|
|
Post by wapentake on Nov 15, 2022 19:31:26 GMT
...Had this country still had capital punishment I don’t doubt he’d have been executed so all this illustrates why we need human rights legislation... No it doesn't, we'd long since done away with capital punishment by then. I’m afraid your comprehension skills are lacking,I posted this Still had as in the past tense. |
|
|
|
Post by The Squeezed Middle on Nov 15, 2022 19:59:27 GMT
But we'd already abolished it, long before current HR legislation was enacted.
So we didn't "need human rights legislation" to abolish it, as you are attempting to claim.
|
|
|
|
Post by wapentake on Nov 15, 2022 20:08:04 GMT
But we'd already abolished it, long before current HR legislation was enacted. So we didn't "need human rights legislation" to abolish it, as you are attempting to claim. Again your comprehension skills are lacking,please quote where I said in that post we needed human rights legislation to abolish capital punishment. |
|
|
|
Post by The Squeezed Middle on Nov 15, 2022 20:10:57 GMT
That'll be when you said: ...Had this country still had capital punishment I don’t doubt he’d have been executed so all this illustrates why we need human rights legislation... But if you want to play semantic silly buggers you carry on. |
|
|
|
Post by wapentake on Nov 15, 2022 20:23:39 GMT
That'll be when you said: ...Had this country still had capital punishment I don’t doubt he’d have been executed so all this illustrates why we need human rights legislation... But if you want to play semantic silly buggers you carry on. As I said you aren’t able to comprehend a short post, I speculated that had we still had (past tense) capital punishment he’d have been executed and I still believe this. I went on to say all this i.e. the poor defence counsel,evidence hidden,let down by the justice system,the police means a human rights legislation,appeal system is required. Whilst steps have been taken like PACE that doesn’t mean miscarriages of justice can’t happen. |
|
|
|
Post by The Squeezed Middle on Nov 15, 2022 20:44:33 GMT
Given that Human Rights legislation isn't primarily concerned with guilt or innocence, it's hard to see how it would safeguard against miscarriages of justice.
So no, I don't think that your argument supports your conclusion.
|
|
|
|
Post by wapentake on Nov 15, 2022 20:57:35 GMT
Given that Human Rights legislation isn't primarily concerned with guilt or innocence, it's hard to see how it would safeguard against miscarriages of justice. So no, I don't think that your argument supports your conclusion. Well that’s ok you have the right to disagree,however articles 5,6,and 7 does cover what you think it does not and of course protocol 13 capital punishment. www.equalityhumanrights.com/en/human-rights/human-rights-act |
|
|
|
Post by The Squeezed Middle on Nov 15, 2022 21:18:45 GMT
Given that Human Rights legislation isn't primarily concerned with guilt or innocence, it's hard to see how it would safeguard against miscarriages of justice. So no, I don't think that your argument supports your conclusion. Well that’s ok you have the right to disagree,however articles 5,6,and 7 does cover what you think it does not and of course protocol 13 capital punishment. www.equalityhumanrights.com/en/human-rights/human-rights-act
None of which prevent a miscarriage of justice.
|
|
|
|
Post by wapentake on Nov 15, 2022 21:53:48 GMT
None of which prevent a miscarriage of justice.
You think a right to a fair trial cannot go a long way to prevent a miscarriage of justice? |
|
|
|
Post by Toreador on Nov 15, 2022 22:05:30 GMT
I'm not seeing why these things should be our problem. The situation is: Foreigner enters UK, commits crime for which part of the penalty is deportation, complains (spuriously in this case) about their "Human Rights". Sorry, but they should have thought of that before committing the offence. Even assuming that their claim is genuine (a big assumption in it's own right) is it really our duty of care to protect these people from the consequences of their own actions? Surely our focus should be on what happens in this country? Surely we can't be responsible for what happens everywhere else? We don't owe these people. If they show contempt for our laws they should be removed. What happens to them afterwards should not be our problem. Are you saying Squeezed that all people committing crime in the UK holding foreign passports should be deported? A guy who came here as a two year old, has two young kids and a decent job but was caught doing 35mph in a 30 zone. Is he on the next plane home. If not why not? That is not a criminal offence classification; thought you'd have known that, have another stab. |
|
|
|
Post by The Squeezed Middle on Nov 15, 2022 22:36:13 GMT
None of which prevent a miscarriage of justice.
You think a right to a fair trial cannot go a long way to prevent a miscarriage of justice?
We've had those for a long time. But an otherwise fair trial based on bent evidence isn't going to prevent a miscarriage of justice.
Sorry, but the HR legislation doesn't protect against that.
But anyway, the argument is getting off topic now. And the scumbags that are the subject of the OP will be deported.
And rightly so.
|
|
|
|
Post by wapentake on Nov 15, 2022 22:46:57 GMT
You think a right to a fair trial cannot go a long way to prevent a miscarriage of justice?
We've had those for a long time. But an otherwise fair trial based on bent evidence isn't going to prevent a miscarriage of justice.
Sorry, but the HR legislation doesn't protect against that.
But anyway, the argument is getting off topic now. And the scumbags that are the subject of the OP will be deported.
And rightly so.
