A question of morals vs confidentiality vs legals vs good neighbourliness

The place for more serious off topic questions, light hearted banter and friendly chat.
User avatar
orraloon
Posts: 5141
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2003 08:45 am

A question of morals vs confidentiality vs legals vs good neighbourliness

Postby orraloon » Fri Sep 06, 2019 18:26 pm

Right. This has come up today.

Family member is in process of buying a new build house, with part exchange of their current property. Through off the record chat with the selling agent working for the developer, not for the current owner, handling the on-sale of the current house, seems the prospective purchaser is someone who has been convicted of some spectacularly bad violent and life endangering crimes. I'm surprised the individual has not been banged up for life. Not current owners' problem, they'll be out of there.

I'm sitting here thinking sh1t if that was me, would I feel morally obliged to alert the neighbours to what is due to happen in the immediate future? I know for sure I would not want that total d1ckhead living next door to me. And no doubt as and when the truth comes out, all hell will break loose anyway.

Yeah this is a cycling forum, where some appear unable to 'forgive' David Millar. But Millar is Mother Teresa of Calcutta compared to this k-nob.

Not my problem. But, as I say, I'm pondering what would I do in these circumstances?

TimothyW
Posts: 2372
Joined: Thu Jun 27, 2013 10:15 am

Re: A question of morals vs confidentiality vs legals vs good neighbourliness

Postby TimothyW » Fri Sep 06, 2019 19:01 pm

To be honest, I'm not sure I'd want to know if a complete nutter was moving in next door.

The thing is there isn't a lot they can do about it is there?

User avatar
Pross
Posts: 20985
Joined: Thu Sep 10, 2009 10:32 am

Re: A question of morals vs confidentiality vs legals vs good neighbourliness

Postby Pross » Fri Sep 06, 2019 19:10 pm

TimothyW wrote:To be honest, I'm not sure I'd want to know if a complete nutter was moving in next door.

The thing is there isn't a lot they can do about it is there?


This pretty much. Even convicted murderers have to live somewhere once released. Also, if it's known this person has committed a crime presumably they been punished as the law sees fit, maybe they are remorseful and trying to start afresh? Added to all that there's no way you should even know about their past and it's possible someone prepared to gossip like that may have got their facts wrong.

User avatar
Slowmart
Posts: 3636
Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2013 13:32 pm

Re: A question of morals vs confidentiality vs legals vs good neighbourliness

Postby Slowmart » Fri Sep 06, 2019 19:11 pm

It seems the individual concerned can potentially raise a mortgage which points to financial stability and whilst there’s no causal link to stability elsewhere in the individuals life it’s a good outlier.

He’s done his time and moved on, so should every once else otherwise we aren’t going to rehabilitate anyone.Ever.
And God created the bicycle, so that man could use it as a means for work and to help him negotiate life's complicated journey.

User avatar
Stevo 666
Posts: 33815
Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2009 11:21 am

Re: A question of morals vs confidentiality vs legals vs good neighbourliness

Postby Stevo 666 » Fri Sep 06, 2019 19:18 pm

As mentioned above - you don't know all the circumstances. Better be sure of the facts as well; as I recall some poor bastards have been strung up in the past on the basis of hearsay which turned out to be wrong.

Image
Whippet
Bruiser
Panzer
Commuter

"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]

User avatar
orraloon
Posts: 5141
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2003 08:45 am

Re: A question of morals vs confidentiality vs legals vs good neighbourliness

Postby orraloon » Fri Sep 06, 2019 19:28 pm

Yeah, is difficult isn't it. Not my problem but family member is worried. Trying to reassure by saying not your decision, you are not the seller, is the developer, you will move on. But family member has 'good' values, socially responsible, concerned about impact on neighbourhood after they leave. I'm thinking the most they can do is just say to neighbours that they are moving, say is a part exchange deal on their new build house, and leave it there.

Btw I cannot divulge nature of events, but suffice to say was not Texas but England. Did not kill anyone, but that was by good fortune only. Not that many years ago. And I, family member, and everyone else who will in time become aware are v surprised this individual appears already to be released back into society. As I said, would have thought sentenced to life without parole

lesfirth
Posts: 884
Joined: Fri Apr 20, 2012 14:46 pm

Re: A question of morals vs confidentiality vs legals vs good neighbourliness

Postby lesfirth » Sat Sep 07, 2019 08:28 am

I have no evidence to back this up but I would bet that the odds of a violent offender reoffending are far greater than chance of the average Joe Public committing a violent crime.
Just a thought.

User avatar
Pross
Posts: 20985
Joined: Thu Sep 10, 2009 10:32 am

Re: A question of morals vs confidentiality vs legals vs good neighbourliness

Postby Pross » Sat Sep 07, 2019 08:37 am

lesfirth wrote:I have no evidence to back this up but I would bet that the odds of a violent offender reoffending are far greater than chance of the average Joe Public committing a violent crime.
Just a thought.


