Human Rights.. or human wrong.. Legal Aid

83
Found 10th Sep 2017
Lee Rigby killer Michael Adebolajo launches personal injury claim.

BBC Link

Lawyers representing Adebolajo have lodged papers in the Queen's Bench Division of the High Court in London, where judges analyse damages claims relating to personal injury.

Paperwork shows a claim was filed on 20 July. Papers list Adebolajo as the claimant and the Ministry of Justice (MoJ) as the defendant, but they give no detail of Adebolajo's allegations.

So should the tax payer (US) Be footing the bill for this scum...

Maybe bringing back hanging for scum like this is the answer so he won't be costing us additional money while he trys to recruit from prison and

Adebolajo lost two front teeth in 2015 in what he claimed was an assault by five prison officers at London's high-security Belmarsh prison two years ago. The officers were cleared of blame.

Meanwhile another prisoner gets treated totally differently..

Link - Murder of Kevin Crehan?

So while a convicted murderer loses two front teeth and can take legal action, they guy who put a bacon sandwich outside a mosque not only dies in prison but the prison service/government won't even release his cause of death.. Which whatever happened is a massive failure of the prison service..
Community Updates
Misc
Top comments
Anyone representing this turd should be euthanised.
This makes you re-think your ideas on shoot to kill policy for terrorists.
A disgrace .He should not get a penny . This country's legal systems a joke .
Erubadhron8 m ago

Human rights are for everyone or for noone.Vile as his crimes patently …Human rights are for everyone or for noone.Vile as his crimes patently were, our criminal justice system entitles him to not have a bunch of heavies smash some of his teeth out. Any disagreement with that is incredibly unpatriotic, ironically.

The law should have the power to revoke certain Human rights on an adhoc basis.

This guy is lucky to have the protection of Prison Officers and should be grateful for it.
83 Comments
Anyone representing this turd should be euthanised.
This makes you re-think your ideas on shoot to kill policy for terrorists.
And people wonder as to why there is so much division amongst communities in this country.
I'm astounded that this should even be considered. He killed a serving British soldier so should rot in prison along with his remaining teeth
And yet this man wrongfully imprisoned for 17 years hasn't received a penny as far as I'm aware,

theguardian.com/uk-…man

Not that this killer has, yet....
Edited by: "shadey12" 10th Sep 2017
I went to boarding school, and it taught me lots. Firstly try and get away with murder, but secondly and if not more importantly when you're caught with your trousers down by your ankles so to speak you take all the punishment. What was he expecting a stay at Butlins!
One of the worst people in our prisons, he can go to hell.
How comes the vocal people in this thread are only ever outraged by Muslims or those who are associated with the left?

Rarely hear a peep out of them if the subject doesn't have a metaphorical lefty, liberal or Islamic tag.

Clearly their opinions are heavily slanted one way.
Destard1 h, 4 m ago

How comes the vocal people in this thread are only ever outraged by …How comes the vocal people in this thread are only ever outraged by Muslims or those who are associated with the left? Rarely hear a peep out of them if the subject doesn't have a metaphorical lefty, liberal or Islamic tag.Clearly their opinions are heavily slanted one way.


For very heavily slanted opinions, just look in the mirror.
There isn't a comparable crime involving a Christian terrorist and a Muslim British soldier that springs to mind however I'm sure if this was Ian Huntley or Peter Sutcliffe there would be some outrage.
A disgrace .He should not get a penny . This country's legal systems a joke .
Cases like this bring it to attention because it's a worse case scenario in the argument for legal aid the problem is it can be abused like anything else that generally makes us a decent and moral country. You could say how many people would of gone to prison for crimes they didn't commit if legal aid never existed.
larrylightweight4 m ago

Cases like this bring it to attention because it's a worse case scenario …Cases like this bring it to attention because it's a worse case scenario in the argument for legal aid the problem is it can be abused like anything else that generally makes us a decent and moral country. You could say how many people would of gone to prison for crimes they didn't commit if legal aid never existed.


Maybe time for a change in the law when a judge at sentencing someone to a whole life sentence can also remove some of their human rights.
Original Poster
shadey1248 m ago

For very heavily slanted opinions, just look in the mirror.There isn't a …For very heavily slanted opinions, just look in the mirror.There isn't a comparable crime involving a Christian terrorist and a Muslim British soldier that springs to mind however I'm sure if this was Ian Huntley or Peter Sutcliffe there would be some outrage.

The Welsh guy who drove into people at a mosque in London is the closest I can think.
Link
Currently up for "attempted murder"
Which whilst serious is still not a patch on being butchered in cold blood.
Human rights are for everyone or for noone.

