11 
When Rebecca Gallanagh was fitted with an electronic ankle bracelet after being arrested, she thought it was boring — so she decorated it using fake diamonds. Sadly, that didn’t play very well with the authorities.
In fact, she was fined £140 by Secro, the security company who fitted the bracelet, for “compromising the integrity” of the device. Gallanagh claims, however, that “it was still working” just fine. She explains why she decorated the device to the Daily Mail:
“I did it to make me feel better about wearing it. I was quite proud of it. I like to bling things up, and wear blingy clothes and watches. It just matched my style.”
Gallanagh was fitted with the electronic bracelet last November, after she was convicted of a public order offence for fighting outside a nightclub in Tamworth, UK. Maybe there’s a niche market waiting to be tapped here. [Daily Mail]
Image credit: Bling from Shutterstock
“I did it to make me feel better about wearing it.”. Whether someone feels better about wearing one is a shite excuse. You’re not only wearing one for being tracked but also to make an example of you.
To be given one of these, she must have been quite a bad girl. Well done Secro.
A £140 fine? That’s not good enough. I would have hit her with a wet cod until she realised the bracelet isn’t there as a fashion accessory, and that she should never use My Big Fat Gypsy Wedding as inspiration for anything.
I think it’s a clear two-codder!
And looking at the linked article, she’s a 10 pinter and a double bagger.
Hmm… If it was still working how did she compromise it?
If they made it clear that you are not allowed to modify or attach anything to it in anyway then the fine is ok, otherwise it seems a bit unfair.
Actually, I just noticed it comes from the Daily Mail so it’s probably just a made up article.
“The lady who fitted the item said she saw a girl from My Big Fat Gypsy Wedding who had blinged her tag, and she said I could do that”
“I saw pictures of it online and checked the leaflet, and nowhere did it say I couldn’t decorate it.”
Yup. That would be unfair to charge her then.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2274915/Woman-22-ordered-pay-140-using-dozens-fake-diamonds-bling-electronic-curfew-TAG.html#ixzz2KK7XBjQ4
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
You know something is wrong with this world when you’re taking fashion tips from a programme that is about people with (how can I put it politely?) ‘dubious backgrounds’.
And the item you’re ‘blinging’ happens to be a security tag.
Unfeckinbelievable…
I believe it is Serco not Secro (correction)
Correct. And now I feel like a tit for writing Secro when I knew something was wrong but didn’t check.
She’s stupid for having done this (she was proud of it? proud of having been arrested??), but really how can it compromise the integrity? If anything, adding diamonds (fake or not) should enhance integrity… and as others have pointed out, if it didn’t say anywhere that she can’t modify it, then she should just get a warning rather than a fine.
It probably says “you can’t damage the device in any way” somewhere. Decorating or modifying it in any way would constitute damage. I’m sure she’ll be more careful when she gets her next tag.