Saturday - July 13, 2013

Unequal Treatment

Bean Town Cop Busted With Army Issue Bombs

A Boston police officer is free on $1,000 bail after police in Plymouth say they found a cache of military grade explosives in a shed at his former home.

Kirk Merricks, 43, of Dorchester, was charged Friday with 11 counts of possession of explosives, along with theft and ammunition charges.

Police say they received a call on Thursday from the homeowner, identified as Merricks’ estranged wife, saying she was cleaning out a bedroom closet and found four ¼ sticks of TNT and assorted ammunition in a metal box marked “highly explosive.”

The bomb squad responded to the home on Paddington Way, where explosives experts recovered a briefcase from a shed outside the home that had “a bandolier that contained four military-grade M203 rounds, six detonator cords with attached blasting caps and two rolls of timed fused cord connected to non-electric fixing mechanisms,” District Attorney’s office reported.

Merricks is accused of stealing those explosives and storing them in the shed.

Plymouth Chief Michael Botieri says investigators think the items were stolen because they are military grade and not available for purchase by the general public.

While Merricks is licensed to carry Boston police-issued ammunition, ammo possession charges were also filed because the ammunition that was recovered was not police-issued, according to investigators.

Ok, a big FU to Assachussets first, for their NY/NJ level firearms laws that are so insane that having “other” ammo is a crime. Ammo not issued by the State or in calibers for which you have no registered weapons. And the “quarter sticks of TNT” sounds an awful lot like the large fireworks called blockbusters around here. The “1/4 stick” thing is pure urban legend and totally false ... because if you had REAL sticks of TNT, why on earth would you break it into little pieces and then store it?

But the detonators are a different story. And the 4 M203 rifle grenades are another, much uglier story altogether.

The guy busted in NJ the other day had “military grade explosives” as well. Maybe, don’t ya think, just MAYBE somebody somewhere ought to be looking into how these things are getting out of thought-to-be secure military storage, or snuck back from the wars by soldiers and sold on the black market? Because we’ve spent billions and billions “terrorist proofing” all those places, and the military absolutely can search every last package and duffle bag leaving the sandbox. No excuses for even a single bullet coming back in anyone’s footlocker.

Hey, I’m all for the Second Amendment, but I don’t want whackos having crew served machine guns, grenades, artillery shells, or commercial explosives ... unless the stuff comes on the open market for the rest of us to buy if we want. Yeah, like that will EVER happen.

So now that Crappy Nappy is quitting the DHS to go play School Marm, will the Swiss Cheese Ammo Dump be the next never-shoulda-happened scandal to push under the Obama-bus?

Oh, and dig this:

Boston police have placed Merricks on paid administrative leave and taken away his handgun and badge. He has worked for the department since 1999.

Merricks was released on [$1000] bail and the case was continued until a probable cause hearing on September 10.

Excuse me, what? What what what? The guy had stolen Army bombs and commercial explosives in his shed, and he gets TIME OFF WITH PAY and bail set at only $1000??? I call racism. RAAAAAAACIIIISSM!!! Because if he was some loner White guy, bail would have been $30 million and he’d be rotting in a deep dark cell, immediately fired from whatever job he may have had, and convicted by the media on every TV channel. 

Posted by Drew458     on 07/13/2013 at 08:12 AM   
Filed Under: • Judges-Courts-Lawyers • Racism and race relations •  
• Comments (3) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Wednesday - July 10, 2013

stabs and beats ex wife over dog loss and walks free

Well having had a rant of sorts with regard to the european court of human rights and the latest war of words and policy on that front, it’s time to return to things in English courts to show that justice isn’t in much evidence here either, and some judges here should perhaps sit on the euro court since they seem to have as little sense of justice as do the euro socialist do gooders. Case in point.
Take a look at this outrage.

‘I’ve given her face a good kicking… she’ll need plastic surgery’: What estranged husband said after stabbing former wife in the head but he is still SPARED prison

Martin Clarkson, 59, attacked Sarah Dowse, 34, in the street in Redcar
Given a 15-month suspended sentence after admitting inflicting GBH
Clarkson’s sentence has been branded ‘inadequate’ by victim

By Kerry Mcdermott

A man who stabbed his estranged wife in the head because she was given custody of their dogs following their split has walked free from court.

After attacking Sarah Dowse in the street with a pocket knife as she walked the terriers near her home in Redcar, Martin Clarkson, 59, was heard to say: ‘I’ve given her face a good kicking… she’ll need plastic surgery.’

Police initially treated the incident as attempted murder, but Clarkson was given a 15-month suspended sentence after admitting inflicting grievous bodily harm.

Ms Dowse, 34, last night told of her shock that her former husband was not jailed for the incident on January 24, which saw Clarkson repeatedly stab his ex in the head and fracture her cheekbone before he was overpowered by a passerby.

Teesside Crown Court heard he fled to the home of another former wife following the attack and asked: ‘Have the police been?’, before describing how he had given Ms Dowse’s face ‘a good kicking’.

Passing sentence, Judge Peter Moorhouse imposed a five-year restraining order preventing Clarkson from contacting his ex, but Ms Dowse has since said the ban ‘won’t stop me feeling in fear of him every day’.

‘I expected him to get a prison sentence, and I feel what he received was inadequate for the suffering he caused me,’ she said.

read more

Is there an old saying about coming between a man and his dog? 

Maybe there should be if not.  In any case, justice was surely denied here.  Oh come on.  A what? A restraining order?  Yeah. We also know how effective those are.  The lady maybe needs to find a gun and keep it close.  Screw the law.  She should make every effort to try and find one somehow, some way. Failing that, carry travel size hair spray.  I’ve read that some woman do carry those.

