Sarah Palin is the reason compasses point North.

calendar   Monday - May 26, 2014

another knife in the back of England and the military by idiot civilian judges

For some time now I have been certain that western countries, and especially the one I am in right now, weren’t really much interested in saving their culture and country.
Of course what I meant to say was that the rulers weren’t much interested. The recent elections across the EU show that unsurprisingly, a good many ppl do care, the ones who haven’t been given votes on things that alter their countries.  It’s all over the news and I suspect it will continue for some days.  After the recent elections in EU,
there has been a serious drift to the right.  Only now are the cowards in office suddenly making all kinds of promises, in efforts to save political lives and earnings.

Now then, when I say the west just will not go the extra mile to protect itself, here’s a fine example of that.
Look at this headline below.  That alone says it all. 

Taliban can’t be held more than 96 hours decides judge: Human rights ruling could hinder our troops in all wars, warn top brass

· Mr Justice Leggatt made the 117-page High Court judgement yesterday
· Ruled that British soldiers may not hold enemies for more than 96 hours
· This is because to do so would breach Afghan prisoners’ human rights
· It means Taliban chieftains must be freed to fight again within four days
· It followed claims brought by Taliban commanders held in Afghan jails
By Steve Doughty, Social Affairs Correspondent

British soldiers may not hold their enemies in Afghanistan as prisoners for longer than 96 hours because to do so would breach their human rights, a judge ruled yesterday.

It means that Taliban chieftains captured by British troops must be freed to fight again within four days.
The judgment – which followed claims brought by four Taliban commanders now held in Afghan jails – alarmed military chiefs and politicians.
They believe soldiers should not be asked to fight and die on the battlefield according to the letter of human rights law.

The 117-page High Court ruling by Mr Justice Leggatt means that the European Convention on Human Rights, and the UK’s Human Rights Act, which made the convention part of British law, apply wherever British troops are fighting.

The judge said that by detaining Taliban leader Serdar Mohammed for 106 days beyond the legal 96-hour limit, Britain had breached his right to liberty.

Taxpayers will now have to pay compensation running into tens of thousands to Mohammed and three other captives involved in the case.

The ruling also opens the way for many other Afghan detainees to sue for compensation, with British law firms likely to be queuing up to help them.

Pretty damn sorry innit?

There a lot more HERE TO READ


Posted by peiper   United Kingdom  on 05/26/2014 at 02:17 PM   
Filed Under: • Democrats-Liberals-Moonbat LeftistsJudges-Courts-LawyersPolitically Correct B.S.Stoopid-People •  
Comments (6) Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

calendar   Tuesday - May 06, 2014

judge awards triple killer damages for lack of apology from …. the prison authorities

Just what one should expect from our upside down world.

Is anyone actually surprised?

And btw … he has a face book page …

He was awarded damages also, for “Aggravated damages for a lack of apology” from the prison authorities.
He has been given $1,358 of the taxpayer’s money. It costs £50,000 a year to keep him in prison. In our money, that works out to $ 84.923.

Triple killer given a payout for lost milk cartons: New fiasco over inmate who claimed for hair clippers

· Kevan Thakrar, 26, is a serial compensation claimant, it has emerged
· The jailed triple murderer was given £75 for missing cartons of milk

· Thakrar had earlier been awarded an £800 payout by the same judge

· Nasal hair clippers were broken and cranberry juice lost in prison transfer
· He was awarded the money as officers did not apologise for the incident
· Thakran was jailed for using machine-gun to kill three men over drug debt
· The 26-year-old from Hertfordshire was sentenced to 35 years in 2008
· He is regarded as once of the country’s most dangerous criminals
By Jack Doyle and Larisa Brown

A triple murderer who received an £800 payout for lost or damaged belongings was a serial claimant, it has emerged.
Kevan Thakrar, 26, also pocketed £75 in a 2011 compensation case – for missing milk.

The judge who handed the machine-gun killer his latest payout for damaged property, including nasal hair clippers, also presided over the earlier case.
Thakrar complained that ten cartons of soya milk and ten of long-life milk, along with some toiletries had disappeared as he was transferred between prisons.
District Judge Neil Hickman awarded him £50 to replace them and a further £25 compensation because losing the items caused him ‘distress’ and made his time in jail ‘more unpleasant than it should have been’.

read more


Posted by peiper   United Kingdom  on 05/06/2014 at 12:28 PM   
Filed Under: • CrimeCULTURE IN DECLINEDaily LifeDemocrats-Liberals-Moonbat LeftistsJudges-Courts-LawyersJustice - LACK OF •  
Comments (2) Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

calendar   Wednesday - April 30, 2014

Farewell to Freedom Part 3, the linking

Oh, we would live in such just world if only this were true.

Outstanding work, mr egnor. 


Posted by Drew458   United States  on 04/30/2014 at 03:18 PM   
Filed Under: • HumorJudges-Courts-LawyersJustice - LACK OFLatin-AmericaRacism and race relations •  
Comments (5) Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

calendar   Monday - March 03, 2014

killer rapist demands rights & compensation. idiot judge says, okay.

Exchanged some email with Drew last night, in which I mentioned that there was always something insane to write about in this politically correct insane place.
And I don’t expect things to be much different back home either. However, I didn’t expect to find this one so soon.

So far, I don’t think this has gone all the way and received unreserved approval. Yet.

This does fit the world upside down thing for sure.

Monster who strangled girl gets payout… because jail harmed HIS human rights: Rapist says he ‘wasn’t given rehabilitation’

Arthur Duncan raped and strangled Linda Bull in 1970, when he was 18
He is serving a life term, but claimed has had no access to treatment
A court agreed - ruling that his human rights were breached
Victim’s family said decision to back claim was a ‘kick in the teeth’

By Luke Salkeld

A convicted murderer and rapist is in line for compensation after a court ruled that his human rights were breached when he was not given rehabilitation treatment in jail.

Arthur Duncan, who raped and strangled Linda Bull, claimed he had no access to sexual offenders’ rehabilitation programmes for a period of five years.

His victim’s family described the decision to back his claim as a ‘kick in the teeth’.

One of the UK’s longest-serving prisoners, Duncan raped Miss Bull, 22, then strangled her with her tights in 1970, when he was 18.

