|
|
Post by zanygame on Nov 16, 2022 7:48:15 GMT
Lots of people - you were one. oh you mean people on a forum. Not professionals or politicians or learned articles. |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Nov 16, 2022 8:39:32 GMT
OK. So what would I change? I emphasise this is my opinion only although it is by far the most important opinion  I would never be happy for a criminal to be sent to his/her death in another country. So I propose a two level rights. Level 1: Where the crime perpetrated involved Grievous bodily harm, Rape, Trafficking, slavery, murder (Feel free to add other serious crimes) and where the sentence exceeded 5 years in prison. Then only rights considered are the right to life, and humane treatment (I.E Not tortured, locked up forever ) All other rights can not be used as a basis for appeal against deportation. Level 2: The current system. Your thoughts all? |
|
|
|
Post by Handyman on Nov 16, 2022 10:54:43 GMT
As I posted earlier the UK will not Deport a person to their country-of-origin or any other country if the person may be killed, executed, tortured, or persecuted for any other reason, nor will the UK extradite a suspect wanted in connection of criminal offences even terrorism in another country.
That to me is respecting Human Rights even though they may not be a Citizen of the UK.
As I understand it if a foreign national is convicted of a criminal offence in the UK and actually serves more than 12 months in prison then they can be deported should the circumstances warrant it, and none of the above applies.
They as far as aware they can still appeal against Deportation via our Courts if the appeal is rejected, they should be out ASAP no ifs and or buts.
|
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Nov 16, 2022 11:05:31 GMT
As I posted earlier the UK will not Deport a person to their country-of-origin or any other country if the person may be killed, executed, tortured, or persecuted for any other reason, nor will the UK extradite a suspect wanted in connection of criminal offences even terrorism in another country. That to me is respecting Human Rights even though they may not be a Citizen of the UK. As I understand it if a foreign national is convicted of a criminal offence in the UK and actually serves more than 12 months in prison then they can be deported should the circumstances warrant it, and none of the above applies. They as far as aware they can still appeal against Deportation via our Courts if the appeal is rejected, they should be out ASAP no ifs and or buts. so my proposal removes the right to appeal coz I'm married, have children here etc etc if I'm convicted of a very serious crime. |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Nov 16, 2022 11:07:36 GMT
I assume most second appeals are raised on the basis of something the first appeal got wrong.
Not just, can I have another go please.
My system removes a lot of those appeal considerations.
|
|
|
|
Post by Handyman on Nov 16, 2022 12:08:08 GMT
As I posted earlier the UK will not Deport a person to their country-of-origin or any other country if the person may be killed, executed, tortured, or persecuted for any other reason, nor will the UK extradite a suspect wanted in connection of criminal offences even terrorism in another country. That to me is respecting Human Rights even though they may not be a Citizen of the UK. As I understand it if a foreign national is convicted of a criminal offence in the UK and actually serves more than 12 months in prison then they can be deported should the circumstances warrant it, and none of the above applies. They as far as aware they can still appeal against Deportation via our Courts if the appeal is rejected, they should be out ASAP no ifs and or buts. so my proposal removes the right to appeal coz I'm married, have children here etc etc if I'm convicted of a very serious crime. As far as I am aware you can only make an Appeal against any conviction or sentence if you have good grounds to do so, even if you do not face being deported, with an Appeal against deportation IMO having a family here would be part of the Appeal. In this particular Appeal by these odious men, they are tried every avenue possible and failed, at great cost to the taxpayers |
|
|
|
Post by dappy on Nov 16, 2022 17:28:27 GMT
OK. So what would I change? I emphasise this is my opinion only although it is by far the most important opinion I would never be happy for a criminal to be sent to his/her death in another country. So I propose a two level rights. Level 1: Where the crime perpetrated involved Grievous bodily harm, Rape, Trafficking, slavery, murder (Feel free to add other serious crimes) and where the sentence exceeded 5 years in prison. Then only rights considered are the right to life, and humane treatment (I.E Not tortured, locked up forever ) All other rights can not be used as a basis for appeal against deportation. Level 2: The current system. Your thoughts all? Zany, I would agree about minimum rules, eg death penalty etc. Beyond that I think I would want to consider all the relevant facts before making a judgement What was the offence and the circumstances of that offence What are the assessed risks of re-offending Was this a one off offence or a pattern of offending When did the convicted come here (if for example he arrived aged 2 and comes from a poorer country, eg Antigua, then I would see him as morally our problem - we nurtured him, if he arrived six weeks before his crime, I would judge him much more harshly) What impact would deporting him have on his family (if any) - crime is his fault not his kids - try not to punish them I don't believe in laying down hard and fast rules -that just leads to injustices in both directions. Give the judge some guidelines, previous cases do likewise and trust the judge to do his job and use his judgement (clue is in the name) to find an appropriate outcome. |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Nov 16, 2022 19:59:44 GMT
