Three charities consider £1m legacy from paedophile 3

Fundraising | Celina Ribeiro | 13 Apr 2010

Girlguiding Scotland and two other charities are deciding what to do with more than £1m worth of legacy bequests left by a convicted child sex offender.

Reginald Forester-Smith, who spent eight years in prison for multiple counts of abusing girls, died last year leaving £400,000 to Girlguiding Scotland in memory of his late wife, and £312,291 each to Cancer Research UK and Macmillan Cancer Support.

Forester-Smith’s daughter, who wrote a book about also being abused by the late photographer, has been left out of the will.

None of the charities named in the will have decided what to do with the bequests.

Girlguiding Scotland said: "The matter is currently in the hands of the executors going through the legal administrative process and as such it would be inappropriate for us to comment."

A Cancer Research UK spokeswoman said the charity will not be able to comment until it too has finished liaising with the executors of the estate while a spokeswoman for Macmillan said the charity is not able to make a statement and is “looking in to it”.

Directory: Cancer Research UK (CRUK) | Girlguiding UK | Macmillan

Place a comment

David Burrows
Head of Fundraising
TDA
16 Apr 2010

Hmm. Sounds like one of those 'moral maze' scenarios. Three reasons why they should probably take the money with good conscience:
1) As it is a legacy the giver is beyond benefiting from the gift - it isn't like a bad company giving a donation to buy good PR to enhance its reputation.
2) I don't know how this person got to be so rich but again, presumably its not like a company that generates profits through immoral activity.
3) The implication of not taking the money would be that charities should carry out some kind of ethical audit on the lives of legators (and presumably every donor) to ensure they come up to a desirable standard. Where would we draw the line?
DB

[Reply]

Carl Allen
none
none
14 Apr 2010

The man is spitting venom from beyond the grave by not giving the money to either or both his victims or charities that deal with these incidents?

The three charities should reflect well on this final act.

[Reply]

Alan Martin
Chief Executive
Yardley Great Trust
14 Apr 2010

As a scout leader I am interested in the issue of the money being left to the Guides. I think they should take the money, unless there is any evidence that the money was acquired through crime, for instance if the paedophile was also a child trafficker. If they refuse it, they could be accused of not taking money that is rightfully theirs, besides. I see it as moral justice for children to benefit in more ways than one from this man's death.

[Reply]

Comments

[Cancel] | Reply to:

Name *

Email *

Organisation

Job Title

Comments *

Verification *

* Please read our Community Standards

Close »

Community Standards

The civilsociety.co.uk community and comments board is intended as a platform for informed and civilised debate.

We hope to encourage a broad range of views, however, there are standards that we expect commentators to uphold. We reserve the right to delete or amend any comments that do not adhere to these standards.

We welcome:

Robust but respectful debate
Strongly held opinions
Intelligent relevant discussion
The sharing of relevant experiences
New participants

We will not publish:

Rude, threatening, offensive, obscene or abusive language, or links to such material
Links to commercial organisations or spam postings. The comments board is not an advertising platform
The posting of contact details for yourself or others
Comments intended for malicious purpose or mindless abuse
Comments purporting to be from another person or organisation under false pretences
Gratuitous criticism, commentary or self-promotion
Any material which breaches copyright or privacy laws, or could be considered libellous
The use of the comments board for the pursuit or extension of personal disputes

Be aware:

Views expressed on the comments board are left at users’ discretion and are in no way views held or supported by Civil Society Media
Comments left by others may not be accurate, do not rely on them as fact
You may be misunderstood - sarcasm and humour can easily be taken out of context, try to be clear

Please:

Enjoy the opportunity to express your opinion and respect the right of others to express theirs
Confine your remarks to issues rather than personalities

Together we can keep our community a polite, respectful and intelligent platform for discussion.