He is serving a life term and has repeatedly been refused parole to protect the public since the murder in Andover, Hampshire. But, to the horror of his victim’s family, he is now in line for a payout.

‘My parents’ lives were left in devastation after losing their daughter in such a horrific way and they were never the same,’ said Shelagh Paynter, Miss Bull’s sister. ‘We were never offered counselling or compensation, yet the criminal seems to have the help.

‘We aren’t asking for anything, but our lives have been in turmoil. We are the victims here and we didn’t get anything, so why should he? It’s disgusting.’

Mrs Paynter, 62, a retired social worker who lives in Dorset, said criminals who commit such heinous crimes should forfeit their human rights.

‘We have all suffered because of what happened and we will continue to suffer but hearing that he is in line for a payout is just a kick in the teeth,’ she said.

Duncan claimed his rights under article five of the European Convention on Human Rights, which protects liberty and security, were breached when he had no chance to access sexual offenders’ programmes between April 2007 and July last year.

Officials argued that there had been no failures and that progress through rehabilitation was ‘very much a matter of judgment for the prison authorities’.

They said fantasies involving bondage and non-consensual sex offending had been ‘an ongoing issue’. But judge Lord Glennie ruled in Duncan’s favour last month.

He said officials had ‘simply failed to provide him with programmes and courses which they themselves recognised were a necessary part of his rehabilitation’.

He also said they were necessary ‘to enable him to make progress towards having an effective review before the parole board’.

The judge said a further hearing should take place before a final decision is made.

There’s a little bit more to read HERE


Posted by peiper   United Kingdom  on 03/03/2014 at 05:29 AM   
Filed Under: • Judges-Courts-LawyersJustice - LACK OFREALLY WORTHLESS and PUTRID PEOPLEUK •  
Comments (2) Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

calendar   Monday - January 27, 2014

It is not right to disrupt the life of a criminal with a short prison sentence, say da judge. huh?

Sometimes you see things like this and say, oh. That’s gotta be a joke. But no.  This judge appears much concerned about disrupting the life of a criminal with short jail time. Ok. So what does he think long prison terms might do. 
This is almost laughable and might be, if it came from a sit-com about a daffy left leaning jurist.  But it isn’t from a sit-com. And the guy is downright serious.

Short prison sentences don’t work as it ‘disrupts criminals’ home lives’, claims top judge

BRITAIN’S top judge provoked an outcry after claiming short prison terms are bad for criminals because they disrupt their home lives.

By: Louise Sassoon

Lord Neuberger, President of the Supreme Court, said a couple of months behind bars would have little deterrent impact on offenders.

In a statement likely to be seen as “soft” on crime, he explained that short sentences “can be disruptive” for prisoners’ personal lives and jobs.

He made his comments after visiting Holloway women’s prison in North London, where he also voiced concerns about cheap food and shared cells.
However, critics accused the judge of seeing things “entirely from the point of view of the criminal” and failing to consider the victims of crime.

Writing in the November issue of Independent Monitor, the magazine for prison monitoring boards, he said: “One message I took away was the highly questionable value of short sentences.
“The notion that a couple of months in prison will help bring a defendant to their senses has always had a real resonance for me.

“But, following my visit to Holloway, I have a very different perspective. A short prison sentence can be disruptive for the prisoner’s job, home, etc. Other impressions included concern that most prisoners were required to share a cell; astonishment that prisoners could be fed sensibly for under £2 a day.”

Tory MP Douglas Carswell said disrupting the life of the criminal is “the ruddy idea” of prison.

He added: “Your honour, in my constituency there are people who would say that if short sentences are a problem, just make them longer.”
Peter Cuthbertson, director of the Centre for Crime Prevention, said short sentences were effective and “can give communities a respite from hardened criminals”.

A Supreme Court spokesman said Lord Neuberger was “simply reporting informal conversations he had with probation officers and other prison staff” during a July visit and “his reflections of their views on short-term sentences are in no way intended as official statements of sentencing policy”.



Posted by peiper   United Kingdom  on 01/27/2014 at 07:00 AM   
Filed Under: • Democrats-Liberals-Moonbat LeftistsJudges-Courts-LawyersPolitically Correct B.S. •  
Comments (0) Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

calendar   Thursday - January 23, 2014

mess with me i breaka you legs … and he did but now is accused of assault by idiot prosecutor

Do you need to see more than this to grasp how dumb the decision made by the plod?

Which now of course leaves him wide open to litigation as the crud with broken limbs is sure to win.  And ... since the arrest was made with a charge of excessive force, how else would a court rule?  So the cards are stacked.  He should have killed both of them, and being in possession of the kind of equipment his business uses, he should have been able to bury them quite deeply on his property.  Who’d look for them?  I really just do not understand the need for the police or the courts in something like this.  No. An end to the unnecessary breathing of the miscreants would be the right and proper solution.

Crime does not pay.

Wanna Bet?  Sure it does.  Especially when a guy like Mr. Woodhouse says later that, he was “gutted and sickened” by what he had done to the perps.  Why? He should feel very good about it.


Andrew Woodhouse on trial facing assault charges on two raiders

The 44-year-old businessman denies GBH and GBH with intent

Kevin Green and Timothy Cross ended up with £75 fines for theft

By James Rush

A businessman who attacked two thieves caught red-handed in a night-time raid was arrested after defending his property, a court has heard.

Andrew Woodhouse, 44, was today on trial facing assault charges on the two raiders he found stealing diesel from his business.

A jury heard how Woodhouse grabbed a fence post one was carrying as a weapon - and used it to fight back against them.

The father-of-five - who says he has repeatedly been a victim of crime at his gardening company - kept hold of the two burglars until police arrived.

But the court was told it was Woodhouse who was then arrested and accused of using excessive force.

The thieves ended up with £75 fines - but businessman Woodhouse could face a prison sentence if he is found guilty of attacking them.

Defence lawyer Andrew Taylor said: ‘These thieves thought they would have nice easy pickings that night.

‘Many people would have given up and just claimed on their insurance but Mr Woodhouse is made of sterner stuff.

‘He showed stoicism, courage and fitness to chase them. One of the men was armed and went to attack him. He acted in lawful self-defence.

‘He agrees the red mist came down which you can understand when his business has almost been wiped out by crime.

