Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Right to a fair trial is tyranny?

I never said they should not get a fair trial.

As someone who would describe himself as, overall, politically on the quite comfortably on the right side rather than the left... And has had his share of disagreements with Whirlwind in the past on British political issues.

What the frak, I mean, seriously... What the frak.

I genuinely do not have the means to fathom the leaps of logic the air mage is making here.

Full disclosure:

I live in the town that Mr Yaxley hails from (I'm not from here). I even work in the area of the town that he's from. As a result, a fair few people at work have met him or know him personally. In fact, the office junior we used to have was hired to teach his kids Tae-Kwon-Do a few years ago. Needless to say recent events were, and have been, a hot topic of workplace discussion. Interestingly the majority actually do think he should be freed, although whether that's local bias or a more analytical determination of the merits of the judicial system is hard to say.

Nevertheless, I won't be lectured by people in the US who 'know more than me' about the topic.

On the wider subject of criminal/victim rights, about 10 years ago I had a vigorous debate with a young man from the Asian community (silly me forgot to ask where from). Someone had broken into a family home and held part of the family hostage. The homeowner rounded up a posse and invaded his own home with makeshift weapons. The initial criminal fled, but was chased down the street and attacked with said weapons (cricket bats etc) to the point they suffered permanent brain damage. I said that the perpetrators of the assault should be prosecuted as at that point they could not be reasonably said to be acting in self defence. His take was that once someone has threatened your family you are justified by any means to remove that threat, including killing them. Eventually he insisted to me that I'd favour the death penalty if my own mother was the one threatened and wouldn't accept any counterarguments along the lines of me knowing myself more than he did.

I learned recently he's been standing for local elections for the Tory party. Funny old world.

Gammon logic at its finest.

Fair Trial requires the Jury to decide solely on the facts as presented in the case. Not the opinions of a racist feth knuckle only out to fleece Gammons.

Tommy broke the law.

Tommy went to prison.

If he doesn’t want to live by our laws, maybe he shouldn’t live here?

And that includes mortgage fraud, spousal abuse, oh, and sneaking into the USA with a fake passport.

He’s a common criminal, just one with a mix and some brain dead supporters.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Gammon logic at its finest.

Fair Trial requires the Jury to decide solely on the facts as presented in the case. Not the opinions of a racist feth knuckle only out to fleece Gammons.

Tommy broke the law.

Tommy went to prison.

If he doesn’t want to live by our laws, maybe he shouldn’t live here?

And that includes mortgage fraud, spousal abuse, oh, and sneaking into the USA with a fake passport.

He’s a common criminal, just one with a mix and some brain dead supporters.

Honestly in this case the court had all rights to deny him the possibility to stream as to defend and protect an independent jury.
In fact i would argue that any state with a Jury System should do so else the jury system itself will become a problem as soon as someone charismatic or demagogic enough shows up.

 Imperial Air Mage V601/20 wrote:

A media blackout, a trial and sentence carried out without the jury of ones peers, this is the very definition of secret police.

Please explain to me again what you mean by a media blackout. I doubt it can be the case above as well, how would you know all about it given that you live on the other side of the pond? So please point me to a case where there has been a media blackout?
There has only been one occasion in the last 350 years or so where there has been a case without a jury (barring military cases but that's nothing to do with the police). The case involved a robbery at heathrow and case collapsed several times over concerns over jury tampering

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8592505.stm

So which trials are you referring to, the ones that have been undertaken under a media blackout?

I think you might find it hard to find anyone that could suggest people are being whisked away in the middle of the night with no one's knowledge. So again where is you evidence for these statements.

Lack of communication between the police and the local council and other bodies.
Lack of accountability in these organisations and oversite
Lack of acknowledgement that these things could happen
Lack of acceptance that known troubled children were being exploited and an approach that they were "crying wolf".

Its comments like this that give credence to alt right conspiracy theories. These crimes were tolerated because labor wanted votes. This has been documented time and time again.

