Jump to content

Potential suicide bombers guilty or not guilty?


Recommended Posts

Four potential suicide bombers go out to cause death and destruction in London in 2005 but their bombs fail to detonate. They were jailed for 'life' in 2007.

Their lawyers are launching an appeal to get the convictions overturned, claiming that doubts by a senior scientist that the bombs were viable were not disclosed to the defence during their trial, thus making their convictions unsafe.

Apparantly the bombs failed because the men got the chemical mixture wrong. Does that make them any less guilty than had the bombs gone off? Dammit! They made the bombs and went out with them to cause death and destruction! The very fact that they did so makes them just as guilty, the intention was there, just fortunate that they cocked up in making the bombs (unfortunate for them).

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's their intent which counts.


This was not some publicity stunt with comedy fake bombs, they intended for the bombs to go bang and kill people.


There's no way their appeal will succeed, just another case of parasite lawyers sucking as much out of the legal aid system as they possibly can. Maybe we need an Examining Magistrate type system to rule on whether the non-disclosure of certain evidence has any potential relevance to the defence, without going through all the rigmarole of a full appeal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Speaking of potential suicide bombers, I spotted a black drug dealer type BMW in repair yard in Birmingham last week with the registration D14 ALA re spaced for best effect of course. Seems that being sensitive to the feelings of the rest of the community or the country they live in was lost on this individual. Back of the car looked like a bomb had gone off btw.


Bill :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Those lawyers are pleading the innocence of avowed suicide bombers by virtue of faulty workmanship on their own bombs.


They have got a point though if the workmanship had not been faulty then they would not have had a case :|


Perhaps the lawyers could get together with the suspects and show them how a bomb should be made and give them a practical demonstration in their offices of how it should have been detonated.


I suppose one way to stop this type of appeal is to bring in a ruling that if the appeal is lost then the defending lawyer has to serve half of the term that the offender got or even double. If they are successful then the lawyer should be liable for the cost of the appeal and any out of pocket expenses of the court and prosecution.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Create New...