‘If it hadn’t been for him these men would not have been caught. Where are we in society when a person cannot act in self-defence to protect his property. That is what Mr Woodhouse was doing.’

Kevin Green, 53, and Timothy Cross, 32, tried to escape into a neighbouring field with jerry cans full of stolen fuel, the court heard.

But Woodhouse chased Green - and caught him near their getaway car. The court heard he then attacked Green leaving him with two broken legs and a broken arm.

The court heard he then chased Cross before rugby-tackling him. He lay on top of the raider until police arrived.

Prosecutor James Wilson said: ‘When he saw his hard-earned money carted off by a couple of ne’er-do-wells, he gave chase in anger intending to injure them.’

Mr Wilson described it an ‘unreasonable and unlawful assault.’

He said: ‘It was not reasonable self-defence. Mr Woodhouse lost his temper and went over the top.

read the link.
update to a previous article, read more


3:30p .... Jan. 23

Cleared in 20 minutes: Businessman who defended his property from fuel burglars

A landscape gardener who attacked two thieves he caught trying to steal from his business was cleared of grievous bodily harm in just 20 minutes today.

Andrew Woodhouse, 44, was accused of using excessive force when he broke the arms and legs of one and rugby tackled the other, Cardiff Crown Court heard.

But today the jury decided he had every right to defend his property from criminals Kevin Green and Timothy Cross, who ended up with £75 fines.

The father-of-five had faced a possible life jail sentence - but was found not guilty of two grievous bodily harm charges for the citizen’s arrest of two raiders.


Posted by peiper   United Kingdom  on 01/23/2014 at 05:16 AM   
Filed Under: • CrimeJudges-Courts-LawyersJustice - LACK OF •  
Comments (7) Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

calendar   Tuesday - January 21, 2014

some disquieting news. and you thought my home state was la-la land. talk about alseep at the wheel

I think we can be fairly sure that the security services will be watching these lice.  Don’t see how they can not be trailing them or listening in to phone conversations if any. 
That said, I still think it’s daft.  We are I believe all for freedoms, but surely there has to be a limit. And a limit too on how much the public at large should be exposed to the threats of death and worse. 

Now if bmews readers think this is crazy .... how about this one.

A Bangladeshi immigrant stabbed her eight month old baby in the stomach with a kitchen knife, the baby survived but, the woman won the “right” to stay in Britain last year so that ....  “She Can Have Contact With Her Child.” You couldn’t make that up.
She was jailed for five years and the home office tried to kick her out of the country at the end of her sentence, but her lawyer claimed deporting her breached her human rights.  AND ..... You ready?  The asylum court agreed!  Here’s what the court in part said.

Her removal would not be proportionate to her crime.

Can you believe that?  I tell you folks, the insanity in the name of rights is way over the top. It’s off the scale.  How do ya measure something like that?

Free within days, the extremist plotting UK Mumbai-style attack: Fanatic who attended training camp with July 21 bombers will have controls lifted to protect human rights

Unnamed plotter was put under a Terrorism Prevention Investigation Measure which includes a tag and strict curfew for the public’s protection

Order will be lifted under new rules to protect terror suspects’ human rights

Security Services say there’s ‘a real risk’ he will seek to revive his plans to undertake attacks in the UK once the order is revoked

By James Slack

An Islamist fanatic will be freed from anti-terror controls within days despite being ‘determined’ to carry out a Mumbai-style attack in Britain.

The extremist attended a terror training camp in Cumbria with four of the five attempted suicide bombers involved in the London attacks of July 21, 2005.

He repeatedly tried to buy guns in what was suspected as a plot to carry out a mass-casualty attack in the UK, and has also travelled to Syria for ‘training’.

The plotter, known only as ‘CD’, was put under a Terrorism Prevention Investigation Measure (T-PIM) – including a tag and strict curfew – to protect the public in January 2012.

The Security Service say that without the T-PIM there is ‘a real risk CD will seek to revive his plans to undertake attacks in the UK’.

He has a number of associates in London ‘in connection with the attempted purchase of firearms’ and officials say that he would be able to quickly buy weapons.

But the order will be lifted on Sunday under rules introduced to protect the ‘human rights’ of terror suspects.

This is despite a judge ruling that the man has been trained in terrorism and that his ‘views and determination are unchanged’.

CD is one of six fanatics who are due to be released from their T-PIMS by the end of this month.

They also include a would-be suicide bomber involved in the liquid bomb plot to murder thousands by blowing up seven transatlantic planes. Experts estimate the total bill for MI5 and the police to keep tabs on the six suspects once their T-PIM restrictions are lifted could reach £20million a year.

Go here for the rest of the insanity


Posted by peiper   United Kingdom  on 01/21/2014 at 07:28 AM   
Filed Under: • CULTURE IN DECLINEIllegal-Aliens and ImmigrationJudges-Courts-LawyersJustice - LACK OFREALLY WORTHLESS and PUTRID PEOPLETerrorists •  
Comments (0) Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

calendar   Friday - January 17, 2014

from the world of upside down

I guess it has been a little over a week since the ruling of lawful shooting in regard to gang member Mark Duggan.

No surprise then, that immediately after that announcement there was a disturbance in and outside the court.  In fact, Duggan’s younger brother had to be physically restrained, shouting threats and abuse.  A mob developed outside the courthouse spitting at cops, the usual race crap bandied about while the so called protesters looking for any excuse to abuse police and public, conveniently forgetting that Duggan was not strictly speaking, a black man.  He was after all, half white.

Not that any of that matters. That’s what those types do for entertainment.  I’m just giving a bit of background because in a world of bizarre, as has been said many times, where up is down etc., a suggestion has been made with regard to the courts, police and …. the Duggan family.  This’d be from the same judge who requested a moment of silence before the inquest into the shooting, a silence to respect the memory of Duggan as a human, not a gang member.
Oh by all means lets do that in all cases of police shootings where the bad guy/newly made victim, is given a moment of silence.  Well, here’s the latest twist.

Da Judge is going to ask the Duggan family for their views on just how armed police should tackle dangerous criminals. 

He says the dead man’s family will be invited to “submit their ideas on potential reforms to high risk operations.”


