a little kit of my own (thank you, Karen). So I am knitting and purling up a storm on my test scarf while Neil’s mother, a knitting veteran, keeps an eye on my progress (and she’ll be the one teaching me how to cast off). I am determined to get us to a Stitch and Bitch in Glasgow (or somewhere closer to home) because it’ll be fun. And I see knit toys in my future.
(Lisiepeasie, there were more card / papercraft stalls than anything, a few wool / knitting stalls, and loads of interesting crafts I’d never thought of trying. The one that really got me was the sewing machine booth, where the sewing machines on display did pretty much everything but make you a cup of tea. It’s well worth going to these huge craft fairs, and there’s another one in March 2007!)
I will upload some pictures as soon as we sort out this wireless connection as I don’t want to spend more time than necessary while we have to share this wired connection.
Prostitution in Scotland
Some are concerned that new rules penalising prostitutes and their clients will induce prostitutes to ply their trade in more remote (and hence, dangerous) areas.
George Lyon, the deputy finance minister, said the new rules would prevent either prostitutes or clients using residential areas to trade.
Residents of areas such as Leith Links in Edinburgh have long complained about prostitutes leaving needles and condoms in the area.
He said: “The current legal situation only criminalises women who sell sexual services - not the men who buy the services. There is a need to redress this balance to protect communities from anti-social behaviour arising from street prostitution, whether caused by the seller or purchaser.”
Mr Lyon also announced the consultation on draft guidelines for local authorities that recommend men caught buying sex pay for an education course on the damage prostitution causes to women.
In Hampshire, only four of 398 men who took the course re-offended. The one-day programme invited men to consider their actions from the viewpoint of their closest female relatives.
This is assuming that the men who were caught value their female relatives. Of those 398 men, how many didn’t get caught re-offending?
Perhaps Scotland should take a leaf from Singapore’s book. The Singapore government’s pragmatic attitude towards the regulation of prostitution is quite amusing and kinda kitschy, but I think the rules do help to protect the registered prostitutes. I don’t think any one government will ever eliminate the demand for prostitution — like drugs — so it makes sense to regulate the industry in order to make it safer for all involved.
Violent crime by women increases by 50%
Wow, this is scary. Violent non-sexual assaults by women in Scotland grew by 50% in the last four years!
Vince Egan, a forensic psychologist at Glasgow Caledonian University, said a cocktail of run-away female empowerment and binge drinking is primarily responsible for the surge in aggression.
He said: “It’s drink and girl-power. Everyone thinks of the Spice Girls being an empowering thing. Suddenly there is a collective view that girls are here to do everything they like, but unfortunately this also gives them the right to do stuff that is just as idiotic as men do.
“The social conditions that might have inhibited women from behaving anti-socially aren’t with us anymore. When you mix this with the acceptability of binge-drinking, it’s no surprise that there are more female criminals”.
I didn’t realise the Spice Girls advocated violence. Personally, I reckon that a lot of people have a diminished sense of personal responsibility, especially the younger generations, and that is why they think it’s all right to do something extremely anti-social and as long as they have justified it to themselves no one else should have an opinion.
Susan Batchelor, a criminologist at Glasgow University who works with female prisoners, said: “The primary problem is an increase in drug use. Most of these crimes are a direct result of a drug problem. Women may be stealing or working as prostitutes or they may assault someone they are stealing from, but the underlying cause is almost always drugs”.
So let’s legalise (but heavily regulate) drugs. The less underground addicts have to be, the better.
At least Glasgow isn’t boring… I guess
Attacks on people in Glasgow? A “girl gang” and a “gang of up to 12 youths”? What attracts adolescents to meaningless violence? Whether or not the attackers had some score to settle with the victims (and the article says both attacks were unprovoked), it really boggles my mind. Even if I was a teenager and desperate to be perceived as cool, I would definitely draw the line at hurting someone like that.
What kind of people would commit such violence? Are they unemployed, with low self-esteem, doing poorly at school (if they even show up regularly), products of dysfunctional families? Are they easily influenced by more charismatic peers? They would, I imagine, have committed other crimes before, although perhaps not quite this shocking — something like shoplifting? Might they have bullied other, weaker children?
It just seems so senseless.
(By the way, four people are treated for knife wounds in Scotland EVERY SINGLE DAY.)