Posted by peiper     on 07/10/2013 at 09:15 AM   
Filed Under: • Crime • Judges-Courts-Lawyers • Justice - LACK OF • UK •  
• Comments (0) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

brit anger at European Court of Human Rights

I have read in the papers that Obama either has already or is about to, sign a multi billion dollar (or is it only million dollar) trade deal with the EU.
SO then closer ties with that officialdom I guess.  Lets hope it doesn’t eventually involve those euro-ass-wipes meddling in USA affairs.  Can’t help but wonder if there were any concessions made to the EU that might impinge on our sovereignty. Just asking.  Because at this moment, many Brits pretty angry at latest decision by the ..... hell.

See it for yourselves.  This really is unbelievable but it’s happening right now.  I think the Brits may pull themselves out of the tangles of this court.

Here’s just another serious reason why.

What about the victims’ rights? Meddling European judges rule that even Britain’s most evil killers have human right to seek freedom

Prisoners serving whole life terms win the right to seek parole in Strasbourg

European Court of Human Rights rules sentence ‘inhumane and degrading’

Convicted killers Jeremy Bamber, Peter Moore and Douglas Vinter appealed

Minister Chris Grayling describes ruling as ‘a terrible day for British justice’

By Jack Doyle, James Slack and James Tozer

Victims’ families reacted with fury last night after European judges ruled serial killers must be given the right to seek parole.

In a hugely provocative decision, Strasbourg said murderers and rapists condemned to die behind bars must now be given a chance of freedom.

The families said the idea of the killers walking Britain’s streets again was a ‘horrendous prospect’ and ‘life must mean life’.

The whole-life tariff applies to 48 men and one woman – Rose West – whose crimes courts regard as so heinous they must never be let out.

But three of them – Jeremy Bamber, Douglas Vinter and Peter Moore – appealed to Europe, saying their sentences ‘undermined human dignity and destroyed the human spirit’. Vinter and Bamber even claimed their time in jail had left them ‘depressed and in despair’.

Yesterday the highest body of the European Court of Human Rights, the Grand Chamber, agreed with them.

It said refusing the 49 any prospect of release amounted to inhuman and degrading treatment in a breach of Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights.

All the killers must now be allowed a review – with the prospect of release if they have been ‘rehabilitated’ and are deemed harmless.

Tory MPs said the ruling was an attack on democracy that exposed the court’s ‘warped moral compass’. Justice Secretary Chris Grayling spoke of ‘a terrible day for British justice’.

Ministers are already in a stand-off with the court over its demand to lift the ban on prisoners voting and are furious over its decisions in favour of terrorists and criminals.

Writing in today’s Mail, Mr Grayling threatened to withdraw from the court’s control after the next election, and accused the judges of being ‘misguided’ and trying to act like a ‘Supreme Court of Europe’.

read more

I will not mention by name here but this has a personal (in a minor way) meaning for us.  One of the 49 killers had done his evil on the family of someone we know very well.  A close personal friend who a few years ago told us the entire sorry tale including things not mentioned in the papers.
The court is soooooo concerned about the rights of these evil, murderous bastards.  How about the victim’s rights? 

A few examples out of the 49.

49 monsters given hope of freedom by the European Court of Human Rights: They’re the UK’s most notorious killers… now they can seek parole

By James Slack

ROSE WEST: With her husband murdered 10 young women in their house which became known as the house of horrors.
They even murdered their own daughter.  Husband Fred killed himself in prison.

JEREMY BAMBER: Murdered his adoptive parents, sister and her twin boys age six.

PETER MOORE: Murdered and mutilated four men. He did it, just for fun.

DENNIS NILSEN:Murdered 16 and was caught because his disposal of human entrails blocked his drains.

DOUGLAS VINTER: Stabbed his wife four times before finally strangling her to death.  Now here’s a case of how dumb can a woman be. She met him while he was in prison for a previous killing in 1996.  But like a few others on this list of rotters, he killed and then was let off in 2005 and then killed his wife in ‘08. 
Oh sure, allow these guys out as a human right. They aren’t dangerous anymore.
Wanna bet?

Don’t be lazy dear readers.  Read the entire list of 49.  It’s insane that there are some who had maimed and killed and got out only to do it all over again.
Here’s a link. Read it please.

THE 49 WITH PIX, SEE THEM HERE AND READ

Posted by peiper     on 07/10/2013 at 07:59 AM   
Filed Under: • Crime • EUro-peons • Judges-Courts-Lawyers • Stoopid-People • UK •  
• Comments (1) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Monday - July 08, 2013

an outrageous judgement. actually, an outrageous lack of it.

Reading something like this convinces me that the system here is so totally broken, so corrupt, so completely staffed by incompetent judges, that there is no way back.  I do not believe it will ever be fixed and it will never work.  The public I think is pretty well aware and certainly the victims are, but nothing changes.

I can’t find any additional words.

Take a look.

Woman who scarred mother-of-two for life by biting her face ‘like a rabid animal’ in unprovoked street attack is SPARED prison

Nicola Hoyes, 32, was attacked by Francesa Raby in Salford

Bitten after greeting Raby’s boyfriend in the street last July

By Jill Reilly

A crazed woman who scarred a mother-of-two for life by biting her face ‘like a rabid animal’ has been spared jail.

Nicola Hoyes, 32, was punched to the floor and pinned down by Francesa Raby in Salford Greater, Manchester, after she greeted Raby’s boyfriend.

Raby, 22, sunk her teeth into Miss Hoyes’ right cheek, leaving her with blood pouring down her face and her injuries were so severe, other friends at first thought she had been bitten by a dog.

She suffered a 5cm wound and now has a scar across her face which she will have to cover with make-up for the rest of life following the attack.

Miss Hoyes was given blood tests and injections in case Raby’s bite had infected her with a virus.

At Manchester magistrates court, mother-of-one Raby, who has a previous conviction for torturing another woman pleaded guilty along with her boyfriend Carl Kelly, 25, who also took part in the attack to assault occasioning actual bodily harm.

But both were given two year supervision orders with Raby ordered to attend a ‘woman’s activity programme.

Kelly, from Swinton, Salford, was ordered to attend an anger management programme and complete 60 hours unpaid work.