The following will come as no surprise to anyone at all familiar with the politically correct, Trotsky/Marx loving Guardian newspaper.

Recently they reported a short item on screwball Bradley Manning who insists on being referred to by his chosen name of Chelsea.  Most papers have ignored that. But not the Guardian.  These bedwetting hand wringers of the far left have reported a complaint Manning has.  I copy the brief item here word for word, as found in another paper with credit to the Guardian.

Manning bemoans image as an anti-war pacifist

Chelsea Manning, the WikiLeaks source, has expressed unhappiness at her public profile in her first statement since she was sentenced in August to 35 years in Custody.  She claims a false impression of her as an anti-war pacifist is being given.


Posted by peiper   United Kingdom  on 01/17/2014 at 10:19 AM   
Filed Under: • CULTURE IN DECLINEDemocrats-Liberals-Moonbat LeftistsJudges-Courts-Lawyers •  
Comments (0) Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

calendar   Monday - January 06, 2014

he tortured and killed and makes demands in prison, cos he can. system sucks!

Well hell … speaking of RIGHTS!  And these days, what else is there?

This fellow wants to wear a woman’s wig.  Hey, if he wants a wig, why the heck not?
Doesn’t he have a right to appear as stupid as any one of us? After all, there isn’t any law against looking or being stupid.


This particular piece of rotten filth, this scum good for nothing waste of space insists on a wig and more.  They always want more.  Why the hell authorities have their hands tied is beyond me.  Why the hell can’t people see that there are cases and there are people who are well beyond the pale and deserve no rights of any kind whatever.
Oh but this bastard wants a wig. And he wants to be, he says, a woman. And guess who will pick up the cost of that if allowed? 

Men like this should locked in a cell if the death penalty isn’t used, and thrown a piece of raw meat once a week and a cup of water.
Look what this SOB and others did to the victim, and tell me he is entitled to rights just because he is seen in his human form.  It just makes the blood boil to think that the culture of the west has been so badly undermined by the left, may they all rot in hell with those they defend, that life forms like this are allowed to go on breathing and given considerations their victims never stood a chance of getting.

Take a look at this one, and tell me he doesn’t deserve the worst sort of treatment in return. 

And oh btw … WTF is this? Some new age health disaster?

‘It is unclear whether the claimant has a diagnosis of [gender] dysphoria.

And like that faggot Bradley Manning, he gets to be called what he demands to be called.  In this case, for now anyway, he is no longer Craig.  No,no. It’s Kimberley.  And Bradley is even referred to as Chelsea in some papers here.  Why give these creeps the consideration? 

Transgender killer who tortured and killed his wife gets legal aid for his fight to wear a WIG in prison after complaining that he looks like a ‘bald drag artiste’
· Craig Hudson said he wanted to change sex and protested that without a female wig he would look like a ‘bald drag artiste’

· Legal aid-funded claim leads to prison service review of transgender rights

By Steve Doughty


A murderer won taxpayer funding for a High Court case in which he demanded the right to wear a woman’s wig in jail.
Craig Hudson – who is serving a life sentence for torturing and killing his wife – said he wanted to change sex and protested that without a female wig he would look like a ‘bald drag artiste’.

The claim, paid for through legal aid, will result in a prison service review of the right of transgender prisoners to wear wigs and outsize women’s clothes.
In a ruling revealed yesterday, Judge Jeremy Richardson QC accepted the argument of governors at maximum security Frankland prison, Durham, who told the court wigs are banned because prisoners can use them as a disguise in escape attempts.

But the judge told prison officials: ‘Further work, I feel, needs to be done to see if the security risks may be mitigated.’
The judicial review brought by Hudson is understood to have cost taxpayers up to £10,000 = ( $16,406 ) in payments to a specialist firm of prison solicitors and a barrister. 

Taxpayers also funded a barrister and other lawyers to represent the Ministry of Justice, and the expense of running the court, resulting in total costs of up to £30,000.  = $49,221.00

The case provoked a row at the Ministry of Justice, which runs the Legal Aid Agency, as Justice Secretary Chris Grayling is trying to cut legal aid waste and limit the number of spurious judicial review cases.

But he is now known officially as Kimberley Green and accused prison authorities of unlawful discrimination on transgender grounds. Hudson, 29, was a member of a ‘family from hell’ in Nottingham who imprisoned and tortured his 20-year-old wife, Rachel.

Mrs Hudson died after two years of daily beatings and abuse. Her body was wrapped in a carpet and dumped.

LINK TO SOURCE to read more


Posted by peiper   United Kingdom  on 01/06/2014 at 09:39 AM   
Filed Under: • CrimeCULTURE IN DECLINEDaily LifeDemocrats-Liberals-Moonbat LeftistsJudges-Courts-LawyersJustice - LACK OF •  
Comments (1) Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

calendar   Monday - December 16, 2013

ongoing trial, but it seems the witness is the one on trial.  it’s called justice

I know this could very well bore many of you but, I just have to post this because it’s been driving me up a wall for weeks now.  Yes there are worse things to be bothered about and I generally am. But this bothers me as well.

Lawyers, courts, judges and the a witness is put on trial. It pisses me off very much and I know things are no different in my own country. I think you know it too.

Basically here’s what happened.

The rat face on the right here is Charles Saatchi.


He’s a millionaire art collector and a man of much power in the art world.  He it was who brought that brilliant con man to fame and fortune by the name of Damian Hirst. He was also the man who brought to the world that brilliant light of art, that shining tower of talented light, Tracey Emin.


Yeah ... she of the unmade bed and used condoms and crap laying about. That’s art today and she is rich,rich and is moving to America. I don’t blame her or Hirst. Not at all.  Hey, if some idiot comes along and thinks my hand drawn line on a piece of paper is worth a million, well, can’t blame the boy and girl. 

Now then Saatchi was married to Nigella Lawson, England’s domestic goddess. 
Some weeks ago he grabbed her by the throat in public, the photos were everywhere cos ppl like them are followed everywhere. The guy is a bully and because of his influence and money he gets what he wants and makes his own laws etc. He is very much used to getting his way.

