Guest pelmetman Posted May 19, 2017 Share Posted May 19, 2017 *-) ........ http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4521658/Rochdale-sex-gang-leader-fighting-deportation-Pakistan.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John52 Posted May 20, 2017 Share Posted May 20, 2017 I think everyone has a right to have their case heard. The hideously expensive legal cost only benefits the lawyers - but this Government won't change that. Too many lawyers are also MP's perhaps? So they prefer to attack the weak like benefit claimants? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Kirby Posted May 20, 2017 Share Posted May 20, 2017 John52 - 2017-05-20 8:33 AM I think everyone has a right to have their case heard. Agreed. The hideously expensive legal cost only benefits the lawyers - but this Government won't change that. Legal cases will never be cheap. Lawyers will always be well paid for their knowledge. So, how could government change that? Too many lawyers are also MP's perhaps? Don't think this is relevant to the case in point or the broader issue. So they prefer to attack the weak like benefit claimants? Definitely not relevant to either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John52 Posted May 20, 2017 Share Posted May 20, 2017 Brian Kirby - 2017-05-20 11:01 AM Legal cases will never be cheap. Lawyers will always be well paid for their knowledge. So, how could government change that? Simplify the law for a start. And allow more competition. One of the brightest lads in my school studied to be a lawyer (what a waste). He had to work for a pittance sending out threatening debt collection letters his employer charged a lot of money for. Then he failed his finals because the standard was high that year and the Lawyers Trade Union (They prefer to call it 'Law Society') only let a limited number through to maintain their monopoly. Too many lawyers are also MP's perhaps? Brian Kirby - 2017-05-20 11:01 AM Don't think this is relevant to the case in point or the broader issue. Of course it is. Turkeys don't vote for Christmas So they prefer to attack the weak like benefit claimants? Brian Kirby - 2017-05-20 11:01 AM Definitely not relevant to either. Except where they use it as a diversion. Like where they blame high housing costs on those forced to claim housing benefit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Kirby Posted May 20, 2017 Share Posted May 20, 2017 John52 - 2017-05-20 11:36 AM Brian Kirby - 2017-05-20 11:01 AM Legal cases will never be cheap. Lawyers will always be well paid for their knowledge. So, how could government change that? Simplify the law for a start. And allow more competition. One of the brightest lads in my school studied to be a lawyer (what a waste). He had to work for a pittance sending out threatening debt collection letters his employer charged a lot of money for. Then he failed his finals because the standard was high that year and the Lawyers Trade Union (They prefer to call it 'Law Society') only let a limited number through to maintain their monopoly. Sounds simple, doesn't it? Simplify the law. 1,000 years approximately of accumulated common law, plus several hundred years of accumulated statute law, plus God knows how many years of accumulated constitutional law. And replace it with what? Surely that could only be by statute law, to be voted into effect through parliament? So who decides which laws to repeal, which to amend, and which to make anew? But to achieve what? Cheap, over the counter, legal representation, conducted by who? Who would then take on the study necessary to enter that profession? Future shortage of lawyers? Better than high cost lawyers and a complex tapestry of law that can allow a member of the public to take on government through the courts, and win? Too many lawyers are also MP's perhaps? Brian Kirby - 2017-05-20 11:01 AM Don't think this is relevant to the case in point or the broader issue. Of course it is. Turkeys don't vote for Christmas I agree that the man should be entitled to his day in court. That, surely, is the case in point? It is to try whether his deportation would be legal. If it isn't, it won't stick, so an even bigger waste of money. How many lawyers are also MPs, or how they vote (though they did vote him that right) still seems irrelevant to whether or not he should have that right and the case be heard. So they prefer to attack the weak like benefit claimants? Brian Kirby - 2017-05-20 11:01 AM Definitely not relevant to either. Except where they use it as a diversion. Like where they blame high housing costs on those forced to claim housing benefit Then, don't allow yourself to be diverted! :-) But, what,or who,ever "they" (I assume government?) choose to blame for high housing costs, this man seems to be getting legal aid to bring his case, with Home Office (so government?) approval. Or is the case crowd-funded? But in either event, the Home Secretary will have approved the case, so maybe governments aren't quite as cynical as you imply? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Violet1956 Posted May 20, 2017 Share Posted May 20, 2017 pelmetman - 2017-05-19 10:25 PM *-) ........ http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4521658/Rochdale-sex-gang-leader-fighting-deportation-Pakistan.html Have you got a crystal ball Dave? He's appealing that's all. The legal processes are slow and that's frustrating but we don't have an outcome yet. Hold fast let's see what happens before we get all upset. I wish you would watch the final episode of Three girls. As Barry said on the other thread there was a court scene which included actual statements made during the trial including one by Shabir Ahmed which showed how base and dangerous he is. Don't lose faith yet. Veronica Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Violet1956 Posted May 20, 2017 Share Posted May 20, 2017 Just to add. The article in your link does show how we still are'nt doing right by the victims. That one of the perpetrators is allowed to be anywhere near the hometown of one of the girls who was abused has to be tackled. He should be subject to a kind of ASBO order requiring him not to go anywhere near it. Shocking and disappointing in the extreme. Veronica Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted May 21, 2017 Share Posted May 21, 2017 Violet1956 - 2017-05-20 5:22 PM pelmetman - 2017-05-19 10:25 PM *-) ........ http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4521658/Rochdale-sex-gang-leader-fighting-deportation-Pakistan.html Have you got a crystal ball Dave? He's appealing that's all. The legal processes are slow and that's frustrating but we don't have an outcome yet. Hold fast let's see what happens before we get all upset. I wish you would watch the final episode of Three girls. As Barry said on the other thread there was a court scene which included actual statements made during the trial including one by Shabir Ahmed which showed how base and dangerous he is. Don't lose faith yet. Veronica Don't need a crystal ball ;-) ....... I have years of experience of reading how the human rights act is being used to defend the indefensible *-) ....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Violet1956 Posted May 21, 2017 Share Posted May 21, 2017 pelmetman - 2017-05-21 9:23 AM Violet1956 - 2017-05-20 5:22 PM pelmetman - 2017-05-19 10:25 PM *-) ........ http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4521658/Rochdale-sex-gang-leader-fighting-deportation-Pakistan.html Have you got a crystal ball Dave? He's appealing that's all. The legal processes are slow and that's frustrating but we don't have an outcome yet. Hold fast let's see what happens before we get all upset. I wish you would watch the final episode of Three girls. As Barry said on the other thread there was a court scene which included actual statements made during the trial including one by Shabir Ahmed which showed how base and dangerous he is. Don't lose faith yet. Veronica Don't need a crystal ball ;-) ....... I have years of experience of reading how the human rights act is being used to defend the indefensible *-) ....... Years of reading what though Dave? Do you think the likes of the DM report on every case regardless of the outcome? I suggest it is more likely that the editor chooses the one that will incense their readership and keep them buying the paper that reinforces their beliefs drawn from very limited knowledge or experience of what protections everyone enjoys under the Act and the Convention on which it is based. Have you read the Convention Dave? I have and there's nothing objectionable in it. Quite the contrary. Here's a link to it and you can form your own view having read it. Hopefully you may never need to rely on it yourself but you never know. http://www.echr.coe.int/Documents/Convention_ENG.pdf BTW I'm not saying that courts in the UK or the European Court of Human Rights always make the right decision in my eyes either when applying it. I'm just saying that where there is a bad decision it is down to the courts themselves not the Human Rights Convention itself. Veronica Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted May 21, 2017 Share Posted May 21, 2017 Violet1956 - 2017-05-21 11:22 AM pelmetman - 2017-05-21 9:23 AM Violet1956 - 2017-05-20 5:22 PM pelmetman - 2017-05-19 10:25 PM *-) ........ http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4521658/Rochdale-sex-gang-leader-fighting-deportation-Pakistan.html Have you got a crystal ball Dave? He's appealing that's all. The legal processes are slow and that's frustrating but we don't have an outcome yet. Hold fast let's see what happens before we get all upset. I wish you would watch the final episode of Three girls. As Barry said on the other thread there was a court scene which included actual statements made during the trial including one by Shabir Ahmed which showed how base and dangerous he is. Don't lose faith yet. Veronica Don't need a crystal ball ;-) ....... I have years of experience of reading how the human rights act is being used to defend the indefensible *-) ....... Years of reading what though Dave? Do you think the likes of the DM report on every case regardless of the outcome? I suggest it is more likely that the editor chooses the one that will incense their readership and keep them buying the paper that reinforces their beliefs drawn