What made you 'Shake your Head' today?

[r3nault]

By the way, your post perfectly illustrates the earlier point I made that you consistently pick a tangential and non-central point to argue. I made it abundantly clear in my post that an escaped fugitive pleading not guilty to escaping was ridiculous, but that nevertheless due process must be consistent in its application. At no point did I suggest he wasn’t guilty or his escape was accidental, yet that’s what you decided to argue.

Since you seem to struggle to detect it, I will spell it out for you. My central contention is:

Due process must be applied consistently, otherwise it just does not work.

I am not suggesting due process is perfect, but much like democracy, it’s the “worst system we have, except for all the other ones”.

[C8RKH]

James, I merely pointed out that the plea was nonsense (and listed the reasons why re the circumstances in I admit I sarcastic manner for effect) as I don't see why we need a court case in this instance, so why we need a plea, and therefore why we need to spend any more effort, time or money on this person as the evidence is not circumstantial nor the act "alleged". 

In the case of Brand, whilst I do not like the man or his actions/views/comedy what I find disturbing is the way he is being hounded whilst allegations have been made and are unproven (unlike the escapee where the escape was a fact and is proven beyond reasonable doubt - the sarcastic comments).

If Dame Caroline and our Politicians were consistent then whenever a politician was "alleged" or "accused" of doing something then under her current actions the MP would immediately be suspended, without pay or allowances, and not be able to earn any money from their activities as an MP. Can't see that happening, in any country. So much for due process being applied consistently". (apologies for the selective quote).

I am railing against wokeism I guess. I also find it bizarre, that an organisation like the BBC, that has a track record of failure in addressing and bringing to the fore the behaviour of its stars and employees feels it has any morale right to comment given it's past cover ups and turning of the blind eye. Bonkers.

 

We obviously are not compatible and I refuse to take myself seriously as life is too short. Feel free to hit the "ignore" button against my profile and you will never again be irritated or annoyed by any of my posts. My wife would give her right arm for that facility I am sure.

[r3nault]

Andy, we agree the plea is nonsense, I’m not contesting that. How do you propose to change these cases so they don’t go to court? Who decides and how do they decide when the facts of the case disqualify the defendant from entering a plea and defending the case? And what protections do you have to ensure innocent people aren’t automatically sent to prison under this rule?

Re: Russell Brand, I have no opinion on his case, I was merely pointing out that, read verbatim, the government letters are making an enquiry as to whether he earns money on his content. Would it be fair to assume the British government has no jurisdiction over the social media companies involved? If the letters had a directive or request to cease paying Brand, I would agree with a characterisation that they are “out to get him”. My issue with this is - again, reading the letters verbatim and not second-guessing their intent - one has to believe they are out to get him, to read the letters as evidence of such. In other words, the reasoning is circular. What would be fascinating to me, would be a letter simply replying “yes” and see what letter comes next.

We had a local state premier here who stepped down (perhaps politically forced out) due to allegations of corruption which were as yet unproven at the time. The same happened to a state member of parliament. So it does happen.

I won’t be drawn on “wokeism”, but suffice to say, the reasoning you give for the BBC not having a leg to stand on in this case is a classic “tu quoque” (you too) logical fallacy.

Finally, yes, I know I could ignore your posts. But where I see un/misinformed, discriminatory, hypocritical and/or plain illogical opinions, I engage to provide more balance to the discussion and try not to allow this to become an echo chamber. You - and probably others here - seem to view me as some far left, activist hippy, when nothing could be further from the truth; I like to learn and soak up knowledge of issues and understand some of their complexities and nuance, and I’ve yet to see a complex sociological issue have a simple yes/no paradigm (as often espoused by conservative viewpoints). I’m aware I am in a demographic minority here and my posts will therefore not receive much support - but owning a Lotus is for anyone who wants to and has the means, whatever their colour, sex, gender, creed, religion etc, and I’m trying to do my bit so they feel welcomed here.

[C8RKH]

James, thanks for your reply.  In the "escapee" case, the issue for me stems from the authorities taking this to court. The guy was imprisoned, he escaped. He got caught. Just take him back to prison. Slap him in a highly secure cell. Deny him any privileges and just feed him, make sure he is held in humane conditions, and ensure he is chained at all times so he cannot escape again. When he comes to court for his original charges, add this as an additional consideration and when/if he is found guilty ensure the sentence reflects this event and use it to deny bail and any early release. Job done. Safeguards in place. Minimal aggro and extra spend.  I accept that common sense can not always be applied.

You are perfectly within your rights to "think" that I am a right wing fascist/extremist, as opposed to a "far left, activist hippy" based on those statements, but remember, that will be your perception and your perception may not be reality.

Do not make an assumption about how I view you. The fact is, I don't have a view on you as I have never met you and do not know you.

You seem to have a pre-occuptation with race/ethnicity, as eventually you bring it into the debate. I'll not be drawn into that as it is, for me, irrelevant and not something I think about nor consider. I consider the person as a person, not anything else, and certainly not labels.

 

[r3nault]

We’ve almost got somewhere Andy. If I read your suggestion correctly, it sounds like an exception purely for the crime of escaping custody. To me it sounds reasonable, though I’d be interested if any criminal lawyers or criminologists could foresee a flaw in that approach. As an example - and obviously a very different case - a 16yo got sentenced to life with a non parole of 25 years in the US, due to mandatory minimum sentencing laws (which is a perversion of due process as it assumes a sentence without regard to the specifics of the case). Her crime? Killing her rapist, who had been doing so for years. Anyway, it’s not relevant here, but an example of an unintended consequence of an otherwise fair-sounding law.