So they split.  Well actually she moved out of the house, is a millionaire in her own right and wants nothing from him. Just her freedom.
So the newspapers really went after him, a wife abuser and a misogynist and a bully, they called him everything that could be legally published. 
He then turned on her in the press and was angry because ..... she said nothing to defend him. She said nothing btw, no angry outbursts or name calling, just remained silent. The less she said the angrier he became.  So just as the dust started to settle, a large fraud was discovered, in American terms is seems that a pair of sisters who worked for the couple, had embezzled at least a million dollars. 

And here’s where things got really bad for Nigella Lawson.

The (Italian) sisters are on trial. Right?  Well you would not think so by the grilling given Lawson.

It was revealed in court that she had snorted coke and smoked the evil weed. She had even allowed regular cigarettes to be used , it is claimed, by her kids.
So every damn day she, who is not on trial for any of that and is merely a witness, she didn’t bring the charges to start with against the fraudsters, but is treated as if it she who is on trial. Her life and reputation is being trashed daily in court as the sisters keep coming up with these stories.  Some of which are true.  Lawson claimed that when her previous husband was dying of cancer, they both snorted and smoked.  But she was not one of those junkies we often read about.  Since she isn’t being charged with anything, it just bother me that courts can be used this way and a person can be dragged through mud this way.
You know, it could be any one of us also.  I mean, you’re called as a witness and yes I do understand a lawyer must be certain the witness is reliable.  But hell’s bells, there’s all this missing money and a trail left behind and the sisters admitting yes, they used the credit cards given them, but only they say for the job of taking care of things and buying item requested or .... were outright gifts.

To really get the full picture, you would have to do a tiny bit of research and you’ll see what’s happening.

Last week the Brit PM when asked about this affair said he was part of team Nigella or words to that effect, as many people are on her side.
Well folks, the judge came down on the PM like stink on poo. He took an entire court session to talk to the jury trying the sisters and telling them that they must ignore comments like that made by the Prime Minister who should never have said such a thing while a trial was ongoing.
But he allows Nigella Lawson to be abused by a lawyer who has proved nothing so far in the way of innocence of the clients. 


I can’t understand how the demand that a kitchen be spotless , has anything to do with missing money. Can you? Hey, I’m not a lawyer.

A former personal assistant of Nigella Lawson accused of defrauding the chef and her husband Charles Saatchi told today how the couple’s kitchen had to be ‘quite spotless’ by the time he had his breakfast.

Francesca Grillo, 35, said her typical day would start at 6am, when she would be required to tidy the kitchen, which could take two or three hours.

Grillo - who, along with older sister Elisabetta, 41, denies fraud - said it ‘would depend what happened the night before’, adding that this was due to ‘untidy children… and grown-ups’.

Francesca added: ‘The kitchen had to be quite spotless by the time Charles came down to breakfast. He keeps a timetable. He’s always downstairs by 7, 7.30am. He would always be out of the house by 8, 8.30am at the latest.’

On some occasions she made his breakfast but sometimes he made it himself, the jury was told.

‘Nigella would come down later, depending on if she had slept well,’ she added.

Francesca, of Bayswater, west London, said she would then clean the bedrooms and do the laundry and shopping, adding that there were ‘always lots of shopping trips’.

She would pick the children up from school and make them tea, as well as helping them with anything they needed.

LOTS TO READ HERE, links to whole affair if interested


Posted by peiper   United Kingdom  on 12/16/2013 at 05:49 PM   
Filed Under: • Judges-Courts-LawyersREALLY WORTHLESS and PUTRID PEOPLE •  
Comments (0) Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

calendar   Tuesday - December 10, 2013

murder? not guilty. why? because i’m a soldier of pisslam so killing isn’t murder. trial continues

So I sat down to breakfast this morning, a nice steaming coffee in front of me, passed over the pages of yet more (and more and more) coverage of Saint Mandela and landed on page 5 or perhaps it was six.
btw, one somewhat conservative paper said under a large headline declared that Mandela was a colossus. Well, if he wasn’t the media have sure made him one.

So anyway there I am with a page open to the trial of these miserable no account black sombitches who quite literally and in broad daylight, butchered a Brit soldier on a street after first running him down with their vehicle.  Poor guy didn’t stand a chance, I saw the video where he’s walking across a street and the car turns in behind him and knocks him down.

Why are these niggers worthy of a trial?  Isn’t a trial supposed to be where guilt or innocence is determined?  One of the scum is pleading not guilty, this in spite of the fact that there he is in full view, it was even posted here at bmews at the time, with bloody hands and clever. He’s even explaining to the person shooting the video why it is that the deed was done and that he was a soldier of pisslam.  Which of course is why it was not murder and so the innocent plea.  And the system goes along with the expense and anguish to the family of the fallen soldier. 

It has been further reported that the two were trying to cut out body parts.
But in spite of it all they get a trial. And that isn’t all.

They also get to be referred to as .... Mister.  WTF?


Lee Rigby murder trial: ‘I am a soldier of Allah,’ says Michael Adebolajo and insists he has no regrets over killing


The man accused of killing and trying to behead Fusilier Lee Rigby declared his love for al-Qa’ida in court on Monday and claimed he was a soldier for Allah in an ongoing war against the British military.

Seated just yards from the family of his victim, Michael Adebolajo, 28, told the Old Bailey that he had no regrets about launching the attack on the defenceless soldier as he crossed the road near his barracks in Woolwich, south-east London. “I will never regret obeying the command of Allah so that’s all I can say,” he told a packed courtroom. “I’m a mujahid, I’m a soldier: I do what Allah commands me to do. I can’t do anything else.”

Mr Adebolajo, who denies murder, claimed that at the end of his trial he should be killed, freed or ransomed back to Islamist fighters in Afghanistan or Iraq. During his evidence that ranged through his Christian upbringing, his teenage conversion to Islam and his radicalisation into a jihadist fighter, Mr Adebolajo claimed he would have been cast “into hellfire” if he had refused to fight because he “loved my wife and children”, the court heard.

“I’m a soldier and this is war,” said Mr Adebolajo, who is married with six children. His last son was born four days before the attack. “I’m a soldier of Allah and I understand that some people might not recognise this because we don’t wear fatigues and we don’t go to the Brecon Beacons to train and this sort of thing but we are still soldiers in the sight of Allah.