Both were ordered pay compensation of £500 each- but they will only have to pay it at the rate of £5 per week because they are jobless meaning they will pay it off in two years time.

And it isn’t as though the verminous slut who did this doesn’t have a violent record.

The court heard Raby had been sentenced to 40 months in a young offenders’ institution in 2008 for being part of a gang that tortured a teenage girl.

In that incident she stabbed, battered and burned the 19-year old victim before locking her in a cupboard.

So the judge slaps the criminal on the wrist and says she must pay money in compensation to her victim. Like that will happen.
Oh right. This punishment will put the fear of the law in her ok. 
What a very bad joke this system is.

source

Posted by peiper     on 07/08/2013 at 09:23 AM   
Filed Under: • Crime • CULTURE IN DECLINE • Judges-Courts-Lawyers • Justice - LACK OF • UK •  
• Comments (2) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

another screwing of the brit public by court of human rights. never ends.

Isn’t it amazing how these vermin arrive in a country armed with a knowledge of the law. Or enough of it to use to their advantage.
Of course, that would not be possible in a world where logic played an important part.  To give them their due, even with their problems, the French manage to side step some of the more idiot regulations and laws and do not so far as I am aware, recognize the law under which Brits are ruled and are forced to obey.
Even when common sense dictate another solution. Like immediate deportation. No, can’t do that.
So damn sick of this crap. It never seems to end.

London riots looter from Congo blocks deportation because it would ‘breach his rights to family life’ - even though he is childless and unmarried

Derrick Kinsasi jailed for 18 months for burglary and theft in 2011 riots
But he argued against deportation saying ‘he has a good life here’
He said he had ‘no-one to go back to’ in home country
The ruling allowing him to stay means Kinsasi will remain here indefinitely

By Amanda Williams

A foreign criminal who was jailed for his part in the London riots has used human rights laws to overturn attempts to deport him.

Derrick Kinsasi was jailed for 18 months for burglary and theft from a branch of Comet during the August 2011 riots.

But his lawyers have successfully argued that sending the criminal, who has no wife and no children, back to the Democratic Republic of Congo would ‘breach his rights to family life’ under the Human Rights Act.

The Daily Telegraph reports that senior immigration judge Nathan Goldstein said the 21 year-old could stay in Britain, because to remove him had ‘echoes of exile’.

Kinsasi told the Upper Tribunal Immigration and Asylum Chamber that he came to Britain with his brother in 2002 to claim asylum.

He was refused, but was granted ‘exceptional leave to remain’ in 2006.

In October 2011 Kinsasi was jailed for 18 months, for his part in the London riots.

According to court papers, Kinsasi - who currently lives with his mother and two brothers - was caught by police as he tried to break into a branch of the electrical good store Comet to take ‘high value portable desirable items’.

Under government rules all foreign national jailed for 12 months or more should be sent back to their home countries.

In November 2011, officials told Kinsasi that he was liable for automatic deportation.

The right to ‘Family life’ under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights is enshrined in British law in the Human Rights Act and argues that everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life, his home and his correspondence.

Officials said that Kinsasi was not entitled to argue the right as he had no evidence of dependency ‘beyond normal emotional ties’.

He appealed to the lower immigration tribunal, but it upheld the Home Secretary’s decision to deport him.

But he then launched another appeal in the Upper Tribunal, in which he told Judges he had ‘no one to go back to’ in the Democratic Republic of Congo and had a ‘good life here’.

Judge Goldstein reversed the previous ruling, allowing the appeal.

The judge said: ‘The consequence of his removal to the DRC would amount to a splitting of the family unit.’’I find that removing him to the DRC has echoes of ‘exile’ rather than exclusion and it is unlikely to be proportionate.’

The ruling means Kinsasi will be able to remain here indefinitely.

A Home Office spokesman said: ‘We are disappointed with this judgment. This kind of case is precisely why we are looking to change the law in the new Immigration Bill which will be introduced later this year.

‘We want to ensure the courts properly reflect Parliament’s view that serious criminals should be deported unless there are very exceptional circumstances.’

source

So bongo, bongo, bongo he do want to leave the congo
Oh yes yes yes yes
Bingle, bangle, bungle he no happy de the jungle he refuse to go

Bingo Bango bongo he so happy in the UK he refuse to go
Him know de law you bet ...
He say ..
I’ve got my spear
I’ll stay right here
On ben-e-fits
ha ha ha ha
I think I’ll stay where I “om”

Posted by peiper     on 07/08/2013 at 08:37 AM   
Filed Under: • Crime • CULTURE IN DECLINE • Daily Life • DIVERSITY BS • Illegal-Aliens and Immigration • Judges-Courts-Lawyers •  
• Comments (1) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Thursday - June 27, 2013

justice and fair play as seen thru crossed eyes of euro-pee on court. jerks!

I brought this bit of lunacy to your attention last year.
Here’s an update.

The short of it is that a european court has the authority to rule on how Brits run the criminal system here.

Just once I wish the govt. here would tell the euros to go and do something anatomically impossible.  I guess we’ll see shortly.

And look at that smiling sack of poo shown here.  Lets hope his cancer when he gets it, is painful and long.

Thousands of convicts denied their human right to vote in line for £5,000 payouts… (7,624.24 USD) thanks to a European court ruling

A ‘gang of lawyers’ are ‘trawling’ for claims by current and former prisoners
Courts could award each inmate £1,000 for every election ‘missed’
It follows 2005 Strasbourg ruling in favour of axe-killer John Hirst

By Jack Doyle

Tens of thousands of prisoners are in line for compensation of £5,000 each because they have been denied the ‘human right’ to vote, MPs were told yesterday.

A ‘gang of lawyers’ was ‘trawling’ for claims by current and former prisoners on the back of a 2005 European Court of Human Rights judgment, a Parliamentary committee heard.