Systematic failures does not represent a cover up, or a toleration of crimes. You do realise that the above statement is libellous don't you. Unless you have actual evidence that you would like to share with us to prove that the government was acting in this way?

I do have an interest which is that this form of tyranny may be spread to where I live. I stated that I don't usually follow UK politics because ultimately this is not my fight regardless of how I feel about it morally. I state this because we live in a time where people adopt pet causes that in the end they don't care about to seem trendy.

So just to confirm you have no interest in UK politics, but you've just joined dakka today, posted nine times in total, seven of which are in this topic, claiming without any evidence that we have secret police gathering people up with no trial all in mind to keep tyranny away? So which trendy cause is this that you are talking about? Are you sure you didn't just watch "V is for Vendetta" and mistake it for a BBC documentary?



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Compel wrote:
As someone who would describe himself as, overall, politically on the quite comfortably on the right side rather than the left... And has had his share of disagreements with Whirlwind in the past on British political issues.

What the frak, I mean, seriously... What the frak.

I genuinely do not have the means to fathom the leaps of logic the air mage is making here.

You see now look at what he has done...I'm agreeing with Compel...

I love how people assume i'm some sort of far right, murica, drone striking redhat when i'm speaking in favor of free speech and transparency. They come for Tommy today, who will they come for later.

 Riquende wrote:
His take was that once someone has threatened your family you are justified by any means to remove that threat, including killing them. Eventually he insisted to me that I'd favour the death penalty if my own mother was the one threatened and wouldn't accept any counterarguments along the lines of me knowing myself more than he did.

Blimey, on that basis twitter and facebook could cause a bloodbath.

 Imperial Air Mage V601/20 wrote:
I love how people assume i'm some sort of far right, murica, drone striking redhat when i'm speaking in favor of free speech and transparency. They come for Tommy today, who will they come for later.

Anyone else arrested, charged and found guilty of breaking the law, especially if they already have a suspended sentence for the same crime?

Also known as criminals?

Radical, I know.

 Imperial Air Mage V601/20 wrote:
I love how people assume i'm some sort of far right, murica, drone striking redhat when i'm speaking in favor of free speech and transparency. They come for Tommy today, who will they come for later.

You say you argue for "free speech" yet classify a tad more restrictive information flow as the very definition of a "secret police" ?
No, just no, if you want to see a secret police in action search for "fichen Skandal".
Then you would have a proper exemple of secret police.
Also free speech can be a right that infringes on other rights and needs constant balance.

 Imperial Air Mage V601/20 wrote:
I love how people assume i'm some sort of far right, murica, drone striking redhat when i'm speaking in favor of free speech and transparency. They come for Tommy today, who will they come for later.

We have asked you for your evidence. Yet you are providing none. You are just making wild statements, which with your own admission you know nothing about. There is free speech (barring hate speech, but I have no issues with that) and the case you are referencing has transparency. You can even go and look up the case details if you were inclined. You just aren't listening to what people are telling you. You've already made up your mind that there is some conspiracy going on and rather than trying to look at the evidence being presented you are batting it back, closing your eyes and ears so you don't need to consider the information provided to you.

 Imperial Air Mage V601/20 wrote:
I love how people assume i'm some sort of far right, murica, drone striking redhat when i'm speaking in favor of free speech and transparency. They come for Tommy today, who will they come for later.

No, you're arguing for the freedom for a far right figurehead to intimidate a jury. He wasn't reporting on the court proceedings. There will be full transparency in the form of transcripts of the court. So what does this guy add?

Jury System should do so else the jury system itself will become a problem as soon as someone charismatic or demagogic enough shows up.

So in addition to taking away community control you replace them with faceless amoral technocrats.

Eventually he insisted to me that I'd favour the death penalty if my own mother was the one threatened and wouldn't accept any counterarguments along the lines of me knowing myself more than he did.

