>On Sep 17, 9:30 am, Boltar yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

>> On Sep 16, 6:08 pm, MIG doreenbird.co.uk> wrote:
>>

>>> The penny doesn't seem to be dropping that decorating a set is not a
>>> crime.  The three million people are no more seeing a crime than if
>>> there was fake blood splatter from acted murder scene.  It's
>>> entertainment, with references to the existence of crime.  There's a
>>> lot of that kind of entertainment.

>>
>> And the penny doesn't seem to be dropping with you that the only
>> reason he got the job was *because* he'd committed a crime. They
>> obviously wanted a specific well known tag otherwise why didn't they
>> just get their set designer to scribble some crap on a wall? Its not
>> exactly rocket science.

>
>I'm sure that there must be easier ways of getting your work noticed
>than being convicted of crimes (and if not caught, they couldn't have
>found and used him). You could say that they were encouraging
>criminals to get caught.
>
>People in gaol get work, and get paid for it, that unemployed people
>outside probably couldn't get (whatever the modern equivalent of
>sowing mailbags is). Maybe they commit crimes just to get this work.
>Our justice system is funding criminals. Outrage.