One eminent QC said the courts could be ‘bound’ to award each inmate £1,000 for every election ‘missed’ since the controversial 2005 Strasbourg ruling in favour of axe-killer John Hirst.

It found by banning him from the polls, Britain had breached his right to participate in the democratic process.

In the seven years since, about 650,000 new inmates have been imprisoned in England and Wales.

In that period the court has reaffirmed its judgment several times, despite MPs voting overwhelmingly against changing the law.

Prisoners serving long sentences may have missed general elections in 2005 and 2010.

Some may also be able to claim for local elections, the 2009 European Parliament elections – and even last year’s Police and Crime Commissioner polls.

Tory peer Edward Faulks QC believes payouts to inmates were likely even if they had never bothered to vote in elections in the past.

He told MPs on the Joint Committee on the Draft Voting Eligibility (Prisoners) Bill: ‘The courts will be bound to award damages to those deprived of the vote, whether they have voted before or not.’

Asked by former prisons minister Crispin Blunt if the figure would be £1,000 per election, he said: ‘It may be something of that sort.’ He said it was ‘inevitable’ payments would be backdated to 2005. ‘I suspect there will be an award of damages,’ he said.

Ministers would be likely to fight any claims. They are also resisting demands from Strasbourg that the law be changed. David Cameron has said the idea of giving prisoners the vote makes him ‘sick’.

To assuage the court, ministers have drawn up a draft Bill which offers MPs the choice of sticking with the existing ban, or giving votes to prisoners who are serving less than six months or less than four years behind bars.

The Bill is being considered by the joint committee and will be put to a vote of the House of Commons – which recently rejected by an overwhelming margin any change in the arrangements.

read more

A gang of lawyers are trawling for claims. The word is not ‘gang’! The collective noun for a group of lawyers is a plague! And it needs eradicating.

- Old Chap , Caribbean, Grenada,

Posted by peiper     on 06/27/2013 at 08:03 AM   
Filed Under: • Democrats-Liberals-Moonbat Leftists • EUro-peons • Judges-Courts-Lawyers •  
• Comments (1) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Saturday - June 22, 2013

european court of uman rights and brit court devise new way to fight wars, enter lawyers

In the normal run of things we can sympathize with families and especially parents who lose a loved one in the military.  The loss is certainly made all the worse if there are fears or accusations that the dead are the result of defense dept. penny pinching and not providing the troops with adequate gear to protect themselves.

That’s what the following is all about.
For awhile now there has been talk and denial and hearings and accusations that troops were sent out in what were supposed to be reasonably safe armored vehicles that were neither safe nor well armored, resulting in the unnecessary deaths of crews and passengers. 

One mother was very much shattered and unforgiving and campaigned for investigation with regard to the type vehicle her son was killed in, by a roadside bomb.

Enter the lawyers.

Human rights victory for families of British soldiers

Justices uphold human rights of Snatch Land Rover soldiers
The families of British soldiers who died when their Snatch Land Rovers hit roadside bombs in Iraq have won the right to bring a claim under the Human Rights Act 1998 (HRA 1998).
The Supreme Court unanimously held that HRA 1998 applies to British soldiers abroad, in Smith & Ors v Ministry of Defence [2013] UKSC 41. The extent of the duty, and whether it was breached, will now be decided at trial.
The families claim the soldiers’ deaths would have been avoided if they had been given proper equipment when carrying out high-risk activities, such as medium-armoured vehicles.

READ THE REST OF IT

Not surprisingly there is another argument to be heard.

UK defence secretary warns of rights ruling repercussions

Judges decree that convention on human rights applies on battlefield

Daily Mail by way of Gulf News
London: British troops could be prevented from carrying out vital missions after an explosive human rights ruling, the Defence Secretary has warned.
Philip Hammond said the judgement means military chiefs will be “living in fear” of being sued.

He fears our forces risk being reduced to Continental-style peacekeeping roles — which see some countries refuse to let their personnel go out after dark — after judges decreed that the European Convention on Human Rights applies on the battlefield.

Hammond is understood to be so furious at the Supreme Court ruling that he is considering demanding a revocation and believes it strengthens the case for Britain quitting the ECHR.

The Defence Secretary said: “There are real concerns that British troops could be prevented from carrying out their missions for fear of falling foul of human rights legislation. We can’t have troop commanders living in fear of how lawyers back in London might interpret their battlefield decisions that are vital to protecting our national security.

“There could be serious implications for our ability to work with international partners who are not bound by the ECHR.”
Following the Supreme Court ruling that the ECHR does apply even in combat situations, Hammond has ordered a review of the implications for military commanders and troops.

The prospect of “health and safety” type laws applying to the battlefield could seriously impact on Britain’s military capability, he said.
A source added: “If the ECHR applies to personnel on operations it is feared that commanders may be reluctant to make decisions in the field that will then be second-guessed by lawyers in a London.

“We don’t want to be tied up by health and safety rules that prevent troops patrolling at night or only with certain equipment.”

READ MORE OF IT

Here’s part of an editorial from the Saturday Mail on the subject.

And as an aside I should tell the readers here, German troops in Afghanistan, some 3,500, do NOT leave their bases at night and Do Not leave their armoured carriers while on patrol. The UN has a number of restrictions on UN troops.
I suppose this is how a politically correct war is fought these days. 

DAILY MAIL COMMENT: Wrong human rights verdict for our troops

By Daily Mail Reporter

As the Mail has long argued, it is a matter of great shame to Britain’s political class that, in Iraq and Afghanistan, soldiers were sent to fight and die without proper equipment.

But, while it is vital that ministers should be held to account, it’s impossible not to be alarmed by this week’s Supreme Court ruling that soldiers in warzones should, for the first time, be given protection under Labour’s Human Rights Act.

Doubtless, the judges felt that giving soldiers and their families the right to sue would focus the minds of the Government and Army on minimising risk.
But what they have failed to accord due weight to is that military commanders are regularly tasked with making instant life-or-death decisions.
If the fear of future litigation causes them to hesitate for even a moment, the consequences could be disastrous.