Then we will have to agree to disagree Regarding this Never disputed that. |
|
|
|
Post by johnofgwent on Nov 15, 2022 23:11:32 GMT
Because I don't agree with endless appeals, potentially to foreign courts on UK domestic matters, when sufficient safeguards already exist within UK domestic law. Now, if you'd answer my question. Then if you don’t agree with endless appeals what you really mean is you’d like the human rights act amended? Regarding foreign courts you do appreciate all this stems from WW2,the holocaust and a desire to enshrine human rights across Europe all from the mind of one Winston S Churchill a well known lefty comrade. And to answer your question,yes rights did exist pre this act though the intention was to enshrine and strengthen them in one act. Bullshit The Americans invented the system post WW2 fully intending to ensure no american citizen ever answered to it. The fact is no American has ever even been forced to give evidence at a UK coroners ‘finding of fact’ which shows the contempt they have for the system they set up to crucify those they vanquished. On the wider matter these shitheads have fought for ten fucking years to avoid being kicked out, including the rather strange claim that they should not be deported for rape of a 13 year old because they are needed in this country as a ROLE MODEL for their (presumably equally sharia indoctrinated) son. In the United Kingdom we used to have a system where the Appeal Court had the right to declare that the accused, having appealed and lost, did NOT have the right to take their appeal further and waste more time and money The Human rights act and a plethora of highly paid ambulance chasers have warped the arrangements we once had into a never ending shambles resembling the UKs death row appeals process It should be terminated The accused having been found convicted should perhaps have ONE go at appealing the conviction on the grounds something was wrong with the way the trial was conducted and / or ONE go at persuading an appeal court the sentence passed was unduly harsh by virtue of not following sentencing guidelines. And if either court is persuaded of the justness of those arguments then so be it But if not, that should be it. As I said these bastards were convicted in 2012 and have been allowed to piss about laughing in the face of their victims for a fucking decade. Time they paid the price demanded. They’re lucky we gone demand Retail Price Index inflation be added. |
|
|
|
Post by wapentake on Nov 15, 2022 23:26:04 GMT
Then if you don’t agree with endless appeals what you really mean is you’d like the human rights act amended? Regarding foreign courts you do appreciate all this stems from WW2,the holocaust and a desire to enshrine human rights across Europe all from the mind of one Winston S Churchill a well known lefty comrade. And to answer your question,yes rights did exist pre this act though the intention was to enshrine and strengthen them in one act. Bullshit The Americans invented the system post WW2 fully intending to ensure no american citizen ever answered to it. The fact is no American has ever even been forced to give evidence at a UK coroners ‘finding of fact’ which shows the contempt they have for the system they set up to crucify those they vanquished. On the wider matter these shitheads have fought for ten fucking years to avoid being kicked out, including the rather strange claim that they should not be deported for rape of a 13 year old because they are needed in this country as a ROLE MODEL for their (presumably equally sharia indoctrinated) son. In the United Kingdom we used to have a system where the Appeal Court had the right to declare that the accused, having appealed and lost, did NOT have the right to take their appeal further and waste more time and money The Human rights act and a plethora of highly paid ambulance chasers have warped the arrangements we once had into a never ending shambles resembling the UKs death row appeals process It should be terminated The accused having been found convicted should perhaps have ONE go at appealing the conviction on the grounds something was wrong with the way the trial was conducted and / or ONE go at persuading an appeal court the sentence passed was unduly harsh by virtue of not following sentencing guidelines. And if either court is persuaded of the justness of those arguments then so be it But if not, that should be it. As I said these bastards were convicted in 2012 and have been allowed to piss about laughing in the face of their victims for a fucking decade. Time they paid the price demanded. They’re lucky we gone demand Retail Price Index inflation be added. Thank you for you reply but a few observations,what shambles of a UK death row appeals process? Some of your assertions regarding the origins of the human rights act are factually incorrect. And perhaps if you’d read the whole thread you’d have understood my stance better. Page 4 of this thread and the first post where I made a reply and said this |
|
|
|
Post by johnofgwent on Nov 16, 2022 7:29:50 GMT
Bullshit The Americans invented the system post WW2 fully intending to ensure no american citizen ever answered to it. The fact is no American has ever even been forced to give evidence at a UK coroners ‘finding of fact’ which shows the contempt they have for the system they set up to crucify those they vanquished. On the wider matter these shitheads have fought for ten fucking years to avoid being kicked out, including the rather strange claim that they should not be deported for rape of a 13 year old because they are needed in this country as a ROLE MODEL for their (presumably equally sharia indoctrinated) son. In the United Kingdom we used to have a system where the Appeal Court had the right to declare that the accused, having appealed and lost, did NOT have the right to take their appeal further and waste more time and money The Human rights act and a plethora of highly paid ambulance chasers have warped the arrangements we once had into a never ending shambles resembling the UKs death row appeals process It should be terminated The accused having been found convicted should perhaps have ONE go at appealing the conviction on the grounds something was wrong with the way the trial was conducted and / or ONE go at persuading an appeal court the sentence passed was unduly harsh by virtue of not following sentencing guidelines. And if either court is persuaded of the justness of those arguments then so be it But if not, that should be it. As I said these bastards were convicted in 2012 and have been allowed to piss about laughing in the face of their victims for a fucking decade. Time they paid the price demanded. They’re lucky we gone demand Retail Price Index inflation be added. Thank you for you reply but a few observations,what shambles of a UK death row appeals process? Some of your assertions regarding the origins of the human rights act are factually incorrect. And perhaps if you’d read the whole thread you’d have understood my stance better. Page 4 of this thread and the first post where I made a reply and said this My mistake I meant the shambles in the US In the UK before shitheads like Longford got the likes of Brady and Hindley off the hook, where I’ve dug into details it seems the convicted swung for it inside about a month. |
|
