>A homeless man who stole a purse and a phone from victims of the Manchester Arena attack has admitted theft.
>Chris Parker, 33, was initially dubbed a hero after claiming he comforted a seriously injured girl. CCTV footage played to Manchester Crown Court showed him wandering between stricken victims. He kept returning to injured Pauline Healey, whose granddaughter lay dying nearby, before leaning over her and taking her handbag to steal her purse.
I don't get why bleeding heart do-gooders bleat on about the homeless. They're all scratters who are on the streets through choice, usually because they choose not to stay in a hostel as they know they wouldn't be allowed to do drugs there.
>The New Jersey couple who became famous for raising hundreds of thousands of dollars for a homeless man after he helped with their disabled car — as did the homeless man himself — will all face charges for allegedly providing a false story in order to raise money for themselves, a source familiar with the case told NBC10.
>Mark D'Amico, Kate McClure and Johnny Bobbitt will face charges including conspiracy and theft by deception, according to the source. Investigators say the three deliberately prevented donors for their GoFundMe campaign from gaining information "that would affect their judgment about solicited contribution to that fundraising effort."
>The three initially gained fame in 2017. The couple claimed Bobbitt used $20 to help McClure get gas when her car ran out on Interstate 95 in Philadelphia. McClure and D'Amico then launched a GoFundMe page to supposedly raise money for Bobbitt, and the page brought in over $400,000 from 14,000 contributors.
You know, it's a surprise more homeless people haven't cottoned on to the fact they should give up street begging and should instead try coming up with a bogus tear-jerking story to get shitloads of money via gofundme.
Nah m8, think about it for a minute. There are thousands of people living in homeless hostels, sofa surfing, squatting, living in tents, cars and lock-ups etc. They might not be living on the streets, but they're homeless by any reasonable definition of the word.
>An adventurer and Guinness World Record holder has revealed that living on the UK's streets was 'more lucrative' than he imagined. Ed Stafford, a former army captain and amazon trekker, spent two months being homeless in Glasgow, Manchester, and London.
>He found that as well as gaining 11lb because passers-by kept giving him fast food, sandwiches, and burgers, he could also make up to £200 a night. After living without a roof over his head for Channel 4's series 60 Days on the Streets, which will be shown next week, Ed said that some parts were 'easier' than he expected.
>'I think I was shocked by the amount of food that was available,' he said. 'I thought I was going to lose loads of weight and it was going to be harder to physically survive - but in fact, there was an abundance of people wanting to help, in all three cities. In Glasgow, I witnessed 26 volunteers handing out food one night, and there were only two rough sleepers there. I even met one homeless man who complained the public 'overfeed' him.
>And begging seemed to be more lucrative than I ever imagined. It was common in London for people to make £100 to £200 in an evening, which is more than the average person earns in work.'
>One homeless man he accompanied in Manchester made £20 in 30 minutes when asking passers by for money for a hostel - although in reality it was to fund his crack cocaine addiction.
>Ed said he was most shocked by how resigned some homeless people were to their situation. 'I had assumed no one would want to be on the streets if they had a choice - but actually, some of the community prefer life on the streets living on one's wits, to one in temporary accommodation navigating the benefits system.'
>After being on the streets, Ed said he would not give directly to homeless people, but does believe they need a great deal more support to help them escape the situation.
At what point did the government realise that instead of helping homeless people it's easier to demonise them all as drug addicts or beggars raking it in, with an actual house to live in when they've finished their shift, so they are undeserving of help?
>>62686 >HOW RESIGNED SOME HOMELESS PEOPLE WERE TO THEIR SITUATION. 'I HAD ASSUMED NO ONE WOULD WANT TO BE ON THE STREETS IF THEY HAD A CHOICE - BUT ACTUALLY, SOME OF THE COMMUNITY PREFER LIFE ON THE STREETS LIVING ON ONE'S WITS
This is why there are often no quick fixes to ridding the streets of homeless people. Many have severe mental illness and substance abuse issues - they end up getting kicked out (or not accepted by) many of the places that could help them, it isn't as simple as not having a roof over their heads. I agree that its monstrous that people live on our streets, it is the only kind of charity I have ever supported, but fixing it is harder than it might first appear; doesn't mean we should give up on them.
>>62689 I've linked to the Daily Mail because that's where I read it; the only other organ with an article about Stafford's upcoming documentary is the Torygraph. There's no point really singling any one particular organisation out; although channel 5 have taken over the mantle of poverty porn channel 4 used to be the worst offenders for painting everyone on benefits as a workshy bastard and even the BBC have their own shows about whether people are deserving or undeserving poor, called either Saint or scrounger, striker or skiver, worker or shirker that's straight out the Tory rhetoric handbook.
The Mail should be taken with a pinch of salt, but it goes beyond this; it's clear government policy to cut the rehabilitation services for tramps and then demonise them for being druggies to reduce public support for spending money on actually helping them.
>>62686 >some of the community prefer life on the streets living on one's wits, to one in temporary accommodation navigating the benefits system.'
Surely it should say something about how shite the benefits system is if anyone would prefer living on the streets to living in a kafka tribute novel by the DWP?
the most powerful force in life is inertia. If it's a reasonable guess that you're going to go homelesss > benefits > can't get a job fast enough > govt decides you're a scrounger and cuts benefits > homeless, why would you bother? That's a lot of upheaval just to live a shaggy dog story.
