, on sky news. Basically, in late 2008, an employer found that one of his employees, whom he'd trusted to have
access to the company cheque book, had abused this, and written himself a cheque for £845. Mr. Cremer, the employer, reacted by tying the man's
hands, writing out a sign that said "THIEF. I Stole £845 AM ON MY WAY To Police Station", hanging it around his neck, and marching him to the police
station. The thief, Mr. Gilbert, was later cautioned for the theft, and Mr. Cremer faced a charge of false imprisonment, though this charge was later
However, the case didn't end there, as the thief decided to take civil action against his former employer, for the "stress, humiliation and trauma" he
suffered. Today, it was decided that the employer must pay £5,000, as well as £29,000 in legal costs. This was an out of court settlement- Mr.
Cremer had wanted to fight the case in court, but quickly discovered it would be too expensive. As a result of this judgement, the new defendant is
going to have to sell his house.
To me, this is craziness. I can see the argument that Mr. Cremer perhaps over-reacted, however, I can understand his anger, and the thief should face
the consequences of his actions- they are only self-inflicted. I don't really understand why being embarrased warrants £5,000 in compensation. It
just seems to me like this case was used as an excuse by lawyers/socilitors to earn a nice packet. £29,000 in legal fees, for an out of court case,
is ridiculous, and just goes to show how the legal system can be easily abused. I appreciate that this is his own doing, he didn't have to react so
extremely. However, talk about a totally disproportionate punishment, totally compounded by the fact that the actual criminal got only a
edit on 16-2-2011 by ScepticalBeliever because: (no reason given)