Van does 120 miles to escort a prisoner for 200 yards

Taxpayer groups that monitor Government expenditure to ensure avoidance of wastage and tracking expenditure were horrified at this recent case in the United Kingdom. A prisoner was to be moved between courts for a hearing; the distance between the courts was 200 yards. The police washed their hands off the matter since the prisoner was in the custody of the courts system, and it was deemed inappropriate to the rights of the prisoner (since he was an accused and not convicted) to make him wear handcuffs for the 200 yard journey across the road. So what was the solution ? A van was called to take him, and the van was called from a place more than 60 miles away:

Local Tory MP Brian Binley said: “I’ve never heard such nonsense. Quite frankly I don’t care about his human rights in this situation and I’m sure he wouldn’t have either. To get a matter like this mixed up with human rights is nonsense.” Labour MP Sally Keeble said: “This seems to me like a complete waste of public money and a breakdown of common sense.”
The “dilemma” arose when Mark Bailey, 35, appeared at Northampton Crown Court to answer theft charges. After a short hearing, he was told to report to the magistrates across the road. Rather than walking, a vehicle was dispatched from Cambridge almost 60 miles away.

It is quite normal for tax payers to respond in outrage to such a case. In times of such high oil prices, and when people are struggling with bad economic situation, such wasteful expenditure should have been avoided. A compromise should have been found.