Meanwhile, if the Ministry of Defence budget is drained by fighting vexatious claims brought by ambulance-chasing lawyers, there will inevitably be less to spend on equipment and training.

READ MORE

Posted by peiper     on 06/22/2013 at 11:21 AM   
Filed Under: • Democrats-Liberals-Moonbat Leftists • Judges-Courts-Lawyers • UK • War-Stories •  
• Comments (1) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Wednesday - June 05, 2013

Hmm Herr Spielmann… Are We Bothered… No.. We want out anyway.. Who elected You… We did not..

Woo-hoo. Brits get read the riot act by euro judge.  Apparently little things like sovereignty have no part or place in the thinking of these eurocrats.

Can’t wait to see what happens next.  Prolly nothing. But then, ya never do know for sure.  There are a lot of Brits who would be thrilled to leave the EU.  But the EU isn’t the only problem they have, and even if they eventually get to vote on the issue, by the time they do and if they leave, it will be too late to save the country.  They need to leave right now. OK, takes time I know.  So one hour. That should do it.
Then deport all foreign criminals that are allowed here with benefits back to their native countries.  Those that refuse to go can be shot.  Deport all the jihad preaching lice and rid the country of the lawyers who enable them.  Pass laws forcing foreigners with names like spaghetti or alphabet soup to anglicize them so the natives are not forced to learn the immigrant’s language.  There’s more but that’s a start.
Oh yeah, rid the country of the uman rights industry on pain of death. 

Yes I know. Unrealistic and never happen.  But it’s nice to be able to imagine a better place. And it could be again if ppl had the will. And more patriotic fervor.

Britain must obey Strasbourg judges or quit the EU, warns new chief of European Court of Human Rights

Judge Dean Spielmann also says ministers should grant vote to prisoners
Intervention puts unelected court on a collision course with Westminster
MPs including Tory backbencher Dominic Raab ‘won’t give in to threats’

By James Slack and Steve Doughty

Britain was yesterday threatened with having to quit the European Union if it refuses to ‘kowtow’ to Strasbourg’s human rights judges.

The warning was delivered by the new head of the European Court of Human Rights, amid an increasing determination among Tory Cabinet ministers to leave its jurisdiction.

Judge Dean Spielmann, from Luxemburg, also insisted that ministers had a duty to grant the vote to prisoners.

His intervention once again puts the unelected court on a collision course with Westminster.

Technically, the EU and the European Court of Human Rights are separate institutions, with the ECHR overseen by the 47-member Council of Europe.

But Mr Spielmann opted to combine two of the most explosive issues in British politics by saying that, if we want to leave the court, we may also have to exit the EU.

His logic was that quitting the court would mean also exiting the Council of Europe. He added no state had ever been a member of the EU without first joining the council.

Mr Spielmann said: ‘That would plainly be a political disaster.

‘Any member state who would leave the Council of Europe, who would denounce the convention, would lose its credibility when it comes to promoting human rights also in different parts of the world.’

Last night, MPs said they would not give in to threats - particularly where they involved Britain’s membership of the EU.

Tory backbencher Dominic Raab said: ‘Mr Spielmann had no previous judicial experience before ascending to the heights of this European ivory tower, and it shows.

‘The only thing undermining the credibility of the Strasbourg court are the Mickey Mouse judgments it spews out. He and the other judges should take a long hard look in the mirror before complaining about British democracy.’

‘If Mr Spielmann thinks threatening to kick us out of the EU is going to persuade anyone in Britain to kowtow to the perverse rulings of the Strasbourg court, he’s got another thing coming’

Home Secretary Theresa May has said the UK should consider its relationship with the European court after a string of adverse judgments.

These include blocking the deportation of Al Qaeda hate-preacher Abu Qatada and the long-running battle over whether convicts must be allowed to vote.

Chris Grayling, the Justice Secretary, has also discussed walking away from the court. This would allow the final say to rest with Britain’s better qualified Supreme Court.

Judge Spielmann told BBC Radio Four that all decisions reached by his court must be respected - including prisoner votes.

read more

Posted by peiper     on 06/05/2013 at 07:47 AM   
Filed Under: • EUro-peons • Judges-Courts-Lawyers • UK •  
• Comments (2) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

“RIGHTS” LAWYERS TO BRIT TROOPS. DROP DEAD. WHAT? US WORRY? HAHAHA

Just my opinion but, I think it’s criminal that lives of Brit troops are on the line and these ass-wipe human rights groups can meddle in things to this extent.  In fact I don’t even think they should be allowed a voice. Come to think of it, or life either.  I’d love to see the troops turn their weapons on the “rights” creeps.  Bang-bang delete.  I’m living in a dream world hoping for that. 

Taliban bomber ‘who killed three soldiers’ to be freed from the British Guantanamo

· Terrorist leader being held at a prison within Camp Bastion
· Directed attack that killed three British soldiers and injured six others
· Explosives expert likely to be released into corrupt Afghan judicial system
· Could be freed within weeks to launch fresh attacks

By Mark Nicol

A Taliban bomb-maker suspected of directing an attack that killed three British soldiers could be freed within weeks if lawyers win their battle to close the ‘British Guantanamo’, it’s been claimed.
Defence sources have said that the terrorist leader is being held at a controversial prison within Camp Bastion.

Due to pressure from human rights lawyers, the Taliban explosives expert is likely to be released into the notoriously corrupt Afghan judicial system, with the danger that he will be freed to launch fresh attacks.
A Taliban bomb-maker suspected of directing an attack that killed three British soldiers could be freed within weeks if lawyers win their battle to close the ‘British Guantanamo’.
But after pressure from human rights lawyers, the Taliban explosives expert is likely to be released into the notoriously corrupt Afghan judicial system, with the danger that he will be freed to launch fresh attacks.
Three British troops died and six others were wounded five weeks ago when their Mastiff armoured vehicle hit an improvised explosive device (IED) .
Days after the attack, British Special Forces uncovered a cache of home-made bombs five miles from the blast site. Troops followed up this success by capturing the suspected bomb-maker and four accomplices.