Please don’t put words in my mouth. I don’t at all think or view you as a “fascist”, and I actually abhor the left-right dichotomy which I think over-simplifies values and beliefs (and politics). Similarly, I have no preoccupation with race; it actually works the other way around, where my “other-ness” is frequently brought forward. My observation is I am often a lone voice here, but to my mind, better lone than absent.

What I am consistently trying to do is bring more nuance to a conversation, as I believe an us/them, right/left approach is reductive and serves no purpose.

I will give credit where it’s due though, so thank you for answering the questions I posed.

[Escape]

Rest assured James, everyone is welcome here, as long as they like cars (and related banter). You don't even have to own a Lotus or be particularly found of the brand, though that obviously helps. 😉 

I can often relate to Andy's posts such as the one regarding the escapee. The last years (decades) there has been a shift to wokeism (for lack of a better word), leaving many to feel that logic and justice are forgotten in the process. I agree with you both sides of a story need to be looked at, it's just the media seem to be focusing too much on that other side. Ironically, you're example of the convicted rape victim is, to me, an indication of this: logically, few if any would see such a severe sentence as just for someone who was clearly a victim first. But the right to defend yourself, your loved ones, your property/business etc seems to have been eroded in favor of protecting the right of criminals. There are too many stories about criminals getting the better end of the deal after a victim reacts. One very striking and sad example happening to someone on here. 😞 This, as much as anything, will lead to a counter reaction demanding harsher justice.

And so it goes in many different subjects: if the pendulum swings too far to one side, the reaction will be stronger as well. Even if few disagree the original position needed to be changed.

[910Esprit]

I'm sure the 'escapee' will put up a plausible defence that he was having a mental health crisis or was in fear of his life from another inmate etc...  On the plus side, by going back through the court system he can have a new sentence imposed - assuming he is found guilty

[Barrykearley]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-66903749
 

if ever I needed more reason to dislike the police - yup the met does it again.

stringing up one of their own officers from lawless london - the fall out is going to be massive - the CPS will also be put under extreme scrutiny I hope. Nice to see officers in their droves handing back weapons.

[Escape]

As above, I'd say this is another case where the balance has shifted too far. I don't know the details about this incident (the articles remain very vague about the exact circumstances) and don't dispute there needs to be a system in place to monitor the use of force by law enforcement agencies. But lately it seems the officers concerned are considered guilty by default and receive little or no support from their unit or hierarchy.
Judging by the information available, I thought the use of deadly force in the recent incidents that led to the riots in Paris and Brussels was very much defendable. If we want police to defend our rights and uphold the law, we need to give them the means and authority to do just that and make split second decisions in difficult circumstances. You can't expect someone to risk his or her life in the line of duty when there's no support after an incident. And when criminals seem to get off much easier. Then they'll just go and sit at the side of the road with a speed gun, as that's a safe option and brings in money. And we wont like that either, will we? 

[C8RKH]

And another great piece of reporting from the British Bullshit Company that says the below. The truth is that the MoD has received a request from the Home Office known as a Military Aid to the Civil Authorities (Maca) request. So the MoD is not "offering" anything, but complying with a request. Small but important details I would have thought for any journalist to get accurate up front.

"The Ministry of Defence is offering soldiers to support armed police in London after dozens of Met officers stood down from firearms duties."

 

[Barrykearley]

And normal practice is that they don’t allow ex soldiers whom are trained to kill use a gun in the police force. Looks like the MET and government are panicking 

[pete]

Now Sadiq Khan is going to charge to use the blackwall tunnel

 

[march]

19 minutes ago, pete said:

Now Sadiq Khan is going to charge to use the blackwall tunnel

I have been following the 'Bladerunners' over the past week or so - it pretty much looks like warfare in London and suburbs.

[Toeside]

The felling of the sycamore tree on the Roman wall  in Northumberland by eco vandals.

[C8RKH]

First time I have seen any mention of "eco vandals", thought it was a 16 year lad, or should I say fookwit, that has been arrested?

[Toeside]

Generic term for people who vandalise nature. Agreed a complete fookwit to do that 

[pete]

1 hour ago, C8RKH said:

First time I have seen any mention of "eco vandals", thought it was a 16 year lad, or should I say fookwit, that has been arrested?

BBC term? 

[Escape]

That even made it into our news, so sad... 😞

But I'm sure we can't use the term eco vandal. It will be just a troubled youth who wanted to reach out after being upset because someone farted in his general direction. 😠

[LotusLeftLotusRight]

If anyone knows who did it, can they put me in touch? There is about a dozen or so sycamore trees adjacent to our garden. None of them belong to me. I would love someone to cut them down. The amount of seeds and leaves that fall from them and end up in my gutters, garden and driveway is astonishing. It keeps me busy each weekend from October to December every year.

[C8RKH]

I'd rather use those sycamores of yours to string the village idiot up from his testicles and allow the local rooks to peck his eyes out.

A senseless, moronic, act of vandalism but no doubt the softies will be jumping to their defence blaming society for failing them. No. They failed society and should be kicked out of it.

I don't know if it was the 16 year old they arrested who "did it", but when they do find the bloke he did (anyone want to bet against the fact it was a bloke?) then I really do hope his testicles are removed with a blunt, rusty saw. Preferably the one the scrote used to cut the tree down.

[Bibs]

He needs 10,000 hours community payback as a free gardener in public spaces. Little shit, I hope he's stigmatised for life for it, what an awful thing to do, no doubt for 'likes' from his peers. 

[C8RKH]

@Bibs, you missed your calling. A much needed wig, a black cloak, and a job as a magistrate beckons.

[Painterdave]

He could have gone and cut some ulez cameras down

[C8RKH]

Personally I'd have been happy if he had lost his legs during the process.

[Painterdave]

He's probably lucky he didn't lose his legs