OK. So what would I change? I emphasise this is my opinion only although it is by far the most important opinion I would never be happy for a criminal to be sent to his/her death in another country. So I propose a two level rights. Level 1: Where the crime perpetrated involved Grievous bodily harm, Rape, Trafficking, slavery, murder (Feel free to add other serious crimes) and where the sentence exceeded 5 years in prison. Then only rights considered are the right to life, and humane treatment (I.E Not tortured, locked up forever ) All other rights can not be used as a basis for appeal against deportation. Level 2: The current system. Your thoughts all? Zany, I would agree about minimum rules, eg death penalty etc. Beyond that I think I would want to consider all the relevant facts before making a judgement What was the offence and the circumstances of that offence What are the assessed risks of re-offending Was this a one off offence or a pattern of offending When did the convicted come here (if for example he arrived aged 2 and comes from a poorer country, eg Antigua, then I would see him as morally our problem - we nurtured him, if he arrived six weeks before his crime, I would judge him much more harshly) What impact would deporting him have on his family (if any) - crime is his fault not his kids - try not to punish them I don't believe in laying down hard and fast rules -that just leads to injustices in both directions. Give the judge some guidelines, previous cases do likewise and trust the judge to do his job and use his judgement (clue is in the name) to find an appropriate outcome. The crime is his fault and it is his right to a family life that is the issue, not his kids. There is no right to have a biological father, the children are not denied that right of a family by his crime, just as if he was a murderer we would put him away irrespective of the kids. Step fathers are common and often more than adequate. |
|
|
|
Post by The Squeezed Middle on Nov 16, 2022 20:12:34 GMT
OK. So what would I change? I emphasise this is my opinion only although it is by far the most important opinion I would never be happy for a criminal to be sent to his/her death in another country. So I propose a two level rights. Level 1: Where the crime perpetrated involved Grievous bodily harm, Rape, Trafficking, slavery, murder (Feel free to add other serious crimes) and where the sentence exceeded 5 years in prison. Then only rights considered are the right to life, and humane treatment (I.E Not tortured, locked up forever ) All other rights can not be used as a basis for appeal against deportation. Level 2: The current system. Your thoughts all?
That's what's supposed to happen now and it doesn't appear to be working.
|
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Nov 16, 2022 20:15:59 GMT
OK. So what would I change? I emphasise this is my opinion only although it is by far the most important opinion I would never be happy for a criminal to be sent to his/her death in another country. So I propose a two level rights. Level 1: Where the crime perpetrated involved Grievous bodily harm, Rape, Trafficking, slavery, murder (Feel free to add other serious crimes) and where the sentence exceeded 5 years in prison. Then only rights considered are the right to life, and humane treatment (I.E Not tortured, locked up forever ) All other rights can not be used as a basis for appeal against deportation. Level 2: The current system. Your thoughts all? Zany, I would agree about minimum rules, eg death penalty etc. Beyond that I think I would want to consider all the relevant facts before making a judgement What was the offence and the circumstances of that offence What are the assessed risks of re-offending Was this a one off offence or a pattern of offending When did the convicted come here (if for example he arrived aged 2 and comes from a poorer country, eg Antigua, then I would see him as morally our problem - we nurtured him, if he arrived six weeks before his crime, I would judge him much more harshly) What impact would deporting him have on his family (if any) - crime is his fault not his kids - try not to punish them I don't believe in laying down hard and fast rules -that just leads to injustices in both directions. Give the judge some guidelines, previous cases do likewise and trust the judge to do his job and use his judgement (clue is in the name) to find an appropriate outcome. Firstly I would say that anyone