[Closed] Jamie Oliver - Are some people beyond redemption?

did he cycle to work then?

that's a bit daily mail, would you like to post the full story (on the correct forum)so we can make considered opinion.

Posting in the wrong forum.. Are some people beyond redemption?

I figured you could find the full story. Mods please move to chat 😳

I'm surprised his wife would post a thread like this tbh.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/3am/celebrity-news/jamie-olivers-restaurant-hires-convicted-4449275

I'm for rehabilitation for what it's worth but this seems commercial suicide.

Any reliable links rather than the mirror?

It's the job of the justice system to punish criminals, not the general population.

Eh? He's done his time hasn't he. Or is he supposed to never work again and never reintegrate in to society?

Edit: ^^^ well put

Did jamie Oliver personally recruit him?

[i]Eh? He's done his time hasn't he. Or is he supposed to never work again and never reintegrate in to society?[/i]

So has the convicted rapist footballer, but a lot of people don't want to see him get back into the game.

Or is that another thread?

Hasn't Jamie Oliver done quite a lot in hiring previous offenders and people who've struggled to get jobs? So a guy leaves jail and is picked up by a scheme to do just this?

Also, assuming this person will get a job somewhere, surely a job where he is in a kitchen and away from the general public for long hours is exactly what the baying masses would want?

I guess he'd rather see a punished and rehabilitated offender moving on and doing something productive with their life over being left on a downward spiral into who knows what sort of issues due to being isolated, vilified and unemployable. I agree with him. The former is a better outcome for everyone. Brave of J.O., and could backfire, but he's putting his money where his mouth is.

So has the convicted rapist footballer, but a lot of people don't want to see him get back into the game

[url= http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/11166299/Jamie-Oliver-takes-on-paedophile-as-restaurant-apprentice.html ]Here's the Telegraph Drac if that's any better[/url].

After reading the article again, he probably wasn't right to hire him. Not because he was a convicted rapist, but because the scheme exists to help disadvantaged young people who've had a tough upbringing, whereas this lad hasnt had a tough upbringing, he inflicted that on another young person.

This decision is very altruistic however I think Jamie is going to find the public less accepting than he is.

Really fail to see the problem here.

People who want the sanctions for these kinds of crimes to be greater or longer-lasting need to take it up with their elected representatives, rather than criticising employers who, in Jamie Oliver's case at least, are trying to rehabilitate people back into society in a perfectly legal and proper way.

The Telegraph report is almost identical to the Mirror's. Does Junkyard do copying and pasting for The Telegraph.

This decision is very altruistic however I think Jamie is going to find the public less accepting than he is.

Yeah that's a better way to put it, however the dramatic news reports don't help.

from the telegraph article -

He was put on the Sex Offenders' Register indefinitely and banned from being near young girls without permission, according to reports.

that alone would be enough to put me off giving the paedophile a job

the scheme exists to help disadvantaged young people who've had a tough upbringing, whereas this lad hasnt had a tough upbringing, he inflicted that on another young person

The article I read didn't say anything about his upbringing.

I don't quite understand the title - is "beyond redemption" a reference to the ex-con or to JO?

Either way, it demonstrates little faith in the ability of our justice system to administer appropriate punishments and in the apparently open-hearted way a businessman is prepared to put his neck out.

The article I read didn't say anything about his upbringing.

Good point.

Edit: Unfortunately too late to strike through my post in light of the flaws in my logic.

The ex con - Sorry was half asleep!

Is it not quite possible that this chap will now be working alongside colleagues who have been a victim of the type of crimes he has actually committed?

Good article on similar subject(right to rehabilitation) here http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/oct/16/ched-evans-punished-rapist-rehabilitation only about Ched Evans. As long as he's not working with kids it shouldn't be a problem.

Im glad to see that others on here [s]support[/s] accept the decision to hire the guy.
Clearly what did, without question was very wrong. There seems to be this view in society that he can never redeem himself because of the crime he committed. He's served his sentence and the are restrictions on his life too.
At what point is he considered to have paid his dues? When he's been hung from the nearest tree?

Explain what is unreliable about the mirror please drac.

As regards the Ched Evans case, the principal problem for me seems to be the lack of contrition, which has made life even more difficult for his victim. I would have seen that as a vital first step of rehabilitation that needs to happen before any thought of employment.

