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

1…6791112…17

Comments

  • neverdespairgirl
    neverdespairgirl Posts: 16,501 Forumite
    IveSeenTheLight wrote: »
    NDG, If you were innocently convicted, would you drop your appeal when you were released?

    I wouldn't, I would continue to fight until I was exhonourated.

    As it is, he remains a convicted criminal responsable for the Lockerbie Bombing.


    If I was seriously ill, and I either dropped it and went home, or didn't drop it and stayed inside, I might very well.
    ...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'.
  • neverdespairgirl
    neverdespairgirl Posts: 16,501 Forumite
    IveSeenTheLight wrote: »
    I know someone who works in forensics and despite the evidence they can produce, it's amazing how many cases are discmissed, because a procedure isn't exactly followed in the courts process.

    Because the evidence isn't there, then!
    ...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'.
  • IveSeenTheLight
    IveSeenTheLight Posts: 13,322 Forumite
    neverdespairgirl wrote: »
    Because the evidence isn't there, then!

    No, it's not about the evidence found, it's about how it is utilised by the lawyers.

    Anyhow, the fact remains that Al Megrahi was found guilty of the crime and remains to this day a convicted criminal.

    We all have our opinions, but mine is that the the day the convicted criminal was released from prison was not a day for justice, but that the justice minister showed that there was no justice in Scotland.

    It was not a day of justice, it was a day that terrorism won.

    It was a day that Scotland announced it's leniency towards terrorism.

    If he truly was innocent, then he would have prooved it within a court of law

    http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/geraldwarner/100007061/if-the-lockerbie-atrocity-does-not-merit-unremitting-punishment-what-crime-does/
    :wall:
    What we've got here is....... failure to communicate.
    Some men you just can't reach.
    :wall:
  • Degenerate
    Degenerate Posts: 2,166 Forumite
    IveSeenTheLight wrote: »
    If he truly was innocent, then he would have prooved it within a court of law

    So now it's up to people to prove their innocence? It always used to be up to the prosecution to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt - something which they miserably failed to do, but the judges perversely issued a guilty verdict anyway.
  • Malcolm.
    Malcolm. Posts: 1,079 Forumite
    edited 16 July 2010 at 7:13PM
    Degenerate wrote: »
    It always used to be up to the prosecution to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt - something which they miserably failed to do, but the judges perversely issued a guilty verdict anyway.

    This often happens in international high profile cases. A kangaroo court knows the verdict before the trial begins.

    How often are those standing trial for war crimes the victors?

    edit: to add that I'm not particular familiar with the details of this case, but if he did do it, 'I was just following someones orders' defense has historically not been sufficient.
  • neverdespairgirl
    neverdespairgirl Posts: 16,501 Forumite
    Malcolm. wrote: »
    How often are those standing trial for war crimes the victors?

    Treason never prospers.
    What's the reason?
    If it prospers, none dare call it treason
    ...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'.
  • neverdespairgirl
    neverdespairgirl Posts: 16,501 Forumite
    Degenerate wrote: »
    So now it's up to people to prove their innocence? It always used to be up to the prosecution to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt - something which they miserably failed to do, but the judges perversely issued a guilty verdict anyway.

    Once convicted, it's the other way round, however. Thr burden (in England & Wales) is on the defendant to show the conviction is unsafe.
    ...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'.
  • neverdespairgirl
    neverdespairgirl Posts: 16,501 Forumite
    IveSeenTheLight wrote: »
    No, it's not about the evidence found, it's about how it is utilised by the lawyers.

    There are rules about chains of evidence and testing for good reasons.
    ...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'.
  • IveSeenTheLight
    IveSeenTheLight Posts: 13,322 Forumite
    Degenerate wrote: »
    So now it's up to people to prove their innocence? It always used to be up to the prosecution to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt - something which they miserably failed to do, but the judges perversely issued a guilty verdict anyway.

    Let's be clear, it's just speculation as to the whether there was sufficient evidence or not.

    The fact remains and is still true today, that he was found guilty and convicted of a terrorist act.

    While all you guys are being compassionate, why not release all convicted murderers, starting with this one

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Sutcliffe

    He only murdered a fraction of those that Al Megrahi did and has already spent longer in captivity
    :wall:
    What we've got here is....... failure to communicate.
    Some men you just can't reach.
    :wall:
  • IveSeenTheLight
    IveSeenTheLight Posts: 13,322 Forumite
    neverdespairgirl wrote: »
    There are rules about chains of evidence and testing for good reasons.

    Totally agree, but my point was that known criminals are not being convicted because of technicalities.

    In regards to getting off on a technicality, one example I recall was of people who raped women and claimed he did so whilst asleep and therefore was not aware of what they was doing.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sleep_sex

    More and more people are now using this as an excuse.
    All the evidence may be there and the guy can openly admit he 'may' have done it, but get's off on the technicality
    Natalie Pona, the then Sun reporter, broke the story of the first case of sexsomnia in the fall of 2005. On 30 November 2005, a Toronto court acquitted a man of sexual assault after he was diagnosed with sleep sex disorder, although prosecutors filed an appeal of the acquittal in February 2006.[8] The Ontario Court of Appeal upheld the acquittal on 7 February 2008 [9]
    In Britain, a man from York was cleared of three counts of rape on 19 December 2005.[10]
    On 8 August 2007, a British RAF mechanic was cleared of a rape charge after the jury found him not responsible for his actions when he had sex with a 15-year-old girl.
    On 23 March 2009, a British woman gave an interview in which she spoke about problems in her life caused by sexsomnia.[12]
    On 12 February 2010, an Australian man was found not guilty of rape due to Sexsomnia [13]
    :wall:
    What we've got here is....... failure to communicate.
    Some men you just can't reach.
    :wall:
This discussion has been closed.
★ ★ ★ Meet your Ambassadors

🚀 Getting Started

Hi new member!

Our Getting Started Guide will help you get the most out of the Forum

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 352.1K 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
  • 258.9K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
  • 37.6K Read-Only Boards

Is this how you want to be seen?

We see you are using a default avatar. It takes only a few seconds to pick a picture.
Update Your Picture