acecarroll Posted April 12, 2010 Share Posted April 12, 2010 I do think that by accepting it, it seems to give a certain amount of approval towards his actions. Perhaps accept it but give it straight to charity. Using it on the Girl Guides funds just seems a little bit wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alien Posted April 12, 2010 Share Posted April 12, 2010 I do think that by accepting it, it seems to give a certain amount of approval towards his actions. Perhaps accept it but give it straight to charity. Using it on the Girl Guides funds just seems a little bit wrong. Give it to "Rape Victims Charity". At least that way it'll go to a group of people he offended against without actually going to anyone in particular he offended against. I certainly wouldn't want his money if he personally offended against any of mine. After all, it is only money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeadingNorth Posted April 12, 2010 Share Posted April 12, 2010 Reject! Can't have people thinking they can right their wrongs with a wad of cash on their death. Let it go to HM Treasury. Do you believe that by doing this, the dead person will know of his failure to right said wrongs? Or will it just be a completely pointless gesture? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hard2miss Posted April 12, 2010 Share Posted April 12, 2010 Morally speaking I'm sure they will find a way round accepting the money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alien Posted April 12, 2010 Share Posted April 12, 2010 Morally speaking I'm sure they will find a way round accepting the money. Whenever money is concerned it's amazing how wobbly and bendy your morals become.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aries22 Posted April 12, 2010 Share Posted April 12, 2010 Perhaps he did feel remorseful, and suppose he had made a Will leaving his money to the Girl Guides, in which case his solicitors will make sure that his wishes are respected. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJ sheffield Posted April 12, 2010 Share Posted April 12, 2010 Whenever money is concerned it's amazing how wobbly and bendy your morals become.. For £400,000 I would have married him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dozy Posted April 12, 2010 Share Posted April 12, 2010 I do think that by accepting it, it seems to give a certain amount of approval towards his actions. Perhaps accept it but give it straight to charity. Using it on the Girl Guides funds just seems a little bit wrong. My bold How? The children he abused were 5,6 and 9, they could hardly have been members of the Girl Guides at that age. Quote: "In his will, Forester-Smith left more than £1m to charity, including £312,291 each to Cancer Research UK and the Macmillan Nurses Cancer Association. His largest bequest was to the Girl Guide and Scouting Association of Dumfriesshire in "celebration of the life" of his late wife Sheena Forester-Smith." Should Cancer Research and Macmillan Nurses all turn down the money, because the work they do helps some children and it could therefore be seen as approving of the nasty pervert's actions? If charities aren't supposed to accept money from the morally bankrupt, should they be expected to investigate the background of the people who leave them bequests? Or even ask people in the street about their moral standards, before they accept their money. There must be hundreds of people who were paedophiles, or thieves, or wife beaters, or embezzlers, or just generally nasty, who leave bequests to charity. The only difference between them and this bloke is the fact that he was caught and they weren't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
purdyamos Posted April 12, 2010 Share Posted April 12, 2010 The report states twice that the bequest was in memory of his wife who worked with the GG movement rather than an act of remorse towards the girls. I don't see how anyone could object if they took the money while simultaneously making a statement with it, to do some good, bursaries for girls in care, abuse counselling, or whatever (I have no idea what guides do anymore). Refusing money can be an effective moral stand if someone's still alive, as they could be trying to curry favour for the future, but now he's dead there are not going to be conditional strings attached and no manipulative benefit to him. Taking it and using it to reverse exactly the kind of damage done by his kind would be an efficient and moral combination. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hels1977 Posted April 12, 2010 Share Posted April 12, 2010 Give it to "Rape Victims Charity". At least that way it'll go to a group of people he offended against without actually going to anyone in particular he offended against. I certainly wouldn't want his money if he personally offended against any of mine. After all, it is only money. Quite - I think this is the best "solution". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.