By definition every re-offender had to originally be an average Joe Public before committing their first crime though.

User avatar
mfin
Posts: 6924
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2007 21:46 pm

Re: A question of morals vs confidentiality vs legals vs good neighbourliness

Postby mfin » Sat Sep 07, 2019 09:35 am

House buying is stressful enough. I would say to your family member not to worry, it is of course natural to be concerned, but it's not something for them to control or get involved with. Looking into a crystal ball for bad scenarios is something to knock on the head. Make a decision to leave all that thinking behind and move on.

User avatar
meursault
Posts: 1431
Joined: Wed Sep 05, 2012 20:57 pm
Contact:

Re: A question of morals vs confidentiality vs legals vs good neighbourliness

Postby meursault » Sat Sep 07, 2019 10:50 am

I wouldn't have David Millar moving in next to me, with his Maserati's and Bromptons pffft.
Superstition sets the whole world in flames; philosophy quenches them.

Voltaire

User avatar
Robert88
Posts: 2640
Joined: Tue Oct 17, 2017 05:44 am

Re: A question of morals vs confidentiality vs legals vs good neighbourliness

Postby Robert88 » Sun Sep 08, 2019 10:50 am

Stevo 666 wrote:As mentioned above - you don't know all the circumstances. Better be sure of the facts as well; as I recall some poor bastards have been strung up in the past on the basis of hearsay which turned out to be wrong.

Image


I agree with that :shock:

My first house, I lived next to a couple of diagnosed paranoid schizophrenics who were in the habit of terrorising the neighbourhood. Funnily enough I never had the slightest problem with them apart from some nights when it sounded as if they were throwing furniture around.

One Saturday the local mobile grocer had turned up just as some 'friends' knocked on their door. They wouldn't answer and said friends started kicking the door then bombarding the house with fruit and veg (which they hadn't paid for of course!).

Then they left and the police arrived and insisted they open the door and put their knives away. It seems they were into the drug scene that was rife at the time and had upset someone.

Not long after they moved out and just before I had a knock on the door, one of them, the woman wanted to sell me their carpets. Being polite I said I'd take a look and went inside their house. As expected the carpets were the shabbiest most threadbare looking things and they had almost no other furniture. Rather carefully, after discussing the weather and so on, I made an excuse, thanked her and left. No problem.

Later I heard they were both dead having moved to some squalid seaside town.

Webboo
Posts: 2029
Joined: Fri Feb 05, 2016 13:43 pm

Re: A question of morals vs confidentiality vs legals vs good neighbourliness

Postby Webboo » Sun Sep 08, 2019 19:40 pm

Having a diagnosed mental illness is not in the same class as being a convicted violent criminal and is classed as a disability but I’m sure you knew that..

User avatar
DeVlaeminck
Posts: 5288
Joined: Sat Sep 21, 2013 20:34 pm

Re: A question of morals vs confidentiality vs legals vs good neighbourliness

Postby DeVlaeminck » Mon Sep 09, 2019 22:55 pm

It really does depend - some quite nasty criminals are no bother to their neighbours - so without knowing what they've done nobody can really advise.

That said if your family member considers the person moving in a threat then I think they should let the neighbours know what they know. I mean if I knew my neighbour had been convicted of violent crime it may alter my reaction should said neigbour get into a dispute with me.
Holbrook Sports FC Women - sign for us

Tangled Metal
Posts: 3907
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2011 08:54 am

Re: A question of morals vs confidentiality vs legals vs good neighbourliness

Postby Tangled Metal » Mon Sep 09, 2019 23:16 pm

I found out a guy I used to work with was out after killing someone. I didn't know that for years, to me he was just a sound guy. I found out and he was still that same guy but I felt my working relationship had changed by knowing about it. Compared to yule other guys at work he was relatively stable send sober. Might have something to do with parole conditions means he can't go to any drinking establishment in the city we live in / or near.

Years before a new kid at my school was pending a manslaughter charge. He was 16 years old. He'd been drinking in a bar with his older brother. His brother accuse accidentally split a guy's beer who then launched at my class mate's brother. Being a close family he punched three guy but with a glass in his hand. Being a bit kid of outhouse proportions the guy died pretty quickly. The kid was a really nice guy.

The OP described a nasty piece of work though. IMHO by getting the story secondhand we can't be sure how much is true. If you can hide the issue from your family it might be better. The person might not want to cause trouble in his own neighbourhood. If they know about his violence and history it'll not give him a chance.

User avatar
Robert88
Posts: 2640
Joined: Tue Oct 17, 2017 05:44 am

Re: A question of morals vs confidentiality vs legals vs good neighbourliness

Postby Robert88 » Tue Sep 10, 2019 04:42 am

Webboo wrote:Having a diagnosed mental illness is not in the same class as being a convicted violent criminal and is classed as a disability but I’m sure you knew that..


