Quizzes & Puzzles3 mins ago
Human Rights
European Court of Human Rights has decreed in their infinite wisdom that 3 murderers currently being detained at Her Majesty's Pleasure in this country, have been wrongfully sentenced - the then HS changed the term of 25 years that they were originally given to Whole of Life.
Why don't these people keep their noses out of our business ?
Any opinions out there ? - I'm sure there will be !!
FBG40
Why don't these people keep their noses out of our business ?
Any opinions out there ? - I'm sure there will be !!
FBG40
Answers
What I don't understand is, not just this case but why do we allow Europe to dictate to us, what we can and can't do, In 1975 we voted for a Common Market not a You will do as we say. The sooner we have a referendum the better IMO.
19:46 Tue 09th Jul 2013
Thank you Fred, I've been having a delve into myself because it's an interesting case and because the police handling of it looks so shambolic, but it's nice to hear form somweone with some hands on experience of it. I was interested in the phone calls side of things more than anything as if the defence version of the phone calls is right he couldn't possibly have done it in a million years. But with the police saying the recordings were destryoed after 28 days and then a contradictory police log stating they had been copied some months later it's hard to judge exactly what's going on with it. Plus the police have a lot of evidnece held under Public Interest Immunity, which I would think in an ideal world if you are going to incarcerate anyone for life with no chance of release ever, really shouldn't happen. That is certainly not in the public interest. I'm not apologising for the man, if he is guilty he can stay in prison, but a whole life term is a very serious deal and I'm glad that the review has been insisted upon by the ECHR.
Sharingan, stuff like the phone calls is just the stuff that we seize upon when defending. It makes a wonderful distraction for the jury, to get them away from what they should be concentrating on, the key and significant evidence. There's nothing new in it, because juries never change. Cicero, who made his name as an advocate, and who wrote a book on advocacy, called this technique "kicking up dust"; the jury lost sight of what they were meant to following. That was in Ancient Rome, and it still applies.
-- answer removed --