|
|
Post by Totheleft on Feb 15, 2024 18:02:52 GMT
I rest my case. Well done lefty - you proved my point. And not even dappy was that dumb. Certainly haven't the only person I seemed to made Dumb I's you by saying the EDL was peaceful lol. |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Feb 15, 2024 18:15:09 GMT
Seems this judge has some very odd views about what should be punished. In 2022, Ikram sent ex-police constable James Watts to prison for 20 weeks after he shared jokes about George Floyd in a WhatsApp group. It seems that jokes made in private which are worthy of jail time, but the glorification of racist terrorism on the streets of London is not... How odd. What was the what's App group do you know? And don't you think a police officer shouldnt be Making jokes about the unlawful murder of George Floyd by police officers in America? It was a private group of 6 people swapping memes - quite possibly the same memes as we have had posted on this website. |
|
|
|
Post by Totheleft on Feb 15, 2024 18:28:08 GMT
What was the what's App group do you know? And don't you think a police officer shouldnt be Making jokes about the unlawful murder of George Floyd by police officers in America? It was a private group of 6 people swapping memes - quite possibly the same memes as we have had posted on this website. Are you saying the Mod team have allowed unlawful memes on this site? I can't recall such Memes on this site. but must of done if you say so. But not Surprised if they have been posted on here looking at some members post . |
|
|
|
Post by Fairsociety on Feb 15, 2024 18:32:22 GMT
It was a private group of 6 people swapping memes - quite possibly the same memes as we have had posted on this website. Are you saying the Mod team have allowed unlawful memes on this site? I can't recall such Memes on this site. but must of done if you say so. But not Surprised if they have been posted on here looking at some members post . FFS......... |
|
|
|
Post by The Squeezed Middle on Feb 15, 2024 18:54:01 GMT
It was a private group of 6 people swapping memes - quite possibly the same memes as we have had posted on this website. Are you saying the Mod team have allowed unlawful memes on this site? I can't recall such Memes on this site. but must of done if you say so. But not Surprised if they have been posted on here looking at some members post . What, as judged by a Judge whose judgements are currently being judged as potentially biased and therefore unlawful?  |
|
|
|
Post by Totheleft on Feb 15, 2024 19:07:34 GMT
Are you saying the Mod team have allowed unlawful memes on this site? I can't recall such Memes on this site. but must of done if you say so. But not Surprised if they have been posted on here looking at some members post . What, as judged by a Judge whose judgements are currently being judged as potentially biased and therefore unlawful? No judged by a DPP and what judgement are unlawful? A judge is acting with in.the law to Suspend a sentence It may be the wrong judgement. But unlawful it Certainly isn't You understand that don't you ? |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Feb 15, 2024 22:19:43 GMT
What, as judged by a Judge whose judgements are currently being judged as potentially biased and therefore unlawful? No judged by a DPP and what judgement are unlawful? A judge is acting with in.the law to Suspend a sentence It may be the wrong judgement. But unlawful it Certainly isn't You understand that don't you ? The DPP does not judge anything |
|
|
|
Post by Totheleft on Feb 15, 2024 22:34:19 GMT
No judged by a DPP and what judgement are unlawful? A judge is acting with in.the law to Suspend a sentence It may be the wrong judgement. But unlawful it Certainly isn't You understand that don't you ? The DPP does not judge anything Of Course they do they judge if a case should be brought to trail or not Are saying the police or a judge decide that. A judge can stop a trial because of not enough evidence by the prosecutors the Dpp. But it's them that judged the trail to go Ahead . Don't you realise that? |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Feb 15, 2024 22:48:21 GMT
The DPP does not judge anything Of Course they do they judge if a case should be brought to trail or not Are saying the police or a judge decide that. A judge can stop a trial because of not enough evidence by the prosecutors the Dpp. But it's them that judged the trail to go Ahead . Don't you realise that? As I said - the DPP do not judge anything. They take a case to court and either the Judge or Jury pass judgement on innocence or guilt. It's a simple system. |
|
|
|
Post by Totheleft on Feb 15, 2024 23:06:53 GMT
Of Course they do they judge if a case should be brought to trail or not Are saying the police or a judge decide that. A judge can stop a trial because of not enough evidence by the prosecutors the Dpp. But it's them that judged the trail to go Ahead . Don't you realise that? As I said - the DPP do not judge anything. They take a case to court and either the Judge or Jury pass judgement on innocence or guilt. It's a simple system. Yes it's a simple system what don't you understand that the system is based on the first Judgement by the DPP. To bring the case to trail.what don't you understand about such Simple System? |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Feb 16, 2024 7:34:39 GMT
As I said - the DPP do not judge anything. They take a case to court and either the Judge or Jury pass judgement on innocence or guilt. It's a simple system. Yes it's a simple system what don't you understand that the system is based on the first Judgement by the DPP. To bring the case to trail.what don't you understand about such Simple System? the DPP decide on whether there is a case to answer - the Judge and Jury determine guilt or not. Under your system we would be holding Keir Starmer responsible for judging that Jimmy Saville was innocent |
|
|
|
Post by Handyman on Feb 16, 2024 8:43:05 GMT
No judged by a DPP and what judgement are unlawful? A judge is acting with in.the law to Suspend a sentence It may be the wrong judgement. But unlawful it Certainly isn't You understand that don't you ? The DPP does not judge anything Indeed he or she heads the CPS Prosecutions side of things, not the Judiciary that is the Attorney Generals remit. The refugee who wore a paraglider image at a pro-Palestine protest will reportedly have her immigration status reviewed. Heba Alhayek, 29, came to the UK claiming to be fleeing from Hamas and previously claimed her life would be at risk if she went back to Gaza after her family's criticism of the terror group. Now the Home Office is reportedly looking into her immigration status after she was convicted under the Terrorism Act 2000. The Home Office told the Telegraph that 'supporting banned terrorist groups will not be tolerated'. The trio lied via their Brief at first they claimed the offending stickers of Paragliders attacking the Jews were put on by someone else then the stated they had done it, the alleged Refugee IMO lied to stay in the UK, she should be thrown out but I doubt it will happen |
|
|
|
Post by steppenwolf on Feb 17, 2024 8:29:42 GMT
There are a couple of other factors in this case which need considering. Firstly the judge in the case is a muslim and is a long-time supporter of the Palestinian cause. This is shown by his social media account where he likes various posts that attack Israel and support Palestine. I gather that it's not recommended that judges participate in social media - violation of the code - but muslims do what they like. When he was "rumbled" the judge promptly deleted his account - presumably before people went more deeply into it and found more inappropriate comments. So the judge should be investigated to see if he's a suitable person to be a judge IMO.
Also one of the women involved in wearing the "paraglider images" is a Palestinian refugee. And one of her claims to qualify was that she wanted to get away from Hamas. Yet here she is marching in support of Hamas's attack on Israel. This should also be investigated IMO.
The danger here is that we're "appeasing" the muslims. But just like Hitler they interpret appeasement as weakness and their behaviour simply gets worse. This was an opportunity to hand down a harsh sentence and boot these people out of the country if they've lied to get into this country. And it's also an opportunity to review guidelines about having muslim judges - especially when the defendant is a muslim.
|
|
|
|
Post by see2 on Feb 17, 2024 8:49:23 GMT
Yes it's a simple system what don't you understand that the system is based on the first Judgement by the DPP. To bring the case to trail.what don't you understand about such Simple System? the DPP decide on whether there is a case to answer - the Judge and Jury determine guilt or not. Under your system we would be holding Keir Starmer responsible for judging that Jimmy Saville was innocent Keir Starmer never suggested or even indicated that Jimmy Saville was innocent. |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Feb 17, 2024 8:57:43 GMT
There are a couple of other factors in this case which need considering. Firstly the judge in the case is a muslim and is a long-time supporter of the Palestinian cause. This is shown by his social media account where he likes various posts that attack Israel and support Palestine. I gather that it's not recommended that judges participate in social media - violation of the code - but muslims do what they like. When he was "rumbled" the judge promptly deleted his account - presumably before people went more deeply into it and found more inappropriate comments. So the judge should be investigated to see if he's a suitable person to be a judge IMO. Also one of the women involved in wearing the "paraglider images" is a Palestinian refugee. And one of her claims to qualify was that she wanted to get away from Hamas. Yet here she is marching in support of Hamas's attack on Israel. This should also be investigated IMO. The danger here is that we're "appeasing" the muslims. But just like Hitler they interpret appeasement as weakness and their behaviour simply gets worse. This was an opportunity to hand down a harsh sentence and boot these people out of the country if they've lied to get into this country. And it's also an opportunity to review guidelines about having muslim judges - especially when the defendant is a muslim. It is all balance and most people can see the balance is skewed. Leave a bacon sandwich outside a Mosque and you get a year in jail, burn a poppy and shout over a two minute silence and you get a £50 fine. |
|