I agree with him

You do realise that the above statement is libellous don't you.

You can't commit libel against a government.

Systematic failures does not represent a cover up, or a toleration of crimes.

Documented with eye witness testimony.

 Imperial Air Mage V601/20 wrote:

Jury System should do so else the jury system itself will become a problem as soon as someone charismatic or demagogic enough shows up.

So in addition to taking away community control you replace them with faceless amoral technocrats.

Eventually he insisted to me that I'd favour the death penalty if my own mother was the one threatened and wouldn't accept any counterarguments along the lines of me knowing myself more than he did.

I agree with him

You do realise that the above statement is libellous don't you.

You can't commit libel against a government.

Systematic failures does not represent a cover up, or a toleration of crimes.

Documented with eye witness testimony.

Thank you for completly missintepreting my statement and completly ignore my other one about secret police.
Again just for you: IF A GROUP OR DEMAGOGIC PERSON IS FORCING HIMSELF AND THE PUBLIC ON THE JURY, WHICH IN ORDER TO HAVE A FAIR TRIAL, SHOULD BE AS INDEPENDENT AS POSSIBLE, THEN YES I VALUE THE ULTIMATE FREE SPEECH LESS THEN THE PROPERLY AND JUST WORKING COURT AND JURY SYSTEM, WHICH WOULD GET DESTROYED VIA PRESSURING THE JURY THROUGH DEMAGOGIC MEANS.

I hope that clarified my position.

No, you're arguing for the freedom for a far right figurehead to intimidate a jury. He wasn't reporting on the court proceedings. There will be full transparency in the form of transcripts of the court. So what does this guy add?

Did he threaten the jury even once?

 Imperial Air Mage V601/20 wrote:

Jury System should do so else the jury system itself will become a problem as soon as someone charismatic or demagogic enough shows up.

So in addition to taking away community control you replace them with faceless amoral technocrats.

What the feth are you even talking about at this point? Community control over what?

Seems like you're arguing for lynchings.

Everyone, just ignore Air Mage, they're gakposting trying to stir up trouble.

 Imperial Air Mage V601/20 wrote:

Jury System should do so else the jury system itself will become a problem as soon as someone charismatic or demagogic enough shows up.

So in addition to taking away community control you replace them with faceless amoral technocrats.

Did you actually read the context of the statement and who on earth are these amoral technocrats?

You do realise that the above statement is libellous don't you.

You can't commit libel against a government.

Except you didn't say government, you said Labo(u)r....

Documented with eye witness testimony.

Evidence of what, of misogynistic behaviour in some Labour constituencies, that the claims weren't dealt with appropriately or in depth. What has that got to do with Labour allowing rape gangs in your paraphrased words or that our jury system is a system of special op police, stealing you away in the middle of the night?

Seems like you're arguing for lynchings.

I get how I might have appeared unclear. I'm not calling for a return of frontier justice. I'm calling for middle ground between mob rule and faceless governments officials deciding whats right and wrong. A good example would be modern day Poland, Ireland, or small town USA where their still is rule of law but where the cops are friends, neighbors, family and inlaws. Sort of like the town I live in. Let me put it this way if the groomers came here and tried that crap they would have a bad day, a very bad day.

 Imperial Air Mage V601/20 wrote:

Seems like you're arguing for lynchings.

I get how I might have appeared unclear. I'm not calling for a return of frontier justice. I'm calling for middle ground between mob rule and faceless governments officials deciding whats right and wrong. A good example would be modern day Poland, Ireland, or small town USA where their still is rule of law but where the cops are friends, neighbors, family and inlaws. Sort of like the town I live in. Let me put it this way if the groomers came here and tried that crap they would have a bad day, a very bad day.

I don't think your ideal exists, except in your imagination.

 Imperial Air Mage V601/20 wrote:

Seems like you're arguing for lynchings.

