ISIS Brides

[Zambo]

Well I don't know how some can sleep at night, it's not a job I could do, and I have no idea how you have come to the conclusion you posted as your second sentence.

I would have thought it was perfectly obvious, but there you go.

I didn't say or remotely imply, that the worse the crime they're accused of the more they must, by definition, be guilty. The discussion had absolutely nothing to do with that aspect. and I gave Nilson as an example, where I find it difficult to put myself in the shoes of anyone who would try and get scum off like that.

[JimmyDee]

I didn't say or remotely imply, that the worse the crime they're accused of the more they must, by definition, be guilty. The discussion had absolutely nothing to do with that aspect. and I gave Nilson as an example, where I find it difficult to put myself in the shoes of anyone who would try and get scum off like that.

But you're calling him scum on the basis of a trial that found him guilty. Before the trial defence lawyers, and juries, must keep an open mind.
Yeah, sure Nilsom had a defence lawyer ... that was his right. Stefan Kiszko was entitled to one as well.

[Saints11]

Well I don't know how some can sleep at night, it's not a job I could do, and I have no idea how you have come to the conclusion you posted as your second sentence.

I would have thought it was perfectly obvious, but there you go.

I didn't say or remotely imply, that the worse the crime they're accused of the more they must, by definition, be guilty. The discussion had absolutely nothing to do with that aspect. and I gave Nilson as an example, where I find it difficult to put myself in the shoes of anyone who would try and get scum off like that.

It's not necessarily about trying to get anyone "off" is about representing a client fairly and competently. Everyone is innocent until proved guilty, you give the impression Zambo that an accusation = guilt.

That's how I have interpreted your post as I think JimmyDee has as well

[gheko]

I think Zambo could benefit from reading this.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cab-rank_rule

[Zambo]

Well I don't know how some can sleep at night, it's not a job I could do, and I have no idea how you have come to the conclusion you posted as your second sentence.

I would have thought it was perfectly obvious, but there you go.

I didn't say or remotely imply, that the worse the crime they're accused of the more they must, by definition, be guilty. The discussion had absolutely nothing to do with that aspect. and I gave Nilson as an example, where I find it difficult to put myself in the shoes of anyone who would try and get scum off like that.

It's not necessarily about trying to get anyone "off" is about representing a client fairly and competently. Everyone is innocent until proved guilty, you give the impression Zambo that an accusation = guilt.

That's how I have interpreted your post as I think JimmyDee has as well

I refer you to the posts which triggered the initial discussion. The appropriate section is now in bold. Hopefully this will resolve any misinterpretations of what I originally said. My opinion has nothing to do with 'accusation=guilt', and neither does it say anything about the levels of the crime making any difference. My issue is with the morality of defence barristers representing criminals who they know full well are guilty. However, as previously said also, with the incompetence within the criminal justice system which also works against innocent people accused of crimes, there is no way out.

There is no upside to allow her back.
Would be a trial and considerable jail sentence
She would get legal aid
This would cost a lot of money.
This way -no cost

Her lawyers have been paid by the British taxpayer.

This is not a bad thing.

Everybody needs someone competent fighting their corner (no matter how serious the crime) as a competent defensive / prosecution gives credibility to the verdict.

I assume she has no money, so would be unable to hire someone capable, so being funded by the Tax payer is better in the long run. As no one can argue her solicitor was shit and her case reviewed on those grounds.

That's my understanding anyway.

Defence barristers are in it for the money and the fame. On a general note, there is something very morally corrupt about someone who knows that their client is guilty, yet they still try and get them off.

Having said that, and it's underpinned by the number of miscarriages of justice where innocent people have been found guilty, you have to have a tight and vigorous defence system, and I understand it's difficult to separate the two aspects. The police and the CPS have a major role to play here but at times they are fucking useless. I've been watching a docu (only seen first part so far) on the murder of Jodi Jones, and the case against Luke Mitchell. That looked very dodgy indeed, with no forensics against him whatsoever.

[The Tick]

Let the gammon meltdown begin

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.thegua ... itizenship


Three British-Bangladeshis win appeal against removal of UK citizenship
Tribunal rules trio said to have travelled to Syria to join Isis were left stateless by Home Office decision

[paolo]

Let the gammon meltdown begin

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.thegua ... itizenship


Three British-Bangladeshis win appeal against removal of UK citizenship
Tribunal rules trio said to have travelled to Syria to join Isis were left stateless by Home Office decision

The pakzhi’s will be loving this

Enabling terrorists and Uk haters to stay in the Uk

Only good can come of this

[The Tick]

Its not good to leave people stateless

[Zambo]

[paolo]

Its not good to leave people stateless

Begum has a state

She even chose it

Syria

[minx]

From what I can see the people who say she should be allowed back only want her put on trial for any crimes she has committed.

Which surely is what should happen?

She doesn’t look terribly uncomfy where she is, shouldn’t she be here being punished?

[pugsly]

Still dangerously newsworthy unfortunately, Theirs still mileage left yet, some fucker will spring her from Syria.

house
chat shows
book deal
re-training
Human rights law degree [ or whatever is required ]
Multi millionaire by 40.

[Vespa]

From what I can see the people who say she should be allowed back only want her put on trial for any crimes she has committed.

Which surely is what should happen?

She doesn’t look terribly uncomfy where she is, shouldn’t she be here being punished?

She lives in a tent in a prison camp, doesn't sound fun. At some point, Syria is either going to deport her or make the UK government pay them to keep her.

[Saints11]

From what I can see the people who say she should be allowed back only want her put on trial for any crimes she has committed.

Which surely is what should happen?

She doesn’t look terribly uncomfy where she is, shouldn’t she be here being punished?

She lives in a tent in a prison camp, doesn't sound fun. At some point, Syria is either going to deport her or make the UK government pay them to keep her.

One bill the British taxpayer might be happy to pay

[minx]

From what I can see the people who say she should be allowed back only want her put on trial for any crimes she has committed.

Which surely is what should happen?

She doesn’t look terribly uncomfy where she is, shouldn’t she be here being punished?

She lives in a tent in a prison camp, doesn't sound fun. At some point, Syria is either going to deport her or make the UK government pay them to keep her.

She looked quite well kept the other day, I’d say her life right now was more boring than punishment.