Take a read [http://www.thenorthernecho.co.uk/news/4582836.Sex_change_killer_wins_switch_to_women___s_jail/]
I was gob smacked to read that a convicted killer and rapist won his case to be moved to a womens prison.
He is undergoing a sex change and in order to get the last part done he needs to live life as a woman, hence move to a womens prison. He challenged the Justice Secratarys decision to send him to a male prison in the high court. Of course this was paid with legal aid, meaning the tax payer has paid the bill.
The judge ruled that it is infringing his human rights not to allow him the operation so he is allowed the move. Apparently it will cost an additional £80,000 to keep him segragated from the female population.
Do you agree with the judges decision? Should he have been allowed to use public finances to make his case?
I was gob smacked to read that a convicted killer and rapist won his case to be moved to a womens prison.
He is undergoing a sex change and in order to get the last part done he needs to live life as a woman, hence move to a womens prison. He challenged the Justice Secratarys decision to send him to a male prison in the high court. Of course this was paid with legal aid, meaning the tax payer has paid the bill.
The judge ruled that it is infringing his human rights not to allow him the operation so he is allowed the move. Apparently it will cost an additional £80,000 to keep him segragated from the female population.
Do you agree with the judges decision? Should he have been allowed to use public finances to make his case?