I get how I might have appeared unclear. I'm not calling for a return of frontier justice. I'm calling for middle ground between mob rule and faceless governments officials deciding whats right and wrong. A good example would be modern day Poland, Ireland, or small town USA where their still is rule of law but where the cops are friends, neighbors, family and inlaws. Sort of like the town I live in. Let me put it this way if the groomers came here and tried that crap they would have a bad day, a very bad day.

Because poland is such a paragon of a state of law. Nvm that i have relatives there, you don't want to hear half of what i heard but he sure, poland is a shining Star of justice and order....
You literally call here, in this comment for lynchjustice.
Literally the very definition.
Just stop pls.

 A Town Called Malus wrote:


Everyone, just ignore Air Mage, they're gakposting trying to stir up trouble.

Way ahead of you. Clearly just here to derail the thread and generate heat. Let's just drop the whole thing and talk about buses, which is apparently the new bee in Corbyn's bonnet.

I mean, I'm torn. Failing and disappearing bus services are increasing common (in Luton it's rare to see a service run after 7pm - the main private company, Arriva gave up years ago and a few local companies started to fill in but they abandoned the routes after a while). For people living in rural areas buses can be the only link they have to shops, social events etc.

It's a subject that is important and affects a growing number of people.... and yet consensus seems to be because he isn't tackling the 'big issues' (ministerial dishonesty, Brexit, etc) then his PMQs were wasted. It's indicative of just how large a pall Brexit is casting over our politics that trying to shine a light on real day to day issues is dismissed as irrelevant.

Whirlwind wrote:Article 11 is more specific. It basically provides copyright to the owners of the original press articles (but does allow their use for research and insubstantial elements of it). basically it prevents farming of news unless agreed by the owner (you can see this yahoo news, google news etc. This could apply to online newspapers that have a pay wall for example. I guess the principle is that if another company earns advertising revenue (like google, yahoo, microsoft etc) using someone else's works is then that fair? (I'd note non for profit website, online encyclopedias are exempt from this I believe). Scribd for example might have difficulties for example as even from a wargaming perspective there are a lot of White Dwarf articles etc.

The risk is that there are unintended consequences. In this thread for example we have to stop copying and pasting whole articles because, I assume, some advertising revenue. However the implementation by individual governments will be key. It may be that ancilliary to main purpose may be considered fair use on the basis that it is 'research' on a topic. We already cannot, for example, paste electronic rules on the site!

They wanted something like that here in Germany and it backfired completely. If you have a google search that link needs some text to click on (like a title and a sentence or two). You can't just click on some empty void and hope to get the right article without any context. Media companies wanted licensing fees for that because google "makes money of their work" and Google (even as filthy rich as they are) could never pay that much so they just stopped linking to those publishers to comply with their wishes. Those companies then whined because their online readership collapsed (and thus their online advertising market). Now they want to try something similar in the whole of the EU. That should end up fun.

Imperial Air Mage V601/20 wrote:

That's great, but he's not in America and appealing to the US justice system doesn't particularly interest me anyway.

In most countries everything outside the courthouse is fair game. England seems to be one of the few nations where the government quite literally has a secret police that are able to charge and detain people in secret. I think its obvious why the best fiction about omnipresent despotic governments such as 1984 and 40k come out of the UK.

You are missing the point, the UK (like Germany and multiple other European countries) have certain restrictions to keep trials fair. And it's not most countries, the media spectacle for trials are kinda a special feature of the USA, and so are the consequences of that media spectacle. We are doing okay over here without all that bs.

And I wouldn't accuse other countries of having a secret police that can detain people without a trial if I were from the USA. It's a bit too hypocritical. And that's on top of the US having the largest prison population in the world, three-strikes laws, for profit prisons, and the rest of the US law enforcement clusterfeth. If you think the UK is so much worse than the USA in that regard then I've got very bad news for you. Maybe you should inform yourself a bit more on the failings of the US system before coming into this thread and handwringing about the state of the UK judicial system. You might find something to really worry about (especially as the flag next to your name seems to indicate that you live over there).