who arrived in the country aged 10 or younger is British as far as I'm concerned and deportation would be a political rather than a legal decision. Beyond that I don't think you have put any consideration for those on the other side of the equation, that being the British public. I think hard and fast rules might cause problems in interpreting law. For instance, sex with a minor used to be statutory rape, even if it was a 16 year old boy and his 15 year old girlfriend. This caused judges huge problems in sentencing and putting the word rapist on a 16 year old that would effect his whole life. However in this case where we are only talking about the boundaries for an appeal I don't see an issue. If you raped and murdered someone and were found guilty. I don't think the public money should be wasted on looking at how deportation might effect your future. |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Nov 16, 2022 20:19:12 GMT
OK. So what would I change? I emphasise this is my opinion only although it is by far the most important opinion I would never be happy for a criminal to be sent to his/her death in another country. So I propose a two level rights. Level 1: Where the crime perpetrated involved Grievous bodily harm, Rape, Trafficking, slavery, murder (Feel free to add other serious crimes) and where the sentence exceeded 5 years in prison. Then only rights considered are the right to life, and humane treatment (I.E Not tortured, locked up forever ) All other rights can not be used as a basis for appeal against deportation. Level 2: The current system. Your thoughts all?
That's what's supposed to happen now and it doesn't appear to be working.
I would be amazed if my suggestions were already in practice. I mean, I know the world hangs on my every word, but that's so quick. |
|
|
|
Post by The Squeezed Middle on Nov 16, 2022 20:22:36 GMT
I would propose a different solution.
How about early release conditional upon deportation?
So that the convict would have a choice of serving his full sentence in HMP or serving out his license period back in his own country (with no right to return to the UK).
So, for example, he could serve his full 15 years in HMP or serve 10 years and then be deported.
Note however, that if he chose to serve the full sentence that would not guarantee the right to remain or that we would not seek deportation anyway.
There, that should sort the wheat from the chaff.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Squeezed Middle on Nov 16, 2022 20:26:27 GMT
I would be amazed if my suggestions were already in practice. I mean, I know the world hangs on my every word, but that's so quick. LOL! Sorry to disappoint. But Human Rights cases are supposed to balance the rights of the individual against those of wider society, which should already include the considerations that you've mentioned. Sadly, as we apparently agree, all too often that appears not to be the case. |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Nov 16, 2022 20:35:30 GMT
I would propose a different solution. How about early release conditional upon deportation? So that the convict would have a choice of serving his full sentence in HMP or serving out his license period back in his own country (with no right to return to the UK). So, for example, he could serve his full 15 years in HMP or serve 10 years and then be deported. Note however, that if he chose to serve the full sentence that would not guarantee the right to remain or that we would not seek deportation anyway. There, that should sort the wheat from the chaff. You could add it in, but I think its very hard on the victims of the crime. Mr A slashed your daughter, bad enough he only got 5 years, but now he gets an option on that. I don't see it solving the human rights claims, for presumably the reason they go through years of court fighting is that they don't want to be deported. |
|
|
|
Post by dappy on Nov 16, 2022 20:37:49 GMT
I think we are agreed that hard and fast rules are not the way to go Zany.
You seem to have created an arbitrary hard and fast age rule at 10years old and one that doesn’t currently exist in British law. Are you suggesting that a man who committed a crime aged 30 should by law be treated differently if he arrived here aged 9 years 364 days or if he arrived here aged 10 years 1 day.
You asked about taking into account the interests of the British public. I agree. That was the point of considering the nature and circumstances of his crime, his criminal record and the assessed risk of reoffending.
I would be much more in favour of deporting a man arriving from Antigua a year before his offence who had already run up several instances of severe drunken violence, who was lucky that his victim this time survived but was convicted of GBH, got into repeated fights in prison and for whom reports suggested posed a high risk of reoffending than I would a man who arrived aged 11 lived a blameless life but caught his wife cheating and in anger punched her lover who fell back in anger hit his head and died and who has served his time for murder been a model prisoner and is assessed as having extremely low chance of reoffending.
Your more rules driven system would push the opposite outcome.
|
|
