We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
Debate House Prices
In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non MoneySaving matters are no longer permitted. This includes wider debates about general house prices, the economy and politics. As a result, we have taken the decision to keep this board permanently closed, but it remains viewable for users who may find some useful information in it. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
is that al megrahi still alive? nearly a year after his release - another lefty
Comments
-
Not according to the jury that convicted him.
who could only go on the evidence that was presented to them. the fact he had grounds for appeal suggests that the evidence they were presented with was incomplete / inaccurate etc. many convictions by jury have been overturned for these reasons.Those who will not reason, are bigots, those who cannot, are fools, and those who dare not, are slaves. - Lord Byron0 -
-
who could only go on the evidence that was presented to them. the fact he had grounds for appeal suggests that the evidence they were presented with was incomplete / inaccurate etc. many convictions by jury have been overturned for these reasons.
Which brings me back to my pointIveSeenTheLight wrote: »Totally agree with the bold part, however on the conviction, it seems hard to believe such a thing.
When you hear of so many cases where the defence get's off on a technicality, was Megrahi's defence so incompetant that there was sufficient proof to convict an innocent man?:wall:
What we've got here is....... failure to communicate.
Some men you just can't reach.
:wall:0 -
IveSeenTheLight wrote: »Then the justice system should be questioned.
As it is (until proven otherwise) he is a convicted criminal.
I agree, ti should be done that way. His appeal was dropped when he was released, though....much enquiry having been made concerning a gentleman, who had quitted a company where Johnson was, and no information being obtained; at last Johnson observed, that 'he did not care to speak ill of any man behind his back, but he believed the gentleman was an attorney'.0 -
IveSeenTheLight wrote: »Totally agree with the bold part, however on the conviction, it seems hard to believe such a thing.
When you hear of so many cases where the defence get's off on a technicality, was Megrahi's defence so incompetant that there was sufficient proof to convict an innocent man?
Such as? There are very, very few cases where someone "gets off on a technicality", outside Daily Mail Planet, anyway....much enquiry having been made concerning a gentleman, who had quitted a company where Johnson was, and no information being obtained; at last Johnson observed, that 'he did not care to speak ill of any man behind his back, but he believed the gentleman was an attorney'.0 -
...much enquiry having been made concerning a gentleman, who had quitted a company where Johnson was, and no information being obtained; at last Johnson observed, that 'he did not care to speak ill of any man behind his back, but he believed the gentleman was an attorney'.0
-
I love reading these arguments where nobody really knows what they are talking about, and then resort to using Wikipedia :eek:to back themselves :rotfl:'In nature, there are neither rewards nor punishments - there are Consequences.'0
-
neverdespairgirl wrote: »Wht jury? It wasn't a jury trial!
OK then, in the case of the judge who decided the trial. If he chose trial by judge, it was his decision to live with. The guy is a convicted mass murderer, deal with it. The guy should have been executed in his sleep rather than dragged through trial anyway. Guilty B@stard.0 -
IveSeenTheLight wrote: »Then the justice system should be questioned.
As it is (until proven otherwise) he is a convicted criminal.
Else we could release any other criminals where people 'think' the conviction is very shaky
So are you saying it would have been preferable to let him die in jail while the wheels of justice slowly turned to eventually exonerate him posthumously?
Many reasonable people were staggered by the court's verdict on the non-evidence it was presented with.0 -
If there wasnt sufficient evidence, the CPS would never have raised the case.
There was plenty of evidence, there are too many conspiracists and lefty idiots that want to blame the system though.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.5K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.2K Spending & Discounts
- 245.1K Work, Benefits & Business
- 600.7K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.4K Life & Family
- 258.8K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards