As can be seen, the judgment laid down two heads of liability: A commentator noted that Fyler v Fyler  and AG v The Corporation of Leicester,  two decisions on knowing assistance in the s which predated Barnes v Addy, did not mention the moral quality of the breach induced or assisted at all.
Director of internal audit and inspection Mary Handley No wonder the charity needs so much money and may be prepared to be dishonest in order to get it. To get to the truth of the matter, one has to examine how the money was spent.
Services directly for children and families. Child protection helplines and websites. Public awareness, education, influencing and motivation to take action.
Partnerships with other child protection organisations. Professional training on safeguarding and child protection. Research on the causes of, and responses to, child abuse. It is a wonderfully ambiguous title which no doubt could cover a multitude of sins if that was the intention.
Even if you wade through the very lengthy report, it is hard to see exactly where most of this money goes. The more one looks, the more vague and complicated it becomes. Unfortunately, the influence that they wield over politicians sometimes includes the use of out-dated and inaccurate information, often wrapped up in a blanket of ambiguity.
The organisation has form too and has already been proved to have been misleading people, according to the Advertising Standards Authority. For example, inthe NSPCC was forced to take down an advertising campaign that claimed that 1 in 6 children were being sexually abused.
It turned out that It is necessary to be dishonest report commissioned by the NSPCC and from which the data was taken was 9 years old and, amongst other things did not define what was and what was not classified as sexual abuse.
Meanwhile, the MPs, Home Office, police and just about everyone else had swallowed the lot believing it to be true. The result was a whole flurry of new legislation, most of which was directed at the wrong target.
Our study Child Maltreatment in the United Kingdom is an authoritative piece of research that is held in high regard and has been cited in numerous journals and parliamentary debates.
At the time it provided — and still provides — the best estimate of the prevalence of child abuse in the UK. Oh, the stupidity and gullibility of weak, pathetic politicians who dare not argue against the Status Quo. Today, that situation is the same with everyone from the Queen to the Beckhams supporting it.
As a result, everyone is afraid to criticise what is much less of a charity and more of a multi-million pound business. A Home Office spokesman said the government would continue to work with groups like the NSPCC to protect the most vulnerable people in our society.
Of course it would say that; to do otherwise would bring the tabloids down on its head and would also be tantamount to political suicide; there we see the guilt trip again. It was as if they had all fallen foul of some awful, spotty contagious disease.
The real tragedy is this: Britain has one of the lowest child populations per head in the EU but also has the largest child protection industry. Britain also has more family intrusive laws, more child protection charities, more possible ways to commit a sexual offence and more child protection officials than any other country in Europe.
Much, if not most of this is driven and maintained by fear and guilt; guilt at ignoring child abuse for years and fear that there is a paedophile on every street corner, fear that every man and now woman who shows an interest in children must be out to harm them; fear of criticism for speaking common sense and, for those in power, fear of political damage unless every new, draconian measure is carried through Parliament without discussion, without debate and without dissension.
My personal view is that the NSPCC and charities like it, although initially full of good intentions, are now nothing but corrupt, greedy organisations that are prepared to do whatever it takes in order to con the rest of us out of our hard-earned cash in order to support themselves.
What is more despicable is that they are prepared to use implied guilt in order to do it.
That suggests to me that the NSPCC is simply another department of an over-sized, intrusive government; a department that everyone is too afraid to close down. It may be though that they are too arrogant and have become too powerful to be bothered to use it.
If they can justify what appears to be a huge waste of our money that could otherwise be spent on genuinely protecting children within the family where most abuse occurs, if they can justify what appears to be a huge con trick to get money out of the rest of us and if they can justify using often exaggerated, out of date or misleading information to force politicians into making unnecessary, draconian and intrusive laws that allow people to be locked up on little or no evidence… if they can do any of that, the comments box is at the bottom of the page.
Tony January 18, at 1: James October 2, at You should be grateful for the bubbles you all live in. You have no idea of the real world. You keep your pennies. Dee October 10, at Reading the comments and main article I have a few observations, we are all really gullible especially when it involves children allowing ourselves to be taken in by glossy ads.
There are other ways to make a difference but it requires commitment and effort. Tom Burey October 17, at 3:Inside The Fraternity Of Haters And Losers Who Drove Donald Trump To The GOP Nomination. From political power brokers to the entire island of Manhattan, a varied cast of taunting insiders has inadvertently driven Donald Trump's lifelong revenge march toward the White House.
Dishonesty is to act without honesty. It is used to describe a lack of probity, cheating, lying, or being deliberately deceptive or a lack in integrity, knavishness, perfidiosity, corruption or treacherousness.
Dishonesty is the fundamental component of a majority of offences relating to the acquisition, conversion and disposal of property (tangible or intangible) defined in criminal law such. Berkeley, CA — "Good morning! My remarks center this morning on critical thinking in every domain of knowledge and belief.
And my subtext is something like this. These 10 ways to get your kids to stop lying will help you get to the cause of their lies and give you some ideas to help them stop. The accumulated effects of academically dishonest behavior could have drastic impacts in the near future if the problem is not confronted and resolved.
“Davis and Ludvigson () found that 98 percent of students who cheated before entering university also continued to cheat while at the university” (Anderman and Murdock 13).
Eusebius the Liar? Some very odd statements are in circulation about Eusebius Pampilus the Historian. Recently someone quoted one of them at me, as a put-down.