“To me, this is all that matters. Basically it is a war between Islam and those militaries that invade Muslim lands. One of them just happens to be the British military and therefore the war continues even to this day.”

And so, like all brave and good soldiers who have faced death more than once in battle, these vermin ram a car into the enemy, from behind him, disable him entirely and then proceed to butcher him. In full view of the public.  But it’s okay cos they are ... ‘soldiers’.  They soil the word while a genuine soldier has been found guilty of murder for deleting a wounded taliban terrorist who also wore no uniform.  He got life and must serve a minimum of ten years, and the Brit public is outraged. Except of course the libtards who continue to preach tolerance and respect for life blah,blah.

With five prison officers sitting close to him around the dock, Mr Adebolajo told the court that he prayed to Allah the night before the attack to ensure that he and his co-defendant, Michael Adebowale, 22, targeted a soldier rather than a civilian. He claimed that the original plan had not been to run him down, but “Allah caused” the 25-year-old to cross the road in front of them.

Mr Adebolajo claimed he saw the soldier moving before he attacked him with a meat cleaver, prompting Fusilier Rigby’s widow to leave the court in tears. Mr Adebolajo said he tried, but failed, to cut off his head with another knife sharpened at his home before the attack. During comments directed towards the Rigby family, Mr Adebolajo accepted that he killed somebody that they loved. “I just hope that soldier’s life and his death might prevent the deaths of other soldiers who are being sent to die in unjust wars and save the lives of Muslims who are being bombed and killed by British forces,” he said.

He told the court that he was raised as a Christian by his family and during his childhood in Romford, east London, most of his friends were white, including one who became a soldier and died during the Iraq war.

He said he converted to Islam during his first year at Greenwich University and had attended a number of demonstrations organised by the banned Islamist group al-Muhajiroun. Mr Adebolajo was jailed for 51 days after one protest following his conviction for two counts of assaulting a police officer in 2006.

Mr Adebolajo and Mr Adebowale both deny murder and attempted murder of a police officer. The case continues.


That Mr. part really annoys but respect must be shown. WHY?


Posted by peiper   United Kingdom  on 12/10/2013 at 07:02 AM   
Filed Under: • Judges-Courts-LawyersmuslimsREALLY WORTHLESS and PUTRID PEOPLEUK •  
Comments (3) Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

calendar   Sunday - December 01, 2013

A pregnant woman has had her baby forcibly removed by caesarean section by social workers

Over some years there has been a lot of publicity with regard to the abuse of children, and the lack of attention by social services.
Oddly, at the very same time, there has been much publicity over social services acting like police and forcibly removing babies from homes where, while no direct proof shown, the fear was that it might be possible that the child ‘might’ be in future danger.

After the very brutal death of Baby P (Google that sad story), critics of the social service were out in numbers calling for arrests and sanctions and sackings, in fact the head of the service was sacked.  So anyway, especially after the case of Baby P and a couple of others, it has seemed as if the service has gone over the top in reaction to the critics and the non stop stories in the media both press and electronic.

Which brings us to this story.

I’ve never heard of this happening before, which does not mean it hasn’t happened. If it did I wasn’t aware of it.  But I do find it pretty shocking that it could be done as it has here in this article.
I almost always have the feeling something is being left out on stories like this one.  Perhaps the service believed that something might happen to the mother if she gave birth naturally.  But it really seems a stretch to take away a baby and give it away even before they know if the mother’s mental condition is temporary or there’s something else afoot. Wow. 

I have posted the entire article here.  The article comes from The Sunday Telegraph. There are lots of things that may get my goat and see the old RCOB, but not much shocks me anymore. But this sure does.  The judge says there could be a risk of relapse, but doesn’t say how great that risk is. I suppose with the home and child’s environment to think about, any risk is seen as too great.  So why is it that so many felons are out walking the streets after short prison terms but the environment the law abiding live in isn’t given more consideration? 

Being a female is no bed of roses.

Child taken from womb by social services

Exclusive: Essex social services have obtained a court order against a woman that allowed her to be forcibly sedated and for her child to be taken from her womb by caesarean section.

By Colin Freeman

A pregnant woman has had her baby forcibly removed by caesarean section by social workers.

Essex social services obtained a High Court order against the woman that allowed her to be forcibly sedated and her child to be taken from her womb.

The council said it was acting in the best interests of the woman, an Italian who was in Britain on a work trip, because she had suffered a mental breakdown.

The baby girl, now 15 months old, is still in the care of social services, who are refusing to give her back to the mother, even though she claims to have made a full recovery.

The case has developed into an international legal row, with lawyers for the woman describing it as “unprecedented”.

They claim that even if the council had been acting in the woman’s best interests, officials should have consulted her family beforehand and also involved Italian social services, who would be better-placed to look after the child.

Brendan Fleming, the woman’s British lawyer, told The Sunday Telegraph: “I have never heard of anything like this in all my 40 years in the job.

“I can understand if someone is very ill that they may not be able to consent to a medical procedure, but a forced caesarean is unprecedented.

“If there were concerns about the care of this child by an Italian mother, then the better plan would have been for the authorities here to have notified social services in Italy and for the child to have been taken back there.”

The case, reported by Christopher Booker in his column in The Sunday Telegraph, raises fresh questions about the extent of social workers’ powers.

It will be raised in Parliament this week by John Hemming, a Liberal Democrat MP. He chairs the Public Family Law Reform Coordinating Campaign, which wants reform and greater openness in court proceedings involving family matters.

He said: “I have seen a number of cases of abuses of people’s rights in the family courts, but this has to be one of the more extreme.

“It involves the Court of Protection authorising a caesarean section without the person concerned being made aware of what was proposed. I worry about the way these decisions about a person’s mental capacity are being taken without any apparent concern as to the effect on the individual being affected.”

The woman, who cannot be named for legal reasons, is an Italian national who come to Britain in July last year to attend a training course with an airline at Stansted Airport in Essex.

She suffered a panic attack, which her relations believe was due to her failure to take regular medication for an existing bipolar condition.

She called the police, who became concerned for her well-being and took her to a hospital, which she then realised was a psychiatric facility.

She has told her lawyers that when she said she wanted to return to her hotel, she was restrained and sectioned under the Mental Health Act.