 Riquende wrote:

 A Town Called Malus wrote:


Everyone, just ignore Air Mage, they're gakposting trying to stir up trouble.

Way ahead of you. Clearly just here to derail the thread and generate heat. Let's just drop the whole thing and talk about buses, which is apparently the new bee in Corbyn's bonnet.

I mean, I'm torn. Failing and disappearing bus services are increasing common (in Luton it's rare to see a service run after 7pm - the main private company, Arriva gave up years ago and a few local companies started to fill in but they abandoned the routes after a while). For people living in rural areas buses can be the only link they have to shops, social events etc.

It's a subject that is important and affects a growing number of people.... and yet consensus seems to be because he isn't tackling the 'big issues' (ministerial dishonesty, Brexit, etc) then his PMQs were wasted. It's indicative of just how large a pall Brexit is casting over our politics that trying to shine a light on real day to day issues is dismissed as irrelevant.

Buses have been declining for years on the rural routes. Councils have been stripped of cash. The rural routes aren't profitable for businesses as they are either empty or full of non paying pensioners. Hence councils previously subsidised these routes so a service is still provided. With the financial pressures anything that was not legally required for the councils to provide has effectively been scrapped as they simply don't have the money to provide them. Hence the subsidies stop and the privately funded bus businesses stop running them. That leads to more pain for the poorest.

 Riquende wrote:

 A Town Called Malus wrote:


Everyone, just ignore Air Mage, they're gakposting trying to stir up trouble.

Way ahead of you. Clearly just here to derail the thread and generate heat. Let's just drop the whole thing and talk about buses, which is apparently the new bee in Corbyn's bonnet.

I mean, I'm torn. Failing and disappearing bus services are increasing common (in Luton it's rare to see a service run after 7pm - the main private company, Arriva gave up years ago and a few local companies started to fill in but they abandoned the routes after a while). For people living in rural areas buses can be the only link they have to shops, social events etc.

It's a subject that is important and affects a growing number of people.... and yet consensus seems to be because he isn't tackling the 'big issues' (ministerial dishonesty, Brexit, etc) then his PMQs were wasted. It's indicative of just how large a pall Brexit is casting over our politics that trying to shine a light on real day to day issues is dismissed as irrelevant.

We need a full overhaul and nationalisation of public transport.

Before I worked in London, my disposable income each month was around £300, tops. My first month’s train ticket to London? £452. If it wasn’t for my parents helping out, I’d be stuck in dead end, low paying jobs where I live.

See, privatisation was sold as better. More efficient. Competition between operators would be inducement for fair pricing. Except, it didn’t work out like that - at all.

The line through my town is the only one between London and Hastings. And it’s run by a single operator, South Eastern. As a company, they have an absolute monopoly, and charge like it. They’ve got all commuters by the short and curlies. That’s not how it was billed.

And that company makes a profit in excess of its Government Subsidy. So all privatisation did was hand public cash and a ‘charge whatever we want’ business model to a private company.

Buses! Well, it’s pretty much Arriva. And again, they charge whatever they damn well please.

The clue is in the name. Public. Transport. It’s not there to make some business an easy profit. It’s there to help Joe Public get about. As it is, many are priced out of looking for employment elsewhere, limiting options and ensuring well paid jobs only benefit a small geographic region.

Because poland is such a paragon of a state of law.

If I had to pick a place to move to and language was no issue it would most likely be somewhere in Eastern Europe. Factoring in how difficult Slavic languages are to learn i'd probably go to the Philippines.

don't think your ideal exists

No ideal truly exist, not mine not yours.

Except you didn't say government, you said Labo(u)r....

A political party is not protected from libel or slander. I can say they like to choke themselves while dressing like clowns.

lynchjustice

No i'm calling for decentralized government and local control. Most of the world functions on this concept.