Vile as his crimes patently were, our criminal justice system entitles him to not have a bunch of heavies smash some of his teeth out. Any disagreement with that is incredibly unpatriotic, ironically.
Edited by: "Erubadhron" 10th Sep 2017
Erubadhron8 m ago

Human rights are for everyone or for noone.Vile as his crimes patently …Human rights are for everyone or for noone.Vile as his crimes patently were, our criminal justice system entitles him to not have a bunch of heavies smash some of his teeth out. Any disagreement with that is incredibly unpatriotic, ironically.

The law should have the power to revoke certain Human rights on an adhoc basis.

This guy is lucky to have the protection of Prison Officers and should be grateful for it.
Dawsy11 m ago

The Welsh guy who drove into people at a mosque in London is the closest I …The Welsh guy who drove into people at a mosque in London is the closest I can think.LinkCurrently up for "attempted murder"Which whilst serious is still not a patch on being butchered in cold blood.

Hence the reason I mentioned Huntley and Sutcliffe, I think people would be outraged and comment on this forum.
Some people on this thread just seem to say people are only outraged because he's a Muslim.
I don't really care what religion he says he was.
SJHan6 m ago

The law should have the power to revoke certain Human rights on an adhoc …The law should have the power to revoke certain Human rights on an adhoc basis.This guy is lucky to have the protection of Prison Officers and should be grateful for it.

What happens if you are fitted up for a crime you didn't commit but you have no rights because they were taken away on a adhoc basis.
larrylightweight2 m ago

What happens if you are fitted up for a crime you didn't commit but you …What happens if you are fitted up for a crime you didn't commit but you have no rights because they were taken away on a adhoc basis.

Are you suggesting that it's not completely obvious that this guy slaughtered one of our soldiers in a street and there is doubt in this case?
SJHan4 m ago

Are you suggesting that it's not completely obvious that this guy …Are you suggesting that it's not completely obvious that this guy slaughtered one of our soldiers in a street and there is doubt in this case?


No he's not.
SJHan5 m ago

Are you suggesting that it's not completely obvious that this guy …Are you suggesting that it's not completely obvious that this guy slaughtered one of our soldiers in a street and there is doubt in this case?

No I am not at all that is not what I said. like I said in an earlier comment this is the problem with something decent like legal aid it can be abused but you also can't take human rights away on a adhoc basis because while I agree in this case it sounds perfect in another case it could be completely wrong as somebody may have been fitted up for a crime they didn't commit and now they can't defend themselves.
larrylightweight1 m ago

No I am not at all that is not what I said. like I said in an earlier …No I am not at all that is not what I said. like I said in an earlier comment this is the problem with something decent like legal aid it can be abused but you also can't take human rights away on a adhoc basis because while I agree in this case it sounds perfect in another case it could be completely wrong as somebody may have been fitted up for a crime they didn't commit and now they can't defend themselves.

And in those cases it's obvious that the human rights wouldn't be taken away on an ADHOC basis.
Where the evidence is undeniable irrefutable then that's when they should lose their human rights.
For they took away the human rights of the victims.

As shadey said and I support the same. It don't matter who they are or their beliefs. Had it been Sutcliffe or some other lifer without the possibility of parole most don't deserve their human rights

foot note

I don't know what's wrong with this new site. You type something, you change your mind and go away and when you come back and reply to someone else - it remembers what you typed before and who you were commenting to originally
Edited by: "philphil61" 10th Sep 2017
SJHan2 m ago

And in those cases it's obvious that the human rights wouldn't be taken …And in those cases it's obvious that the human rights wouldn't be taken away on an ADHOC basis.


But it isn't.
People have spent decades in prison and then been found to be innocent. There's rarely anything "obvious" in the criminal justice system.
Erubadhron1 m ago

But it isn't.People have spent decades in prison and then been found to be …But it isn't.People have spent decades in prison and then been found to be innocent. There's rarely anything "obvious" in the criminal justice system.

Are you suggesting that there is any doubt in THIS case?
Are you suggesting that there is doubt in every single prosecution in the UK?
The funny thing is, the kinds of places that do kill people for committing crimes, are also the kinds of places that would kill you for disagreeing with their criminal justice system...

Just a thought
SJHan2 m ago

Are you suggesting that there is any doubt in THIS case?Are you suggesting …Are you suggesting that there is any doubt in THIS case?Are you suggesting that there is doubt in every single prosecution in the UK?


Did I say or insinuate there were doubts in this case? I haven't as far as I'm aware.

Doubt is literally how our Criminal Justice System.

You could walk up to Theresa May herself and slap her around the face with a 3ft glittery salmon, and if your defence can produce enough doubt that you did it, you'll be as free as a bird.
Erubadhron2 m ago

Did I say or insinuate there were doubts in this case? I haven't as far as …Did I say or insinuate there were doubts in this case? I haven't as far as I'm aware.Doubt is literally how our Criminal Justice System.You could walk up to Theresa May herself and slap her around the face with a 3ft glittery salmon, and if your defence can produce enough doubt that you did it, you'll be as free as a bird.