Meanwhile, Essex social services obtained a High Court order in August 2012 for the birth “to be enforced by way of caesarean section”, according to legal documents seen by this newspaper.

The woman, who says she was kept in the dark about the proceedings, says that after five weeks in the ward she was forcibly sedated. When she woke up she was told that the child had been delivered by C-section and taken into care.

In February, the mother, who had gone back to Italy, returned to Britain to request the return of her daughter at a hearing at Chelmsford Crown Court.

Her lawyers say that she had since resumed taking her medication, and that the judge formed a favourable opinion of her. But he ruled that the child should be placed for adoption because of the risk that she might suffer a relapse.

The cause has also been raised before a judge in the High Court in Rome, which has questioned why British care proceedings had been applied to the child of an Italian citizen “habitually resident” in Italy. The Italian judge accepted, though, that the British courts had jurisdiction over the woman, who was deemed to have had no “capacity” to instruct lawyers.

Lawyers for the woman are demanding to know why Essex social services appear not have contacted next of kin in Italy to consult them on the case.

They are also upset that social workers insisted on placing the child in care in Britain, when there had been an offer from a family friend in America to look after her.

An expert on social care proceedings, who asked not to be named because she was not fully acquainted with the details of the case, described it as “highly unusual”.

She said the council would first have to find “that she was basically unfit to make any decision herself” and then shown there was an acute risk to the mother if a natural birth was attempted.

An Essex county council spokesman said the local authority would not comment on ongoing cases involving vulnerable people and children.


Posted by peiper   United Kingdom  on 12/01/2013 at 06:46 AM   
Filed Under: • Health and SafetyJudges-Courts-LawyersUK •  
Comments (3) Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

calendar   Thursday - November 07, 2013

so he stabs this woman 6 times in broad daylight but … read this example of justice not

I suppose this is what passes for justice here.  Not that the US is perfect but ....

I do not understand this judgment at all.

What DNA?

He stabbed her in broad daylight. She knows who did it ... why is this not open and shut?

If anybody can make sense of this, would you please explain it to me.  Cos I just don’t get it.

Man accused of attempted murder jailed for lesser charge after police lost vital forensic evidence… and he could be freed within months

Michael Bennison could have faced life in jail for stabbing his ex six times

But attempted murder charge was dropped after DNA evidence was lost

He was jailed for four years but could be out in 12 months after taking into account time already spent on remand

By Daily Mail Reporter

A man found guilty of a frenzied knife attack on his ex-girlfriend could be freed in months after investigators lost vital evidence which could have convicted him of attempted murder.


Michael Bennison, 29, could have faced life behind bars after stabbing the woman once in her side and five times in a broad daylight attack on a street in York.

But the charge of attempted murder would not stick after forensic teams misplaced DNA evidence from two knives.

As a result prosecutors were forced to accept the 28-year-old’s plea to a lesser charge of unlawful wounding, which carries a maximum sentence of just five years.

Newcastle Crown Court heard that on December 14 last year Bennison, of no fixed address, was travelling in a car in York with the female victim, Amy Evans, 27, and another man.

Nick Adlington, prosecuting, said Bennison, of no fixed address had been in a volatile, on-off relationship with Miss Evans and an argument broke out in the car.

When they arrived at their destination they got out and Miss Evans produced a knife. But Bennison took the knife from her and stabbed her six times, once in the side and five times in the back.

He then ran off down an alleyway and went into hiding before he was found two days later.

Describing how the evidence came to be lost by North Yorkshire Police, Mr Adlington said: ‘The swabs went missing from the forensic science service in York. I have been told there has been a full internal review.’

Mr Adlington said as well as the lost evidence, the attempted murder trial faced other problems, including the refusal of an expert witness to come to court.

Jailing Bennison, who has previous convictions for domestic violence on different partners, for a total of four years, Mr Justice Bennison told him he posed a high risk to all women.

After already spending a year behind bars on remand, Bennison could be eligible for parole within just 12 months.

The judge said: ‘Originally you faced a charge of attempted murder but because vital evidence had been lost a plea to section 20 was accepted.

‘You pose a high risk of harm to the victim and to all women. There is clearly a significant risk to female members of the public.

‘There was an intention to commit serious harm.’

The sentence also included a guilty plea for assaulting a man outside a flat in November last year after they got into an argument over noise.

After falling to the floor, the victim was kicked in the head by Bennison before he jumped with both feet onto his back.

The court heard that he had 14 previous appearances at court for 27 offences, that included battery and affray.

John Gregg, defending, said Bennison had ‘wrestled with his own demons’, which included drug abuse, but that he has made progress in prison.


Oh good. Now I understand a bit more.  He made progress in prison.  Progress meaning what? Right. This time he only stabbed the woman instead of jumping on her head or on her back. Good. That good. That’s “progress”.
What a fracked up system in play here.  What the hell ... in a few years they’ll be living under sharia anyway.


Posted by peiper   United Kingdom  on 11/07/2013 at 07:37 AM   
Filed Under: • CrimeCULTURE IN DECLINEDaily LifeJudges-Courts-LawyersJustice - LACK OFUK •  
Comments (1) Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

calendar   Wednesday - November 06, 2013

bomb suspect can have his uk passport back.judges here prove they are bonkers

I’ve ranted a lot and said often that the west just won’t defend itself. And certainly this country, this England won’t.  I guess what I mean to say is, they refuse to defend it in ways I believe they should.  Which okay on occasion may appear a bit over the top.  But in the age we live in, with the enemy we face both inside and outside borders, there are some rules and conventions that just should not apply.
Ok I’ll shut the heck up and please ,,, read all of the article for yourself.  You tell me.  How would you deal with this if you had the power and authority?
Am I wrong?  Isn’t this a case of fairness in the unreasonable extreme? 

Read this one sitting down.

Bomb suspect can have his passport back, judge rules: Iraqi who was stripped of nationality after plotting atrocities against coalition forces could return to Britain

Explosives expert Hilal Al-Jedda was given asylum in 1992 but his British passport was withdrawn after returned to Iraq where he was accused of plotting atrocities against coalition forces

But Supreme Court judges have ruled the move was unlawful as it left him ‘stateless’ without a home country

Father-of-eight may now be allowed to return to Britain with his family

He has already won more than £50,000 in compensation and legal costs from the European Court of Human Rights over his detention in Iraq

By Jack Doyle, Home Affairs Correspondent

An Iraqi terror suspect accused of plotting to blow up British soldiers could be allowed to return to this country after judges ruled he must be given his UK passport back.