Now, following the intervention of British human rights lawyers, the Camp Bastion prison is facing closure and the inmates are likely to be transferred to an Afghan jail.
Defence sources are adamant that the country’s legal system remains corrupt and that suspected terrorists could be released by the courts or freed in Taliban raids.
Last night, former Government Defence Minister Sir Gerald Howarth attacked the move, saying it will put British soldiers’ lives at risk.

Taliban IED technicians represent a very serious threat to British personnel. So we should not connive in any measure that results in them being able to continue operations against our troops,’ he said.
‘I am also sick and tired of human rights being evoked to defend or protect those who seek to destroy us and take the lives of members of Her Majesty’s Armed Forces. So absolutely no way should he or anyone else be transferred or released before the end of 2014 when British troops withdraw from Afghanistan.’
Public Interest Lawyers, which is acting for eight of the approximately 80 inmates at the Camp Bastion prison, say that its clients are being mistreated by UK guards.
It claims that torture techniques such as sleep and sensory deprivation, blindfolding and a process called ‘harshing’ – when guards stand just inches in front of the inmates and suddenly scream abuse – are being used to extract information and confessions.

READ AND SEE MORE

Posted by peiper     on 06/05/2013 at 05:00 AM   
Filed Under: • Judges-Courts-Lawyers • War-Stories •  
• Comments (1) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Saturday - June 01, 2013

secret courts,secret arrests.welcome to a place that rants about lack of justice in other countries

This is an article so bizarre, so terrifying to contemplate, that I had to stop everything else and share the lunacy.

I understand court orders must be obeyed but this ongoing bit of Stalinist court power just should not exist in our world. At least not in a case like this one.

I am posting most of the article instead of only a short bit.  You really need to read this.

If America has the same system, and I have never heard that we do, then we really need to be looking over our shoulders and be very careful.

Actually, thanks to a book Drew mentioned a week or so ago, (Gold Coast, by Nelson Demille), I got the clearest picture yet of how even our own law enforcement can act against people they want to stick it to.  That reminds me to say to Drew;

It’s your damn fault I lost sleep staying up trying to finish 638 pages even trying to hold my eyes open which in the end didn’t work.
Scary stuff.  I’ve read Demille before but missed this one. 

I don’t suppose I’d be surprised if American courts could do this also.  Makes me uncomfortable to think about it.

I guess I want stability in an unstable world.

Secret court jails father for sending son 21st birthday greeting on Facebook after he was gagged from naming him

Garry Johnson breached gagging order stopping him publicly naming son

46-year-old brought up his son and still lives with him

Judge sent father to prison for contempt at a closed-doors family court

Case certain to fuel concerns about Britain’s network of secret courts

By Sue Reid

A father has been jailed at a secret court hearing for sending a Facebook message to his grown-up son on his 21st birthday.

Garry Johnson, 46, breached a draconian gagging order which stops him publicly naming his son, Sam, whom he has brought up and who still lives with him.

In a case which is certain to fuel concerns about Britain’s shadowy network of secret courts, a judge sent the former music executive to prison for contempt at a closed-doors family court hearing in Essex at the beginning of last month.

He was not arrested by police or even represented by a lawyer.

The order silencing Mr Johnson – which follows an acrimonious divorce eight years ago – means he cannot mention either of his boys, 21-year-old Sam and Adam, 18, in public, even by congratulating them in a local newspaper announcement when they get engaged, married or have children in the future.

The extraordinary gag is set to last until the end of his life, although his boys are now adults. Last night they condemned their father’s jailing as ‘cruel and ludicrous’.

After their parents’ divorce, the two boys chose to live with their father, following a series of rows with their mother over her new boyfriend.

But within a year of the divorce, Mr Johnson’s ex-wife made allegations to Essex social workers that he was neglecting the children and not feeding them properly at his smart family home.

An investigation by social workers cleared him of any wrongdoing and said the boys were fine.

A year later, in 2006, she made further allegations to social workers that he was mentally unfit to care for the boys.

Medical documents shown to the Mail by Sam and Adam reveal that Mr Johnson was examined three times by a local psychiatrist hired by social workers. The doctor wrote to social workers saying:  ‘There is no evidence of mental illness. I cannot understand why there are concerns about Mr Johnson’s mental health.’

Social services refused, as a result, to get involved.

In 2007, the ex-wife started private care proceedings to remove the boys from their father. A judge put the boys under a ‘living at home with parent’ care order.

It meant they would continue to live with their father, but under supervision by social services.

This care order was accompanied by the gagging order to stop an increasingly anguished Mr Johnson talking about the case publicly.

Even naming his sons in the most innocuous circumstances – such as on Facebook – became a contempt of court.
Much-loved: Gary Johnson wished his son, Sam a happy birthday on Facebook. Sam is pictured when he was 15 in 2007

The care order on Sam expired on his 18th birthday three years ago. The one on Adam in October last year when he reached 18. Normally, a gagging order imposed by a family court judge on a parent expires at the same time as a care order on the child. This one did not.

Mr Johnson was imprisoned at the height of the Mail’s campaign against jailings by this country’s network of secret courts.

The secretive family court system, which jailed Mr Johnson, deals with custody wrangles, children’s care orders and adoption.

Mr Johnson received a letter in late April from Chelmsford County Court officials ordering him to go to Basildon Magistrates’ Court building on May 2 for a hearing regarding his children.

He was not warned he might face imprisonment or that the hearing was about his Facebook message, posted on Sam’s birthday a few days earlier on April 23.

On arrival, he was escorted by court security guards to a private room in the building for a half hour hearing under family court rules before His Honour Judge Damien Lochrane.

He was not warned that he might need a lawyer.

