You need to be logged in to your Sky Poker account above to post discussions and comments.

You might need to refresh your page afterwards.

The downfall of Hannah Ingram-Moore and the Captain Tom Foundation is a tale of human folly

123578

Comments

  • Tikay10Tikay10 Member, Administrator, Moderator Posts: 170,984
  • VespaPXVespaPX Member Posts: 12,458
    Tikay10 said:


    This is the young lady in question....




    Far Left lunatic
  • EnutEnut Member Posts: 3,563
    Tikay10 said:


    This is the young lady in question....




    Very sad, I hope she gets the treatment she needs.
  • goldongoldon Member Posts: 9,141
    Has anyone asked her the reason why she did this...... may-be we'll find out.


    A woman is set to appear in court accused of pouring faeces over a memorial for Sir Captain Tom Moore.

    Madeleine Budd, 21, of Kedleston Avenue, Manchester was arrested by the Metropolitan Police in central London on Sunday.

    It comes after a video posted online showing human faeces being poured onto the life-sized statue of the World War Two veteran in Thistley Meadow, Hatton, south Derbyshire.

    Budd was charged with criminal damage by the Derbyshire Police on Monday.

    She is set to appear at Westminster Magistrates’ Court on Tuesday morning.

    Sir Tom shot to national fame when he raised almost £33m for NHS charities during the first wave of the coronavirus pandemic by walking laps of his garden aged 100.

    He was later knighted by the Queen before he died with Covid-19 in February 2021.
  • goldongoldon Member Posts: 9,141
    Tomorrow is a good day.......least we forget.


  • EssexphilEssexphil Member Posts: 8,845
    I'm not defending what Ms Budd did. Nasty act.

    But I would say 2 things in relation to this:-

    1. She is clearly mentally disturbed. She appears to need considerable psychiatric help, rather than punishment. Presumably from the very NHS Sir Tom was raising money for.

    2. I was staggered to read that the starting point for pouring poo on a statue is 18 months inside. Really? That appears to be massively more than for destroying a monument. More than almost all violent offences short of Murder/Armed Robbery.
  • goldongoldon Member Posts: 9,141
    You don't have to be "Mad" too have Mental Problems....... look at me.! cough!

    " Legal Eagle Phil" surely mental assessment required first.

    She would be wise to avoid a jury...
  • EssexphilEssexphil Member Posts: 8,845
    edited October 2022
    goldon said:

    You don't have to be "Mad" too have Mental Problems....... look at me.! cough!

    " Legal Eagle Phil" surely mental assessment required first.

    She would be wise to avoid a jury...

    There were 2 possible strategies, logically. Either to claim that she is sufficiently mad so as to be not guilty, or less so, and bring it up at the Social Enquiry Reports (Which happen between conviction and sentencing). I don't have access to her file-but it is clear that her Lawyers have chosen the latter option.

    Juries decide on whether someone is Guilty. Judges decide on the sentence.

    I have no idea what sentence she will, or should, get. That will depend on a whole range of factors, none of which we know. My issue was with the Starting point. 18 months inside.

    That is more than the starting point for GBH. For the most serious cases of Death by Careless Driving. Burglary without violence.
  • goldongoldon Member Posts: 9,141
    It's a Mote Point G.B.H. to a statue interesting.
  • EssexphilEssexphil Member Posts: 8,845
    goldon said:

    It's a Mote Point G.B.H. to a statue interesting.

    That's kind of the point I am making.

    If you threw faeces over a person, that would (IMO) be closer to ABH than the (more serious) GBH-there is (normally) no lasting damage. More likely the offence of Outraging Public Decency (which I expect was the charge here). Normally need broken bones for a GBH.

    And, obviously, I would much rather neither statues or people were attacked in this way. But surely attacking a statue is less bad than attacking a person...
  • goldongoldon Member Posts: 9,141
    Clearly Guilty by own actions. But is she a bad person or mearley misguided, would prison sentence serve any purpose better than fine or community service.
    Would making an example of her stop others performing similar stupidity in the future.
    Me Finks not....
  • lucy4lucy4 Member Posts: 8,109
    A charity founded by the chancellor, Jeremy Hunt, paid more than £110,000 – two-thirds of its income – to his former political adviser Adam Smith, who lost his job over a lobbying scandal.

    Patient Safety Watch, which was set up to research preventable harm in healthcare, paid Smith as its sole employee and chief executive about 66% of its income in the year ending January 2022.

    The charity is part-funded by Hunt but also solicits donations from the general public on its website.

    It was established in 2019 to conduct research, but appears to have produced no papers since then. A message on its website says: “We have an ambitious research programme looking into a wide variety of patient safety issues. We will publish details of our forthcoming research on these pages.”