Alleged explosives expert Hilal Al-Jedda was given asylum in this country in 1992 but returned home during the Iraq war where he was accused of plotting atrocities against coalition forces.

He was stripped of his British passport but appealed and yesterday won his case at the Supreme Court. Judges said taking his passport away was unlawful because it left him ‘stateless’ – in effect without a home country.

Al-Jedda, whose case is legally aided, has already won more than £50,000 in compensation and legal costs from the European Court of Human Rights over his three-year detention in Iraq by coalition forces. The court found his internment amounted to a breach of his right to liberty.

Now ministers face the prospect of having to issue a new passport and allow the father of eight and his family back in.

MPs reacted with fury to the judgment. James Clappison, a senior member of the Home Affairs Select Committee, said: ‘The public will be entitled to think there is something extremely wrong with the law in a case like this – when it appears national security and public safety cannot be properly taken into account.’ Al-Jedda, 56, came to the UK in 1992 with his first wife and sought asylum.

In 1998 they and their four children were given the right to remain here indefinitely and in 2000 were given British nationality. At that point, he automatically lost his Iraqi passport because the laws of that country did not allow dual nationals.

After divorcing his first wife he married again in 2002 and while still married took a third wife. He lives in Turkey with his third wife and all eight of his children. In September 2004 he left Britain for Iraq and was captured by US forces in Baghdad the following month. He was then transferred to the custody of British forces in Basra and held for three years.

On his release from the detention facility the then Home Secretary, Jacqui Smith, stripped him of his passport. Using legal aid, he launched a series of appeals to try to get it back. He won his case at the Court of Appeal last year which ‘reluctantly’ ruled in his favour.

One judge said the outcome was ‘deeply unsatisfactory’ because of the threat ministers say he poses to Britain. Judges were told the reason for stripping him of his passport was the ‘atrocities’ the Islamic terrorist group he belonged to planned against coalition soldiers. He is accused of recruiting terrorists and smuggling explosives and detonators for roadside bombs.

Home Secretary Theresa May appealed to the Supreme Court, which yesterday ruled he must be given his passport back.

Lawyers for Mrs May argued that Al-Jedda could have applied to the Iraqi authorities to restore his nationality and that he had a right to a new Iraqi passport.

The court found that British law does not allow the Secretary of State to strip someone of their passport if they do not have another – even if they could apply for one from another country.

Before the 2002 Asylum Act ministers could make someone stateless if they were considered a sufficient threat to Britain, but that power was revoked.

Lawyers for the Home Secretary have suggested that Al-Jedda has a real Iraqi passport and a valid grant of Iraqi nationality. This might allow her to further appeal the case. However his lawyers insist it is a fake one used to travel to Turkey in 2008.

A Home Office spokesman said:  ‘We are disappointed with the court’s decision. We are considering the judgment and our next steps in this case carefully.’


You may also be interested in reading the comments at the link.
This is much of what I mean when I rant about this place not defending itself.  And you can bet your last dollar he and his so called family will all be on benefits.


Posted by peiper   United Kingdom  on 11/06/2013 at 06:17 PM   
Filed Under: • Judges-Courts-LawyersmuslimsStoopid-PeopleTerrorists •  
Comments (0) Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  
Page 2 of 35 pages  <  1 2 3 4 >  Last »

Five Most Recent Trackbacks:

Once Again, The One And Only Post
(4 total trackbacks)
Tracked at
The advantage to having a guide with you is thɑt an expert will haѵe very first hand experience dealing and navigating the river with гegional wildlife. Tһomas, there are great…
On: 07/28/23 10:37

The Brownshirts: Partie Deux; These aare the Muscle We've Been Waiting For
(3 total trackbacks)
Tracked at head to the Momarms site
The Brownshirts: Partie Deux; These aare the Muscle We’ve Been Waiting For
On: 03/14/23 11:20

Vietnam Homecoming
(1 total trackbacks)
Tracked at 广告专题配音 专业从事中文配音跟外文配音制造,北京名传天下配音公司
  专业从事中文配音和外文配音制作,北京名传天下配音公司   北京名传天下专业配音公司成破于2006年12月,是专业从事中 中文配音 文配音跟外文配音的音频制造公司,幻想飞腾配音网领 配音制作 有海内外优良专业配音职员已达500多位,可供给一流的外语配音,长年服务于国内中心级各大媒体、各省市电台电视台,能满意不同客户的各种需要。电话:010-83265555   北京名传天下专业配音公司…
On: 03/20/21 07:00

meaningless marching orders for a thousand travellers ... strife ahead ..
(1 total trackbacks)
Tracked at Casual Blog
On: 07/17/17 04:28

a small explanation
(1 total trackbacks)
Tracked at yerba mate gourd
Find here top quality how to prepare yerba mate without a gourd that's available in addition at the best price. Get it now!
On: 07/09/17 03:07



Not that very many people ever read this far down, but this blog was the creation of Allan Kelly and his friend Vilmar. Vilmar moved on to his own blog some time ago, and Allan ran this place alone until his sudden and unexpected death partway through 2006. We all miss him. A lot. Even though he is gone this site will always still be more than a little bit his. We who are left to carry on the BMEWS tradition owe him a great debt of gratitude, and we hope to be able to pay that back by following his last advice to us all:
  1. Keep a firm grasp of Right and Wrong
  2. Stay involved with government on every level and don't let those bastards get away with a thing
  3. Use every legal means to defend yourself in the event of real internal trouble, and, most importantly:
  4. Keep talking to each other, whether here or elsewhere
It's been a long strange trip without you Skipper, but thanks for pointing us in the right direction and giving us a swift kick in the behind to get us going. Keep lookin' down on us, will ya? Thanks.


Copyright © 2004-2015 Domain Owner

GNU Terry Pratchett

Oh, and here's some kind of visitor flag counter thingy. Hey, all the cool blogs have one, so I should too. The Visitors Online thingy up at the top doesn't count anything, but it looks neat. It had better, since I paid actual money for it.
free counters