Bleedingnheart liberals

[Newboy]

Now this sort of cr*p really makes my blood boil.

Two convicted terrorists

1) Bourgass, an Algerian, is serving 17 years for conspiracy to commit public nuisance by using poisons or explosives. A life sentence for murdering Detective Constable Stephen Oake, 40, with a kitchen knife during his 2003 arrest at a flat in Manchester. & additional sentences for attempted murder of two officers and wounding a third.

2) Hussain was one of three men convicted of a plot to launch suicide attacks on flights from Heathrow to America and Canada using liquid bombs made of hydrogen peroxide hidden in soft drink bottles. He is serving life with a minimum tariff of 32 years.


Now some QC (doubtless funded by legal aid) is appealing to the Supreme Court because they were segregated whilst in prison.

It follows a ruling in March 2012 when they failed to persuade appeal judges that their treatment was unlawful.

Human Rights my ar*e!

 

[EFLImpudence]

I agree.

Part of the blame lies with the QC for taking on the job when it should be a case of "I want nothing to do with scum like this".

The same with the oft quoted excuse of "everyone is entitled to a defence" when representing known guilty offenders.

It's just a money-making scheme for the already rich.

 

[Newboy]

Far too often the law has descended into an intellectual exercise rather than punishing criminals.

 

[JBR]

I completely agree. The law these days often appears to actively encourage crime. Do-gooders claim all sorts of mitigation to the benefit of criminals, but conveniently forget about the suffering caused to victims.

One excuse is that we have an insufficiency of prison places and that the government claims it is 'unable to afford' to build more. Perhaps if they saved a bit of money on pool tables and en-suite facilities, they might be able to build more prisons. I suspect that it has never crossed their feeble minds that the more pleasant they make prisons, the more inclined are our criminal classes to commit crime.

Personally, I see nothing wrong with constructing prison camps along the lines of those used in the war. These would be cheap and could be quickly constructed and, of course, might discourage crime.

Of course, I have not forgotten the EU and the ECHR!

 

[handyjack]

Prison ships are affordable.

 

[EFLImpudence]

Prison ships are affordable.

I thought they were a good idea.

Am I right in recalling it (the one off the coast down here) was abandoned because "visiting was difficult" affecting their human rights?


Why are some human rights not able to be withdrawn when the fundamental one of freedom obviously is?

 

[handyjack]

Prison ships are affordable.

I thought they were a good idea.

Am I right in recalling it (the one off the coast down here) was abandoned because "visiting was difficult" affecting their human rights?


Why are some human rights not able to be withdrawn when the fundamental one of freedom obviously is?

Only criminals have human rights, victims can't afford them.

 

[Dextraneous]

Prison ships are affordable.

The Temeraire was a fine example of an old timber ship which fought at Trafalgar but which eventually became obsolete when iron ships came along, and was used as a prison ship. Google her and especially the fine portrait of her being towed to her dismantling berth, this portrait by Turner being in the National Gallery.

Prison ships are a good idea IMHO, especially if certain categories of prisoner are aboard when the ship gets scuppered,

 

[handyjack]

Prison ships are a good idea IMHO, especially if certain categories of prisoner are aboard when the ship gets scuppered,

 

[Brigadier]

Now this sort of cr*p really makes my blood boil.

Two convicted terrorists

1) Bourgass, an Algerian, is serving 17 years for conspiracy to commit public nuisance by using poisons or explosives. A life sentence for murdering Detective Constable Stephen Oake, 40, with a kitchen knife during his 2003 arrest at a flat in Manchester. & additional sentences for attempted murder of two officers and wounding a third.

2) Hussain was one of three men convicted of a plot to launch suicide attacks on flights from Heathrow to America and Canada using liquid bombs made of hydrogen peroxide hidden in soft drink bottles. He is serving life with a minimum tariff of 32 years.


Now some QC (doubtless funded by legal aid) is appealing to the Supreme Court because they were segregated whilst in prison.

It follows a ruling in March 2012 when they failed to persuade appeal judges that their treatment was unlawful.

Human Rights my ar*e!

Presumably, the miscreants were prosecuted in the first place on behalf of the Crown.
I thought that QCs acted on behalf of the Crown, and therefore it would not make sense for them to act against the Crown?

Regardless, I thought that lawyers did the law work, but QCs did the forensic "examination" of the witnesses and defendants in court, to pick holes in their stories.

I very much stand to be corrected though.

 

[EFLImpudence]

http://www.doctor-don.com/wiaqc.html

"Queen’s Counsel were described by Justice Ellis in 2002 as:

“…a tremendous prop to the independence of the Bar. He/she is a bulwark of freedom on which the private citizen can implicitly rely in a quest of justice. He/she is a taxi on the rank, obliged, as a taxi is, to give his/her services to the first-comer irrespective of his/her own social preferences, provided that the fee can be paid; such cases serve to remind even scoffers of the magnificent impartiality of our legal system.”

 

[jockscott]

http://www.doctor-don.com/wiaqc.html

"Queen’s Counsel were described by Justice Ellis in 2002 as:

“…a tremendous prop to the independence of the Bar. He/she is a bulwark of freedom on which the private citizen can implicitly rely in a quest of justice. He/she is a taxi on the rank, obliged, as a taxi is, to give his/her services to the first-comer irrespective of his/her own social preferences, provided that the fee can be paid; such cases serve to remind even scoffers of the magnificent impartiality of our legal system.”

How the fook can these scum afford the fees? Oh yeah, forgot all about the legal aid system (used to print money by unscrupulous QC's)

 

[JBR]

Presumably, the miscreants were prosecuted in the first place on behalf of the Crown.
I thought that QCs acted on behalf of the Crown, and therefore it would not make sense for them to act against the Crown?

Regardless, I thought that lawyers did the law work, but QCs did the forensic "examination" of the witnesses and defendants in court, to pick holes in their stories.

I very much stand to be corrected though.

I was watching a documentary on the legal system recently and I'm sure I heard a reference to defence lawyers. From what I remember, they are assigned cases and are not allowed to pick and choose which they take. Moreover, they are obliged to defend to the best of their ability at the risk of severe punishments themselves if they fail to do so.

 

[jeds]

Presumably, the miscreants were prosecuted in the first place on behalf of the Crown.
I thought that QCs acted on behalf of the Crown, and therefore it would not make sense for them to act against the Crown?

Regardless, I thought that lawyers did the law work, but QCs did the forensic "examination" of the witnesses and defendants in court, to pick holes in their stories.

I very much stand to be corrected though.

I was watching a documentary on the legal system recently and I'm sure I heard a reference to defence lawyers. From what I remember, they are assigned cases and are not allowed to pick and choose which they take. Moreover, they are obliged to defend to the best of their ability at the risk of severe punishments themselves if they fail to do so.

As much as it goes against the grain sometimes the system wouldn't work any other way. You can't have barristers putting in effort based on whether they think somebody was guilty or innocent. There'd be no point having the case half the time.