    However, the page for reports says: “Our reports will be published here – please check back soon for our first piece of research ….”

    Its main output appears to be a blog and publishing newsletters from Hunt in his capacity as founder and trustee of the charity. The charity’s annual accounts explains that it chose not to publish its research – some of which has been completed – while the NHS remained under significant Covid-related pressure and it would only do so “when the climate is right”.

    Smith resigned as an adviser to Hunt as culture secretary in 2012 after the Leveson inquiry, over a scandal in which he had exchanged messages with a lobbyist for Rupert Murdoch’s News Corp. The company was seeking permission for a takeover of BSkyB (now Sky) at the time, with Hunt in a quasi-judicial role.

    When he stepped down, Smith said he acted without the authority of his boss and that he had allowed an impression to be created of too close a relationship between News Corp and the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport.

    Smith is now currently employed by Hunt as a parliamentary aide, returning to work for him in 2020.

    Smith’s £110,000-£120,000 salary, first reported by the Civil Society publication, represents more than two-thirds of the charity’s annual income of £164,400 for the financial year ending January 2022. Its annual accounts report that £106,000 of its income came from donations and legacies, and a further £58,400 from other trading activities.

    The accounts show that its only employee received remuneration of £47,232 in 2020, and that this more than doubled to £113,600 in 2021. Its 2022 accounts refer to a salary band of £110,000 to £120,000.

    The three trustees of Patient Safety Watch do not receive remuneration. The trustees are Hunt, charity worker James Titcombe and chartered accountant David Grunberg.

    Hunt and Patient Safety Watch did not respond to a request for comment.
  • HAYSIEHAYSIE Member Posts: 36,442
    edited June 2023
    Captain Tom Moore's lockdown fundraising is most beautiful moment of the past century - beating David Attenborough meeting gorillas, the Lionesses winning the Euros... and even the MOON landing, according to poll




    There have been many meaningful moments over the last century, but some pull on the heartstrings more than others. Now the most beautiful moment of the century has been revealed.

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12209027/Captain-Tom-Moores-lockdown-fundraising-beautiful-moment-past-century.html
  • HAYSIEHAYSIE Member Posts: 36,442
    edited July 2023
    Captain Tom charity issues statement on donations as daughter 'uses name to build spa'



    The charity linked to Captain Tom Moore has broken their silence amid claims the hero's daughter used his name to build a spa and pool at their home.

    Hannah Ingram-Moore and husband Colin, said they wanted to build a building dedicated to the veteran to use as office space at their seven-bed home in Bedfordshire.

    In the planning application, they referenced the charity Captain Tom Foundation in the design and access statement, despite putting it forward in their own names.



    https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/captain-tom-charity-issues-statement-on-donations-as-daughter-uses-name-to-build-spa/ar-AA1dpMBS?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=74476d63390e44489917bf8f8059996b&ei=42
  • HAYSIEHAYSIE Member Posts: 36,442
    edited July 2023
    HAYSIE said:

    Captain Tom charity issues statement on donations as daughter 'uses name to build spa'



    The charity linked to Captain Tom Moore has broken their silence amid claims the hero's daughter used his name to build a spa and pool at their home.

    Hannah Ingram-Moore and husband Colin, said they wanted to build a building dedicated to the veteran to use as office space at their seven-bed home in Bedfordshire.

    In the planning application, they referenced the charity Captain Tom Foundation in the design and access statement, despite putting it forward in their own names.



    https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/captain-tom-charity-issues-statement-on-donations-as-daughter-uses-name-to-build-spa/ar-AA1dpMBS?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=74476d63390e44489917bf8f8059996b&ei=42

    Planners order demolition of pool and building at home of Captain Tom’s daughter




    In 2022, planners subsequently received a retrospective planning application for a “part retrospective erection of detached single-storey building (revised proposals)”, which was refused, the spokesperson said.

    The council spokesperson said: “An enforcement notice requiring the demolition of the now-unauthorised building was issued and this is now subject to an appeal to the Planning Inspectorate.”

    Efforts have been made to approach Hannah Ingram-Moore for comment.

    The Captain Tom Foundation said, in a statement to a national newspaper: “At no time were The Captain Tom Foundation’s independent trustees aware of planning permissions made by Mr and Mrs Ingram-Moore purporting to be in the foundation’s name.

    “Had they been aware of any applications, the independent trustees would not have authorised them.”



    https://uk.yahoo.com/news/planners-order-demolition-pool-building-173708702.html
  • lucy4lucy4 Member Posts: 8,109
  • HAYSIEHAYSIE Member Posts: 36,442
    lucy4 said:


    She is a piece of sh1t.
Sign In or Register to comment.