Lest We Forget...................

[Adam]

Not sure what the big issue is.

The police probably advised Julie to go to the bank & pay the money back. Which she did do.

QC is getting carried away with his bias.again.

[guest7363]

I think you will find I’m talking of Julie going to the police, not the bank.

When you think about it Jane, it was a Bold/Risky decision by Julie, she could have wrecked her chance of working in Schools with a conviction/caution?  I say risky also, she could have lost her friend Susan Battersby because she now had to tell the police Susan was involved.


I’m saying, once she had opened up about her past it became risky, she could have damaged her career and lost her friend.  Nothing at all to do with the bank.

And, I’m not implying that Julie went to the police voluntary about the Cheque book fraud, this was answered in my 360 post, could she have or couldn’t she have kept quite?

[guest7363]

Not sure what the big issue is.

The police probably advised Julie to go to the bank & pay the money back. Which she did do.

QC is getting carried away with his bias.again.

Its a no brainier, of course they did.

[Jane]

I think you will find I’m talking of Julie going to the police, not the bank.

When you think about it Jane, it was a Bold/Risky decision by Julie, she could have wrecked her chance of working in Schools with a conviction/caution?  I say risky also, she could have lost her friend Susan Battersby because she now had to tell the police Susan was involved.


I’m saying, once she had opened up about her past it became risky, she could have damaged her career and lost her friend.  Nothing at all to do with the bank.

I did go back to take a look at what you'd said, but I failed to see that you'd implied what you've been accused of.

[guest29835]

I think you will find I’m talking of Julie going to the police, not the bank.

When you think about it Jane, it was a Bold/Risky decision by Julie, she could have wrecked her chance of working in Schools with a conviction/caution?  I say risky also, she could have lost her friend Susan Battersby because she now had to tell the police Susan was involved.


I’m saying, once she had opened up about her past it became risky, she could have damaged her career and lost her friend.  Nothing at all to do with the bank.

I've answered that above.

Your whole assumption here is that her actions were voluntary and on account of conscience. 

[guest29835]

And, I’m not implying that Julie went to the police voluntary about the Cheque book fraud, this was answered in my 360 post, could she have or couldn’t she have kept quite?

I think you are implying this.  It's the whole assumption behind the classic guilter approach to the case, which is to naively think that Julie was acting on her conscience.

[Jane]

My daughter worked in Colchester high street bank Jane, it was very rare banks would prosecute minor fraud, even against Staff members.

I would realistically have thought there to be a ceiling below which prosecution wouldn't be worth their while. They could cancel the 'fraudster's account and/or sack the employee.

[guest29835]

Its a no brainier, of course they did.

I rather have the impression that everything's a no-brainer for you.

[guest29835]

I would realistically have thought there to be a ceiling below which prosecution wouldn't be worth their while. They could cancel the 'fraudster's account and/or sack the employee.

Then I would say you're wrong.  Realistically of course.

[guest7363]

I would realistically have thought there to be a ceiling below which prosecution wouldn't be worth their while. They could cancel the 'fraudster's account and/or sack the employee.

Thats what happened Jane

[guest29835]

Not sure what the big issue is.

The police probably advised Julie to go to the bank & pay the money back. Which she did do.

QC is getting carried away with his bias.again.

Except that's not what actually happened, is it, silly bum.

[guest29835]

Thats what happened Jane

Were you there?

[guest7363]

I rather have the impression that everything's a no-brainer for you.

And, Oh Father?

[guest7363]

Were you there?

Here there and every where

[Adam]

Except that's not what actually happened, is it, silly bum.

What happened then?

Briefly please.