from very limited knowledge or experience of what protections everyone enjoys under the Act and the Convention on which it is based. Have you read the Convention Dave? I have and there's nothing objectionable in it. Quite the contrary. Here's a link to it and you can form your own view having read it. Hopefully you may never need to rely on it yourself but you never know. http://www.echr.coe.int/Documents/Convention_ENG.pdf BTW I'm not saying that courts in the UK or the European Court of Human Rights always make the right decision in my eyes either when applying it. I'm just saying that where there is a bad decision it is down to the courts themselves not the Human Rights Convention itself. Veronica I object to the fact that criminals have access to it for a start *-) ........and folk wonder why the re offending rates are so high :-| ........ Its because there is a highly paid excuse merchant at their beck and call >:-) ......Plus their worst case scenario is a few years in one of HMP (Her Majesties Pleasure Parks) even for murder >:-( ...... I've already decided if I'm the only one left when I'm proper old, once my dosh runs out and then I'm gonna get myself locked up :D ...... To die locked up and In debt is my ambition B-) ..... Hopefully I'll be able to drag it out suing the system for the wrong pile cream or summit.......BTW perhaps I can have your number on speed dial for my illegal phone Veronica :D ....... Well you do like to defend the indefensible don't you ;-) .......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Violet1956 Posted May 21, 2017 Share Posted May 21, 2017 pelmetman - 2017-05-21 6:03 PM Violet1956 - 2017-05-21 11:22 AM pelmetman - 2017-05-21 9:23 AM Violet1956 - 2017-05-20 5:22 PM pelmetman - 2017-05-19 10:25 PM *-) ........ http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4521658/Rochdale-sex-gang-leader-fighting-deportation-Pakistan.html Have you got a crystal ball Dave? He's appealing that's all. The legal processes are slow and that's frustrating but we don't have an outcome yet. Hold fast let's see what happens before we get all upset. I wish you would watch the final episode of Three girls. As Barry said on the other thread there was a court scene which included actual statements made during the trial including one by Shabir Ahmed which showed how base and dangerous he is. Don't lose faith yet. Veronica Don't need a crystal ball ;-) ....... I have years of experience of reading how the human rights act is being used to defend the indefensible *-) ....... Years of reading what though Dave? Do you think the likes of the DM report on every case regardless of the outcome? I suggest it is more likely that the editor chooses the one that will incense their readership and keep them buying the paper that reinforces their beliefs drawn from very limited knowledge or experience of what protections everyone enjoys under the Act and the Convention on which it is based. Have you read the Convention Dave? I have and there's nothing objectionable in it. Quite the contrary. Here's a link to it and you can form your own view having read it. Hopefully you may never need to rely on it yourself but you never know. http://www.echr.coe.int/Documents/Convention_ENG.pdf BTW I'm not saying that courts in the UK or the European Court of Human Rights always make the right decision in my eyes either when applying it. I'm just saying that where there is a bad decision it is down to the courts themselves not the Human Rights Convention itself. Veronica I object to the fact that criminals have access to it for a start *-) ........and folk wonder why the re offending rates are so high :-| ........ Its because there is a highly paid excuse merchant at their beck and call >:-) ......Plus their worst case scenario is a few years in one of HMP (Her Majesties Pleasure Parks) even for murder >:-( ...... I've already decided if I'm the only one left when I'm proper old, once my dosh runs out and then I'm gonna get myself locked up :D ...... To die locked up and In debt is my ambition B-) ..... Hopefully I'll be able to drag it out suing the system for the wrong pile cream or summit.......BTW perhaps I can have your number on speed dial for my illegal phone Veronica :D ....... Well you do like to defend the indefensible don't you ;-) .......... You gave me the creeps a bit there Dave. However I've got over it. So in your view there are people who should not enjoy the same rights under the Human Rights Convention as others based on the fact that they are criminals. What kind of criminals would you have as worthy or not worthy of the same protections as the rest of us law abiding folk Dave? What should be denied them and why? Veronica Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted May 21, 2017 Share Posted May 21, 2017 Violet1956 - 2017-05-21 6:16 PM So in your view there are people who should not enjoy the same rights under the Human Rights Convention as others based on the fact that they are criminals. What kind of criminals would you have as worthy or not worthy of the same protections as the rest of us law abiding folk Dave? What should be denied them and why? Veronica All of them ;-) .......and if we converted Her Majesties Pleasure parks back to prisons......then at least their victims may get some sense of retribution :-| .......