I thought the Blades had sacked him, but I see reports that Nigel Clough has spoken to him and is awaiting the club owners' verdict on re-hiring him?

Explain what is unreliable about the mirror please drac.

Good question, the tabloids are renowned for their reliable and unbiased ethical reporting on news items (or things they deem newsworthy) after all.

Only the other day, I saw the Sun running a front page tagline, "CLASSICAL MUSIC SPECIAL - I twerk my boobs to Motzart".

Out of interest,
Who would be happy to work alongside someone who had been convicted of raping a 12 year old when they was 19.
If it had been many years ago and he had proven to been a model citizen since but just out of prison.

Also if Jamie hires other ex offenders will there be a problem as far as would they view him as they would have done back on the wing. And with alice gross not even buried a lot of people would still be very emotional about such subjects.

But if a job and a chance to rejoin society could be what it takes to stop him reoffending rather than sitting around all day in a bedsit on benifit.

Cougar - the tabloids may not always cover the stories you would like to read, but they are surprisingly fastidious about being accurate.

Eg. Most of the phone hacking derived stories were true, just not very ethical.

The daily star being an exception of course.

They happily make stuff up.

The daily star being an exception of course.

They happily make stuff up.

See below

[img] [/img]

Yeh, but it's cheaper than the Mirror.

Or did they make that up too...

they are surprisingly fastidious about being accurate.

This is a wind up, right? They twist the truth, they misquote, they love to miss details out too so people misinterpret the real truth and love a bit of sensationalism.

Either we lock people up and throw away the key, or execute them, or we have to have a system that enables them to be reintegrated back into society. I'd prefer the latter, and good luck to Jamie. Let's hope the media don't ruin it for all involved.

I've not followed the Ched Evans case but again, once sentence is served, he has a right to live in society that ideally requires him to to gain employment. Sadly the media storm may prevent that.

As I understand it, not having followed it closely, but he is still hoping to get the conviction quashed, hence apparent lack of contrition. Wasn't this tbe case when some nutter named the victim on twitter as well?

It's cheds girlfriend running the campaign to clear his name..
Either she must really love him or she just does not want to get off the gravy train.

As I understand it, not having followed it closely, but he is still hoping to get the conviction quashed, hence apparent lack of contrition. Wasn't this tbe case when some nutter named the victim on twitter as well?

That was the one.

Ah, I see he's lost a couple of appeals, but is going to the Criminal Cases Review Commission shortly. I wonder on what basis he contests it, and if he will accept the verdict if it goes against him there? You would need pretty significant new evidence or grounds to overturn it.

His girlfriend isn't on a gravy train. Her millionaire father is bank rolling the campaign to clear his name, apparently.

I've not followed the case, try and avoid tabloid frenzy gossip, but this case seems complicated.

So, for those who think that people convicted of certain offences should never be given employment ever again, what's the alternative? Presumably living out the rest of their days living on state benefits?

Apart from anything else, who's more likely to pose an ongoing or future risk of serious offending behaviour: the person who served their sentence and has been able to rebuild their life, gain a sense of purpose and make a positive contribution, or the one we've told has no role to play in society?

Well four years inside for what could be the total ruining of a young girls life is ridiculously low, and as for rehabilitation, do people really believe the system can rehabilitate ?

Only an individual can rehabilitate themselves, they can only do that once they fully accept their wrongdoing, accept their punishment and complete their punishment in full.

Oliver is nothing more than a promoter of the Saint Jamie Oliver Corporation.

with regards to sleeping with a woman who is paraletic being rape,

There is a high street near me where at 2 in the morning on a Saturday is packed with young woman with skirts up there arses staggering down the road.

Now if I was laying in bed at 12 o'clock at night thinking I fancy a shag, get myself spruced up and hit the town looking to pick up one of the previously described woman, not snatch but chirps.
And was successful that on the chip scale of wrong would top the scales.

If I went out for the evening met a young woman and we got on famously, I paced myself but she was knocking them back. And I had to literally hold her up while escorting her back to my place that would also rate high on the scale.

But if we are both off our tits, staggering off trying and failing to do the walk from the monkeys, it would not even register.
Because if a woman can be absorbed (doubt that's the right word) from the responsibility of there actions because of being too far gone surely the same applies to men.

Also if a young woman off her tits glassed another woman would she be afforded the same irresponsibility as if she shagged an ugly bloke and regretted it.