At the private hearing, Mr Johnson learned he had breached a gagging order, imposed by the family courts in 2007, by sending the Facebook message.

He informed the judge that he had had four heart attacks and was awaiting a triple by-pass operation. But he was sentenced to 28 days’ jail and sent down to a court cell to await transport to Chelmsford prison.

In the court cell, he had a heart attack caused by the shock. Rushed to a local hospital by ambulance, he was then shackled and handcuffed to a bed while on oxygen and receiving morphine.

A team of prison officers were put on 24-hour shifts beside his bed to make sure he did not escape.

He recovered and was sent to prison two days later, serving two weeks of the sentence before being released. Details of the horrifying case were made public to the Mail by his sons, who are not subject to any gagging order according to their Essex-based lawyer, Alan Foskett.

The jailing provoked a horrified response from MPs last night. John Hemming, the Lib Dem MP who has campaigned against the secret courts, said: ‘This is yet another example of how the secret courts are stopping freedom of speech. I have never heard of a gagging order of this kind going on into adulthood. This is a surreal case.’

Mr Johnson’s local MP, John Baron, said: ‘I have helped Mr Johnson and his sons – who always wanted to live with him – over several years. To find he has been imprisoned for sending a birthday message to one of them is troubling.

Sam, a telesales manager and former professional footballer, said last night: ‘My dad is a good father and has never been in trouble with the police. He was treated like a criminal. This ludicrous gagging order should not exist and must now be lifted.

Both Adam and myself are adults. This cruel ruling is now hanging over my father to silence him about the sons he loves for the rest of his life. That is a terrible thing in what is meant to be a free country.’

Mr Johnson was imprisoned a day before senior judges, on May 3, reacted to the Mail campaign by saying they planned to stop courts jailing defendants in secret for contempt.

Because of the controversial secrecy rules, some have been sent to jail for discussing their case with MPs or charity workers advising them.

read more

So in other words, a person can not even speak to say their congresscritter or senator if this should be a rule in the US. Wow. Here’s the Mail’s comment on the subject.

Posted by peiper     on 06/01/2013 at 05:56 AM   
Filed Under: • Judges-Courts-Lawyers • Justice - LACK OF • Outrageous • UK •  
• Comments (5) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Sunday - May 12, 2013

more laughable law and disorder or …. what? me worry?

Crivens!
This case goes back to ‘09?  First we’ve seen of it.

So typical of law and order and the laughable justice system they have here. 
I make note of it and pay a lot of attention to these things because I so often read how bad our system is in the states.  Mostly though I hear it on the radio on panel shows.  There is almost always someone using the US system as an example of what you do not want.  Of course, it’s kinda close to the truth in the sense that in many cases we don’t want it either.  But hell, who consults “the people” anymore?

Then there’s folks who use our system of govt. ( which is prefect right guys?) as an example of the form of govt. that doesn’t work well and they use the senate deadlocks they hear about as an example of bad govt.
HOWEVER ....  the system here is not working all that hot these days. They have a coalition govt. in place at the moment because no party at the last natl. election could get a majority. From what I’ve seen so far, I am not alone in thinking it is NOT working out well at all. AND ... I am left wondering what the basic difference is between us since the Rep. and the Dems. in the US are at war on all fronts also.  However, many of our critics do not seem to be aware that in many cases we do get an opportunity to “throw da bums out” between major elections and we do hold referendums in our states without having to jump thru some of the hoops they do here.

Oh, speaking of referendums.  The old EU thing is in the air again and has been for a month or more.
The Brit PM said back in 2010 they could have one but it must have slipped his mind AFTER the election was over.  So now, nobody is surprised and nobody believes much of what he says. And that’s his own party.

The word now is there will be a vote on in or out of the EU BUT ...  AFTER the next election! In 2015.  BUT ... now get this.  Originally he said (before the recent local elections where UKIP, the UK Independence Party, made some very strong gains and won a number of seats AND ... did way better than the other party in the coalition at the present time.  He originally set the date for a vote on the EU for 2017! Soooooo he’s moved it forward and making some slightly more conservative noises. Not too much of course. But a slight sum.  And the party that calls itself conservative here is running scared. Or at least that’s the impression I get and it could a wrong one interpreted by a foreigner.

So now on to the topic I wanted to share that has to do with, (pauses for laffing fit) law and order.

‘Cash-for-crash’ gang swagger free from court after staging fake stag-do pile-up that was set to earn them £134,000 ( 205,810.60 USD )

Gang of 13 intentionally damaged minibus before taking it to crash scene
Six ambulances went to scene in Tyneside and the group faked injuries
But smug Richard Oliver and others avoid jail at Newcastle Crown Court

By Mark Duell

Flashing £20 notes after walking free from court with the rest of his criminal team, this is the smug smile of a ‘cash for crash’ gang member who helped staged an accident in a spoof stag do.

The scam involved the gang of 13 intentionally damaging their minibus near the Tyne Tunnel in North Tyneside, before driving it to the scene of the ‘crash’ - then claiming for whiplash injuries.

A second Peugeot vehicle was also purposely damaged and the defendants had claimed it was involved in the ‘smash’ - but the court heard it had never been anywhere near the minibus.

Smiling Richard Oliver, 25, of Jarrow, South Tyneside, was part of the gang, who would have taken £134,000 between them from insurance firm Aviva if they had pulled off the scheme.

A fleet of six ambulances raced to the scene of the faked accident on the north bend slip road of the A193 near the Tyne Tunnel, after one of the men dialled 999 at 7.45pm on August 19 2009.

The men were taken to North Tyneside Hospital, some in neck braces, where members of the group were given ‘unnecessary’ neck and spine x-rays, Newcastle Crown Court was told.

The driver Robert Paul, 45, the ‘groom’ Stephen Paul, 28, and the other ‘stag do revellers’ in the vehicle seemed to be ‘quite well’ when ambulance staff approached the minibus.