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John52 Posted May 22, 2017 Share Posted May 22, 2017 pelmetman - 2017-05-21 6:54 PM Violet1956 - 2017-05-21 6:16 PM So in your view there are people who should not enjoy the same rights under the Human Rights Convention as others based on the fact that they are criminals. What kind of criminals would you have as worthy or not worthy of the same protections as the rest of us law abiding folk Dave? What should be denied them and why? Veronica All of them ;-) .......and if we converted Her Majesties Pleasure parks back to prisons......then at least their victims may get some sense of retribution :-| .......... Lock 'em in a cell for 23 hours a day where they learn to get what they want through violence and intimidation. Then expect them to transfom into model citizens on release. *-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Violet1956 Posted May 22, 2017 Share Posted May 22, 2017 pelmetman - 2017-05-21 6:54 PM Violet1956 - 2017-05-21 6:16 PM So in your view there are people who should not enjoy the same rights under the Human Rights Convention as others based on the fact that they are criminals. What kind of criminals would you have as worthy or not worthy of the same protections as the rest of us law abiding folk Dave? What should be denied them and why? Veronica All of them ;-) .......and if we converted Her Majesties Pleasure parks back to prisons......then at least their victims may get some sense of retribution :-| .......... All of them? You mean all criminals shouldn't have the protection of the Human Rights Convention? You haven't read it yet have you? It's not been published in the DM but it doesn't take much longer to read than one day's issue. It doesn't say all cons have to have TVs in their cells btw -go on read it and brace yourself as you discover what hideous indulgences it affords the unworthy. Veronica ;-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted May 23, 2017 Share Posted May 23, 2017 Violet1956 - 2017-05-22 1:15 PM All of them? You mean all criminals shouldn't have the protection of the Human Rights Convention? ) Yes :-| ...... Losing that right should be a automatic part of any prison sentence *-) ........ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Violet1956 Posted May 23, 2017 Share Posted May 23, 2017 pelmetman - 2017-05-23 7:46 AM Violet1956 - 2017-05-22 1:15 PM All of them? You mean all criminals shouldn't have the protection of the Human Rights Convention? ) Yes :-| ...... Losing that right should be a automatic part of any prison sentence *-) ........ Read the Convention Dave for heaven's sake. I am becoming a little exasperated that you don't appear to have armed yourself with the requisite knowledge that would enable you to advance an informed opinion or present a considered argument on why prisoners should be deprived of any of the protections afforded to everyone under the human rights convention. Veronica Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted May 23, 2017 Share Posted May 23, 2017 Violet1956 - 2017-05-23 7:15 PM pelmetman - 2017-05-23 7:46 AM Violet1956 - 2017-05-22 1:15 PM All of them? You mean all criminals shouldn't have the protection of the Human Rights Convention? ) Yes :-| ...... Losing that right should be a automatic part of any prison sentence *-) ........ Read the Convention Dave for heaven's sake. I am becoming a little exasperated that you don't appear to have armed yourself with the requisite knowledge that would enable you to advance an informed opinion or present a considered argument on why prisoners should be deprived of any of the protections afforded to everyone under the human rights convention. Veronica I don't need to read it to be aware of its affect do I? *-) ......... It's clearly turned out to be a lucrative meal ticket for the lawyering trade........So sod the consequences eh? >:-) ......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted May 23, 2017 Share Posted May 23, 2017 John52 - 2017-05-22 12:05 PM pelmetman - 2017-05-21 6:54 PM Violet1956 - 2017-05-21 6:16 PM So in your view there are people who should not enjoy the same rights under the Human Rights Convention as others based on the fact that they are criminals. What kind of criminals would you have as worthy or not worthy of the same protections as the rest of us law abiding folk Dave? What should be denied them and why? Veronica All of them ;-) .......and if we converted Her Majesties Pleasure parks back to prisons......then at least their victims may get some sense of retribution :-| .......... Lock 'em in a cell for 23 hours a day where they learn to get what they want through violence and intimidation. Then expect them to transfom into model citizens on release. *-) So they beat themselves up do they? *-) .......When will you loony lefty concerned citizens learn you're just giving scrots a stick to beat us with by making them out to be the victims :-|....... THEY ARE NOT THE VICTIMS THEIR VICTIMS ARE THE VICTIMS FFS!!......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.