Sarcastic little bugger aincha!

The point is that they had a reputation for violent, threatening behaviour in the neighbourhood and were also drug abusers.

They probably did have convictions, the police clearly knew them well.

If they were violent towards my then neighbours it's probably partly due to the neighbours ignorance and failure to make allowances. I think it fortunate that I was warned and was able to make allowances.

Matthewfalle
Posts: 16846
Joined: Sun Mar 02, 2014 23:06 pm

Re: A question of morals vs confidentiality vs legals vs good neighbourliness

Postby Matthewfalle » Tue Sep 10, 2019 08:35 am

DeVlaeminck wrote:

I mean if I knew my neighbour had been convicted of violent crime it may alter my reaction should said neigbour get into a dispute with me.


in what way?
Postby team47b » Sun Jun 28, 2015 11:53 am

De Sisti wrote:
This is one of the silliest threads I've come across. :lol:

Recognition at last Matthew, well done!, a justified honour :D

smithy21 wrote:
He's right you know.

User avatar
DeVlaeminck
Posts: 5288
Joined: Sat Sep 21, 2013 20:34 pm

Re: A question of morals vs confidentiality vs legals vs good neighbourliness

Postby DeVlaeminck » Tue Sep 10, 2019 16:51 pm

Matthewfalle wrote:
DeVlaeminck wrote:

I mean if I knew my neighbour had been convicted of violent crime it may alter my reaction should said neigbour get into a dispute with me.


in what way?


In the way that if I were cut up by a car I'd be less likely to respond if I knew Kenneth Noye was driving it.
Holbrook Sports FC Women - sign for us

Matthewfalle
Posts: 16846
Joined: Sun Mar 02, 2014 23:06 pm

Re: A question of morals vs confidentiality vs legals vs good neighbourliness

Postby Matthewfalle » Tue Sep 10, 2019 16:54 pm

so you'd be happy to get verbal and square up to someone you knew wouldn't kick seven bells out of you? the minute someone is "harder" you'd change your approach?

you'd be happy to have a pop at me (meek mild cyclist) and not, for example, Fat Les the well known football hooligan?

sounds a bit bullying/cowardly unless i'm i'm reading it wrong.
Postby team47b » Sun Jun 28, 2015 11:53 am

De Sisti wrote:
This is one of the silliest threads I've come across. :lol:

Recognition at last Matthew, well done!, a justified honour :D

smithy21 wrote:
He's right you know.

User avatar
DeVlaeminck
Posts: 5288
Joined: Sat Sep 21, 2013 20:34 pm

Re: A question of morals vs confidentiality vs legals vs good neighbourliness

Postby DeVlaeminck » Tue Sep 10, 2019 17:30 pm

Matthewfalle wrote:so you'd be happy to get verbal and square up to someone you knew wouldn't kick seven bells out of you? the minute someone is "harder" you'd change your approach?

you'd be happy to have a pop at me (meek mild cyclist) and not, for example, Fat Les the well known football hooligan?

sounds a bit bullying/cowardly unless i'm i'm reading it wrong.



Where did I say I'd square up and kick 7 bells out of anyone? So yes you are reading it wrong, or trolling to get a rise.

I suspect if you knew I had been convicted murdering 2 people for trying to wind me up on this forum you wouldn't have posted that - most people including me will moderate their response to something if they suspect it may result in violent death.
Holbrook Sports FC Women - sign for us

Matthewfalle
Posts: 16846
Joined: Sun Mar 02, 2014 23:06 pm

Re: A question of morals vs confidentiality vs legals vs good neighbourliness

Postby Matthewfalle » Tue Sep 10, 2019 17:37 pm

DeVlaeminck wrote:
Matthewfalle wrote:so you'd be happy to get verbal and square up to someone you knew wouldn't kick seven bells out of you? the minute someone is "harder" you'd change your approach?

you'd be happy to have a pop at me (meek mild cyclist) and not, for example, Fat Les the well known football hooligan?

sounds a bit bullying/cowardly unless i'm i'm reading it wrong.



Where did I say I'd square up and kick 7 bells out of anyone? So yes you are reading it wrong, or trolling to get a rise.

I suspect if you knew I had been convicted murdering 2 people for trying to wind me up on this forum you wouldn't have posted that - most people including me will moderate their response to something if they suspect it may result in violent death.



not in my book - always treat everyone fairly, politely and the same.

seems that by using the phrase "moderate their response to something...." it means that you're happy to scream and eff and blind at someone unless you think you'll get a dose of your own medicine/worse.

or are you trolling?
Postby team47b » Sun Jun 28, 2015 11:53 am

De Sisti wrote:
This is one of the silliest threads I've come across. :lol:

Recognition at last Matthew, well done!, a justified honour :D

smithy21 wrote:
He's right you know.


Return to “The Cake Stop”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 18 guests