So Ron. You agree that there are individual cases that can be proven, with 100% certainty, the guilt of the criminal?

And in those cases, some human rights COULD be removed on an ADHOC basis?
SJHan12 m ago

And in those cases it's obvious that the human rights wouldn't be taken …And in those cases it's obvious that the human rights wouldn't be taken away on an ADHOC basis.

How do you know once you start taking the human rights of someone away in one case it's a slippery slope to getting it wrong in other cases. People were hung for crimes they didn't commit but were tortured into confessions only to be hung. whilst I don't much care for what happens to this guy I do care about human rights in general.
larrylightweight1 m ago

How do you know once you start taking the human rights of someone away in …How do you know once you start taking the human rights of someone away in one case it's a slippery slope to getting it wrong in other cases. People were hung for crimes they didn't commit but were tortured into confessions only to be hung. whilst I don't much care for what happens to this guy I do care about human rights in general.

You are comparing cases where there could be doubt with cases where there literally is no doubt whatsoever.
SJHan5 m ago

So Ron. You agree that there are individual cases that can be proven, with …So Ron. You agree that there are individual cases that can be proven, with 100% certainty, the guilt of the criminal?And in those cases, some human rights COULD be removed on an ADHOC basis?


I'm not going into theoreticals with you, but yes to your first point.
An incredibly small amount of prosecutions are open and shut "I did it, it was me" cases.

Your second point is obviously too big a question for this kind of site.
Our Government could, if it wanted to, start hanging paedophiles, terrorists, rapists etc. It won't, and it shouldn't.
The point is, I'm sure most people wouldn't be entirely devastated to see Ian Huntley drop from the hatch.
The counterpoint is how far down the ladder of severity do you stop?
Rape? Murder? Arson? Burglary? Shoplifting?
Erubadhron5 m ago

The point is, I'm sure most people wouldn't be entirely devastated to see …The point is, I'm sure most people wouldn't be entirely devastated to see Ian Huntley drop from the hatch.The counterpoint is how far down the ladder of severity do you stop?Rape? Murder? Arson? Burglary? Shoplifting?

But there could be doubts that ian Huntley is guilty, however small.
There are NO doubts in this case and many other cases.
The world would be a much nicer place to live in if there were fewer lawyers. Of course some do good work but the vast majority don't.
Lawyers defending mega corporations against the small guy.
Lawyers knowingly defending the guilty and others knowingly prosecuting the innocent.
Lawyers threatening people with action to bully them. Basically thugs in suits.
Lawyers overcharging for their services to explain rules and regulations drawn up by other overpaid lawyers.
Lawyers prosecuting British soldiers using false witness statements to defraud the State, that's us the British taxpayer, black white and brown.
Disgusting but the price we pay for having the protection of law.
Some of you would like to undo the magna carta
I'm sure the officers used appropriate force in the circumstances.
I'm just glad that nobody who thinks we should be allowed to remove human rights will ever be in any kind of position where they can effect meaningful change.
Original Poster
CoeK11 m ago

I'm just glad that nobody who thinks we should be allowed to remove human …I'm just glad that nobody who thinks we should be allowed to remove human rights will ever be in any kind of position where they can effect meaningful change.

So your quite happy if someone commited a mass murder, massacre or plotted to kill 1000's They should have the same protection and rights as somone who urinated in public or was drunk and disorderly.
Personally if you do an inhumane act your inhumane.. So you don't get human rights.

It's also funny how real hard-core terrorists are allegedly killed in drone and missile strikes etc. Where are the human rights for them..
Does everyone have a right to a trial, to be presented the evedence against them and to have legal representation provided for them if they can't afford it..
CoeK11 m ago

I'm just glad that nobody who thinks we should be allowed to remove human …I'm just glad that nobody who thinks we should be allowed to remove human rights will ever be in any kind of position where they can effect meaningful change.


Why they're dining out on the Brexit result so much
Dawsy5 m ago

Does everyone have a right to a trial, to be presented the evedence …Does everyone have a right to a trial, to be presented the evedence against them and to have legal representation provided for them if they can't afford it..


Yes.
That's the way the law works.
SJHan56 m ago

Are you suggesting that it's not completely obvious that this guy …Are you suggesting that it's not completely obvious that this guy slaughtered one of our soldiers in a street and there is doubt in this case?


LOL, where he did he say that?
SJHan46 m ago

Are you suggesting that there is any doubt in THIS case?Are you suggesting …Are you suggesting that there is any doubt in THIS case?Are you suggesting that there is doubt in every single prosecution in the UK?


LOL, where did he say that?
Post a comment
Avatar
@
    Text

    Top Discussions