The jobcentre truly is that useless. Even the well meaning advisers who want to help can only really show you a list of random jobs their local centre has in a file.
The fact that you can't sign on while homeless is entirely unforgivable to me - how the fuck do they expect that to work? I truly don't understand that policy. What's the reason for that, fear of fraud? There has to be a better way to solve that than to just simply not help anyone who's on the streets.
>>60664 >KAREN ESSENTIALLY LACKS MORALITY AND HAS SOME CRAFTY IDEAS. MOST PEOPLE WOULDN'T HAVE THOUGHT ABOUT THE POSSIBLE FINANCIAL REWARDS OF HIDING YOUR KID AND SAYING SHE'S GONE MISSING, OR INDEED SELLING SANDWICHES TO THE HOMELESS.
>SHE PERHAPS LACKED THE QUICK THINKING OR PLANNING SKILLS THAT WOULD HAVE ALLOWED HER TO GET AWAY WITH IT, BUT AS SOCIOPATHS GO, SHE'S CERTAINLY NOT THE LEAST CREATIVE. I CAN RESPECT THAT.
>IF SHE'D BEEN BORN TO A HIGHER STATION, OR HAD A MORE ROUNDED EDUCATION, THERE'S NO DOUBT SHE'D HAVE BEEN OPERATING SOME HIGHER LEVEL SCAMS, MAYBE A PONZI SCHEME OR EVEN A SUCCESSFUL CHILD KIDNAPPING HEIST, INSTEAD SHE'S RESIGNED TO DESPERATELY TRYING TO CLAW HER WAY OUT OF WHAT SHE KNOWS IS A SOCIAL TIER THAT AMOUNTS TO A DEAD-END.
EVIL Karen Matthews wants to offer Kate and Gerry help after watching the Netflix documentary The Disappearance of Madeleine McCann, it has been reported.
The twisted mum faked the disappearance of her own daughter, Shannon, in 2008 in a bid to claim a £50,000 reward. But pals say the 44-year-old is in "complete denial" over the ordeal, calling herself an innocent victim despite being found guilty and jailed for eight years.
After being inspired by the documentary about Madeleine, Matthews thinks she can start a business offering support to families whose children have gone missing, the Daily Star reports.
She even wants Kate and Gerry McCann to contact her for advice, an anonymous source has claimed. The source said: “She thinks she could advise couples who have missing kids. She also suggested starting a business doing it. And she thinks the first people she could help are Madeleine’s parents. And all because she boasts she has experience of children going missing.”
>>62820 Alright, fuck this, I'm selling my entirely made up stories about the dangerous cult of .gs to the papers. Apparently they'll print anything so who even cares.
>>62823 Firstly, Eagle doesn't pay, secondly stories about Autiefuckers (who defo offed themselves after being goaded by .gs users) and erotic obsessions about MPs are tabloid smut. You made this bed, it's not my fault you've got to lie in it.
>>62825 If you talk the talk but don't walk the walk then I'm going to call you a coward forevermore. If you can't get a story about this place in the press by the end of the month then you have failed.
>>59262 >THE RISE IN THE USE OF TEMPORARY ACCOMMODATION IS PRIMARILY IN LONDON AND THE SOUTH EAST, WITH 70% OF HOUSEHOLDS IN TEMPORARY ACCOMMODATION PLACED THERE BY LONDON BOROUGHS. COUNCILS HAVE LESS SOCIAL HOUSING STOCK, ARE HAVING TO SPEND MORE ON TEMPORARY ACCOMMODATION AND LESS ON PREVENTING THE CAUSES OF IT.
Cash-strapped London councils are paying private landlords more than £14m a year in “incentives” simply to persuade them to house homeless people, the Guardian can reveal.
The sweetener payments of up to £8,300 each were made to landlords more than 5,700 times in 2018 to house people who were either homeless or considered at risk of homelessness, freedom of information requests have revealed. The payouts are made in addition to rent and have been branded as ludicrous by housing campaigners and intolerable by councils.
Typical loony lefties. Get mad when London councils attempt to house people who can't afford to live in the capital elsewhere. Get mad when those councils then have to spend extortionate amounts of money housing people who are homeless or at risk of homelessness in their boroughs.
>>62845 >those councils then have to spend extortionate amounts of money
Maybe you missed this bit?
>The payouts are made in addition to rent
Normally government payments are safe as houses, so if the government promises to pay the rent you shouldn't be asking for hazard money.
A significant proportion of homeless people - particularly long-term homeless people - have significant social care needs. They might have issues with drug or alcohol dependency, they might have chronic mental health issues, they might have behavioural issues, often they have all of the above. Some homeless people just need somewhere to live, but some are difficult to house. If you really set your mind to it, you can make a newly-refurbished flat into a completely uninhabitable shithole in a matter of days. That's the reason for the risk premium - there are a lot of tenants that landlords are simply unwilling to accommodate at market rents.
>>62859 That's all well and good, but the overwhelming majority of homeless people placed in temporary accommodation are the 'hidden homeless' who have been priced out of where they live.
Oh, well. At least we're not Americans.
>Twisted police officer who fed homeless man dog poo sandwich keeps job
