Bazj Posted February 7, 2009 Report Share Posted February 7, 2009 You are innocent in this country till proven guilty in a court of law Unless of course you get caught by a speed camera or a traffic signal camera or a bus lane camera; in which case you are presumed guilty and then it is up to you to prove your innocence rather than the other way round. Just thought I'd mention it! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tara_dad Posted February 7, 2009 Report Share Posted February 7, 2009 You are innocent in this country till proven guilty in a court of law wrong ............. As baz as just explained some . You are only presumed innocent until a court of law. Innocent ends At the time you are charged . Plus I would never have thought I would be agreeing with baz as well Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
safeway56 Posted February 7, 2009 Report Share Posted February 7, 2009 Wrong again Tara-dad...You are still presumed innocent in our justice system even after you are charged, until the verdict is delivered you are still presumed innocent. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tara_dad Posted February 7, 2009 Report Share Posted February 7, 2009 Nope your confusing justice with innocent its an old saying. that?s why your presumed innocent that why the judge say how do you plea guilty or not guilty. before that you would have been integrated and investigated on where evidence has to be put in against you or you would not be in court. Then the law will then works for you or against you. that why its called presumed. Its is on record your not innocent it?s the court and the justice system decides wither you are guilty or not guilty. if you think that not wright Explain on the spot fines, motoring fines, speeding fines, ect. Ect. its on you to show your innocent same with presumed you have to use the law to your advantage the Courts and the justice system decides the punishment for the law you have broken if found guilty or if not guilty clears all record of the event that lead you to court and all intelligence and records is cleaned Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
safeway56 Posted February 7, 2009 Report Share Posted February 7, 2009 I give up...you have verbally tortured me to death. I presume that your ignorance of the British system of law is because you aren't British. Judging by the standards of your posts, English isn't your first language. Not your fault mind..my Serb-Croat is a little rusty as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P J Posted February 7, 2009 Report Share Posted February 7, 2009 If, as is often claimed, a person is innocent until proven guilty then why does remand exist? Just a thought. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tara_dad Posted February 7, 2009 Report Share Posted February 7, 2009 I give up...you have verbally tortured me to death. I presume that your ignorance of the British system of law is because you aren't British. Judging by the standards of your posts, English isn't your first language. Not your fault mind..my Serb-Croat is a little rusty as well. Just as I considered, it would down to insults when debiting I would envisage nothing more from you. You bite every time . Nevertheless your entitle to your views and I can say that without insulting you. It?s a pity your weak. And do you not think that a bit antipathetic and racist with the paraphrase"because you aren't British. " ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eagle Posted February 7, 2009 Report Share Posted February 7, 2009 Tara dad, he is excusing your weaknesses on the assumption you are not British, if you feel it is insulting then is it not you who are the racist? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tara_dad Posted February 7, 2009 Report Share Posted February 7, 2009 may be should have been on the lines like this maybe I give up...you have articulately tortured me to death. I assume that your inaccuracy of the British system of law is on account of you are not British. Judging by the standards of your correspondences, English is not your original language. Not your inaccuracy mind..My Serb-Croat is a little rusty as well. anyway back to topic Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Father Jack Hackett Posted February 7, 2009 Report Share Posted February 7, 2009 Can't see what the problem is with toture at Guantanamo personally. If they had information and refused to divulge it, why not take what ever steps needed to recover it? A personal friend of Josef Stalin were you I cannot believe any civilised British citizen could advocate use of torture. I mean lets face it, If (as some of the detainees were) captured in a war zone and then claim to be on "holiday" there is something not quite right .........isn't there? The British armed forces in Afghanistan? We have not declared war so what are we doing there (holiday?). Seems the Afghans have a right to torture our troops according to your thinking. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tara_dad Posted February 7, 2009 Report Share Posted February 7, 2009 [quote="Father Jack Hackett" The British armed forces in Afghanistan? We have not declared war so what are we doing there (holiday?). Seems the Afghans have a right to torture our troops according to your thinking. ] they will Remember the gulf campaign? the downed pilots, bravo two zero, and the marines and one was a woman all tortured and then some displayed on TV for the world to see how soon we forget Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted February 7, 2009 Author Report Share Posted February 7, 2009 So that makes it OK for us to do the same; errm I thought the whole reason (given by Bush.Bliar) for invasion, was to end the reign of barbaric regimes - people in glass houses etc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Father Jack Hackett Posted February 7, 2009 Report Share Posted February 7, 2009 You missed my point they will Remember the gulf campaign? I don't remember seeing Britain on the invite to that invasion either. Observer gets my point. We cannot play moral policeman if we do not retain our own sense of decency and tagging along with the Yanks like a 51st state of a politically inferior country beggars belief. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tara_dad Posted February 7, 2009 Report Share Posted February 7, 2009 I have the full admiration for you and additionally what you stand for. I assume that you know all to well form where you live. That life is valuable and now in peace time. what happens to Irish local drug pusher if found dealing form what I have seen people want it like that it stops it from happing and deailers know what to look foreword to if found ? . Now just going on history alone we all know from the troubles the IRA used tortured on its own people as well as British troop and so did the British to the IRA and other originations. However after bombing how many people and Victims? would like to have had them in a room and what do you think, would have happed. we have all said it and wished it. And we all know that the IRA tortured and then killed its victims. However, if you know who was responsible for a bombing how do you fetch them to justice without gain information. if it works and it stop do you complain on how it was got ? or do you complain that nothing is done and let it happens again because no one was that bothered to get the intelligence and information by any means? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lt Kije Posted February 7, 2009 Report Share Posted February 7, 2009 However, if you know who was responsible for a bombing how do you fetch them to justice without gain information. You do it the old fashioned way you conduct an investigation, present the evidence in a court of law and await a decision. It works in most civilized societies Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tara_dad Posted February 7, 2009 Report Share Posted February 7, 2009 And how do you think that Achieved ? interrogation in some way or another Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Father Jack Hackett Posted February 7, 2009 Report Share Posted February 7, 2009 if it works and it stop do you complain on how it was got ? Too right I do. That is what makes me proud to be British and that is what makes me civilised. Failure to question barbaric behaviour is the difference between a civilised community and anarchy. If you are willing to mutilate human beings whilst they are defenceless what makes you different than a bomber? Putting your head in the sand while your government commits atrocities has consequences we understand only too well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mary Posted February 7, 2009 Report Share Posted February 7, 2009 At Miliband's request, the details had been edited out of a judgement last year, which found MI5 took part in his unlawful interrogation. Wednesday's ruling followed a challenge by media organisations. Miliband said allegations of MI5 involvement in any possible torture had been referred to the attorney general for investigation months ago. "We never condone or authorise the use of torture," he said. Clive Stafford Smith, Binyam Mohamed's lawyer and the director of legal rights charity Reprieve, accused Miliband of having bowed to "illegal" US requests under the administration of former president George W. Bush. "The US is under a legal duty to investigate the crime of torture, not to suppress evidence that it happened," Stafford Smith said. "The UK has a similar duty. For the foreign secretary to give in to these illegal demands by the Bush administration is capitulation to blackmail, pure and simple. It is hardly Britain's finest hour." Stafford Smith added it was now "up to President Obama to put his money where his mouth is. He must repudiate his predecessor's reprehensible policy." Ok Observer I get what you are saying - do you not think that there was similar collusion during past wars and war criminal cases? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted February 7, 2009 Author Report Share Posted February 7, 2009 Of course - and Tara is probably right about torture in Ulster - but precedents don't make it right. IF "the West" is the beacon of rightiousness, not sinking to the level of terrorists is one of the burdens that goes with it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.