Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Draft Bill

carmanmemoranda · 16 Dec 2023

motorbiking said:
the former is not a criminal offence.

He wasn't asked, have you ever authorised the hacking of a phone, or other specific questions.

Weasel words don't impress many people

JohnD · 16 Dec 2023

blup said:
It was a journalists question, the lawyers ones would be more challenging, if it got that far, because of the recent finding that the top brass knew that some hacking had taken place. The Paper didnt seem to put up much of a defence suggesting they didnt want to be in court. It seems to be more about the claimants wanting a finding.

If they had turned up they might have had to give evidence under oath, at risk of perjury.

Very frightening prospect for professional crooks and liars.

blup · 16 Dec 2023

JohnD said:
If they had turned up they might have had to give evidence under oath, at risk of perjury.

Very frightening prospect for professional crooks and liars.

Moron complained he didn’t have his say, presumably the paper didn’t think he would add anything

motorbiking · 16 Dec 2023

JohnD said:
If they had turned up they might have had to give evidence under oath, at risk of perjury.

Very frightening prospect for professional crooks and liars.

You cannot be forced as a witness to answer questions that incriminate yourself.

noseall · 16 Dec 2023

motorbiking said:
answer questions that incriminate yourself.

That would be stupid. Trump and Rudy opted out too.

JohnD · 16 Dec 2023

motorbiking said:
You cannot be forced as a witness to answer questions that incriminate yourself.

"Did you murder that person?"

"I refuse to answer on the grounds that I might incriminate myself"

carmanmemoranda · 16 Dec 2023

motorbiking said:
You cannot be forced as a witness to answer questions that incriminate yourself.

But sometimes better not to be asked than have to say " no comment"

blup · 16 Dec 2023

motorbiking said:
You cannot be forced as a witness to answer questions that incriminate yourself.

The behaviour of the tabloids over the last 20 or 30 years have been one long act of self incrimination.

Blup

motorbiking · 17 Dec 2023

JohnD said:
"Did you murder that person?"

"I refuse to answer on the grounds that I might incriminate myself"

carmanmemoranda said:
But sometimes better not to be asked than have to say " no comment"

It would be a strange question to ask a witness and not one that a judge would allow, even if the defence lawyer was asleep and forget to "raise a point of law". Of course if they were the accused, there is no problem with asserting that they did.

blup · 17 Dec 2023

Sasha’s · 2026-07-31T12:28:36+0100

JohnD said:
She is trying to get a lawyer to help her sort it out.

Our Tories object to lawyers who try to help with "immigration" problems.

It’s good that she’s looking for another lawyer. If the previous advice was poor or important information was missed, having someone independent review the case is probably the best next step. Immigration cases can often be corrected, but it’s usually easier if any issues are identified early.

Comments about immigration lawyers are often political, but what really matters is finding someone experienced who will explain the process clearly and act in the client’s best interests. If she wants another opinion before moving forward, Consultant LM UK could also be worth considering: consultantlm.uk/partner/yuruduchniposlugu

Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Draft Bill

Similar threads