Evidence of what, of misogynistic behaviour in some Labour constituencies, that the claims weren't dealt with appropriately or in depth. What has that got to do with Labour allowing rape gangs in your paraphrased words or that our jury system is a system of special op police, stealing you away in the middle of the night?

Their are two different conversations going on. One about Tommy Robinson and one about what he was live streaming. What I was trying to say was that the UK government allowed this situation to be created in the first place. Its only getting more traction now that members of the majority ethnicity are suffering but these rape gangs were targeting Sikh and Roma girls before they targeted White British girls.. You accuse me of lynch justice? Lynch justice is not supporting non violent demonstrations or someone live streaming. Lynch justice is where people fear to run for a government position because someone might murder their kids.

I'd honestly would like to see you there, but not in krakow or warsaw or gdansk, no somewhere in the nowhere torwards russia.
I'd wager you 'd crawl back over to pond real quickly.

Not Online!!! wrote:
I'd honestly would like to see you there, but not in krakow or warsaw or gdansk, no somewhere in the nowhere torwards russia.
I'd wager you 'd crawl back over to pond real quickly.

Now I might be being a mite suspicious but I wonder whether the person might not have that far to travel from where they actually are already. The sudden creation of an account today by someone that says they have no interest in uk politics but apart from two at the last count were all in this topic. It's a bit fishy to me especially given Salisbury (again),

Just pop the goon on ignore.

But mom, I want to see which avenues we go down before we hit the start of the circle again. How big is the circle? What colour is it?

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:

 Riquende wrote:

 A Town Called Malus wrote:


Everyone, just ignore Air Mage, they're gakposting trying to stir up trouble.

Way ahead of you. Clearly just here to derail the thread and generate heat. Let's just drop the whole thing and talk about buses, which is apparently the new bee in Corbyn's bonnet.

I mean, I'm torn. Failing and disappearing bus services are increasing common (in Luton it's rare to see a service run after 7pm - the main private company, Arriva gave up years ago and a few local companies started to fill in but they abandoned the routes after a while). For people living in rural areas buses can be the only link they have to shops, social events etc.

It's a subject that is important and affects a growing number of people.... and yet consensus seems to be because he isn't tackling the 'big issues' (ministerial dishonesty, Brexit, etc) then his PMQs were wasted. It's indicative of just how large a pall Brexit is casting over our politics that trying to shine a light on real day to day issues is dismissed as irrelevant.

We need a full overhaul and nationalisation of public transport.

Before I worked in London, my disposable income each month was around £300, tops. My first month’s train ticket to London? £452. If it wasn’t for my parents helping out, I’d be stuck in dead end, low paying jobs where I live.

See, privatisation was sold as better. More efficient. Competition between operators would be inducement for fair pricing. Except, it didn’t work out like that - at all.

The line through my town is the only one between London and Hastings. And it’s run by a single operator, South Eastern. As a company, they have an absolute monopoly, and charge like it. They’ve got all commuters by the short and curlies. That’s not how it was billed.

And that company makes a profit in excess of its Government Subsidy. So all privatisation did was hand public cash and a ‘charge whatever we want’ business model to a private company.

Buses! Well, it’s pretty much Arriva. And again, they charge whatever they damn well please.

The clue is in the name. Public. Transport. It’s not there to make some business an easy profit. It’s there to help Joe Public get about. As it is, many are priced out of looking for employment elsewhere, limiting options and ensuring well paid jobs only benefit a small geographic region.

Strangely enough - over here in the north-eastern USA - the local bus company is vibrant and expanding, after decades of scraping by - the poor economy had forced people to use the bus, and put much needed money into the system.

New routes, new buses, and adding Wi-Fi.

Ten years of a poorish economy made an enormous difference.

Not sure if the local Metro is publicly owned, a non-profit, or what.

But I do know that I greatly prefer grabbing the bus to driving to work,

The Auld Grump