‘The defendants were laughing, smoking and chatting,’ James Adkin, prosecuting, said. ‘What followed was a domino effect as they began to hold their necks and say they had suffered injury.’

A few hours later they seemed to have made a ‘dramatic recovery’ and were ‘walking around’ at the hospital, Mr Adkin said. When police arrived, Robert Paul claimed he had not seen the other vehicle.

But an investigation by Northumbria Police discovered that the passengers of the mini-bus were in cahoots with the owner of the Peugeot, Ben LeBlond, and his ‘ghost passenger’ Marnie Simpson, 21.

Officers were immediately suspicious, as the men were two and a half hours away from Edinburgh, the supposed stag-weekend destination. The group then lied to paramedics, doctors and insurers.

Mr Adkin continued: ‘Robert Paul immediately started telling lies to the police. They were two and a half hours away from Edinburgh when it crashed so it would have been a limited affair.

‘Steven Paul immediately complained to the police he had neck pains. He said he was the groom.’

Officers also found no overnight bags or clothes for the ‘weekend away’. Aviva launched a probe and discovered through Facebook that many of the minibus passengers were friends with LeBlond.

boys night out, more to see here

Posted by peiper     on 05/12/2013 at 09:32 AM   
Filed Under: • Judges-Courts-Lawyers •  
• Comments (1) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Friday - May 10, 2013

‘Most crooks don’t have licences but still keep guns

He’s in the news again and his name is Tony Martin.  He is the farmer who some years ago, went to jail after shooting and deleting a young burglar.  That was a good deed.  Except of course back then, Mr. Martin went to jail and also lost his permit to own a shotgun.  People here were outraged that the law would come down so heavily on Martin, who was protecting his property.  Impossible for us Americans to understand the mindset that appear so heavily in favor of the bad guys. 

Well, Mr. Martin chased off another bad guy and this time no shooting. But he says it isn’t the first time there have been intruders on the property.  The story reads like he does have a weapon handy, but he is now afraid of using such due to what happened to him before.  He might become a victim 2wice.  Once at the hands of a thief and again at the hand of asinine laws that bleed tears for the bad guys. 

A week or two ago, a judge decided that 17 year olds MUST be treated as children under the law if arrested. 

Meanwhile ….  this week two teens, age 15, were sent to jail for 6 years for the mugging and killing of an 85 year old woman.  They were totally unconcerned about her death. The black bastards will be out just in time to enjoy the rest of their undeserved youth.  The rest of us can only hope we won’t be one of their future victims.  And lets be clear about this.  It won’t be their fault vermin tho they are. That’s what they do. Innit? I mean to say, scum are only doing their job.  It’s the system that isn’t doing its job.

‘I wished I’d fought him off’: Farmer Tony Martin who was jailed for shooting a teenage burglar confronts thieves for the second time

· Claims he chased thief yelling: ‘Come back again and I’ll sort you my way’

· 67-year-old shot dead Fred Barras and injured Brendan Fearon in 1999
· Given a life sentence before crime was reduced to manslaughter
· After stress of yesterday’s incident he’s been taken to hospital for treatment
· ’I don’t understand myself or recognise myself. I don’t feel safe,’ he said

‘Most crooks don’t have licences but still keep guns so the law’s hugely unbalanced in their favour.

The farmer was checking out houses and barns when he confronted the intruder.
He said, ‘He ran away but I’m convinced he’ll be back in my barn and then he’ll wish he wasn’t,’ admitted Mr Martin, who does not hold a shotgun licence any more.
‘But you know what,’ he said. ‘Most crooks don’t have licences but still keep guns so the law’s hugely unbalanced in their favour.
‘While it’s 13 years since the last incident happened, I don’t think we’re any safer than we were then. I still feel vulnerable and am unable to properly protect myself.
‘It’s not the value of the goods that upsets me; its just that people seem to be able to come and take from others as they please and the police and politicians never seem to do anything about it.
‘Who’ll pay for the smashed battery? It’s irrelevant to the thief and I don’t expect the police to find him through checking the fingerprints.’

READ MORE

Posted by peiper     on 05/10/2013 at 11:56 AM   
Filed Under: • Crime • Daily Life • Guns and Gun Control • Judges-Courts-Lawyers • UK •  
• Comments (4) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Monday - May 06, 2013

the wheels of justice?

A little late now judge, in the case of those already dead. They could have been spared but for your f***** up bleeding heart attitude.

The wheels of justice(?) grind how?

Doesn’t seem like they move at all.

I failed to do my duty: Judge’s confession after the burglar he refused to jail strikes again at pensioner’s home 11 days later

· Judge said latest victim suffered because he had not done ‘his public duty’
· Steffan Jackson, 18, from Leeds, pleaded guilty to burglary

By Eleanor Harding

A judge has chastised himself for not doing ‘his public duty’ after sparing a burglar jail – only for the thief to break into another house just 11 days later.

Judge Scott Wolstenholme bemoaned his own ‘foolishly optimistic’ decision to give Steffan Jackson, 18, who had burgled his father’s home, a final chance.

The teenager, whose own mother has had to call the police about him in the past, was given a community order.

But less than two weeks later he burgled another house, this time belonging to an 87-year-old man.

It is not the first time that Judge Wolstenholme’s ‘lenient’ sentencing has caused controversy. One man spared jail for a stabbing went on to murder four people.

In 2005, he was criticised over his ‘lenient’ sentencing of murderer Mark Hobson, who was spared jail for stabbing a man and went on to kill his girlfriend Claire Sanderson her twin sister, Diane, and an elderly couple James and Joan Britton.

read more

Posted by peiper     on 05/06/2013 at 12:02 PM   
Filed Under: • Judges-Courts-Lawyers • Stoopid-People •  
• Comments (3) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Sunday - May 05, 2013

what happens when control of borders is relinquished to foreign courts.

This is what they have come to here in the UK. And this pair are not the only ones.

This is what happens when control of borders is relinquished to foreign courts.
USA , so far, doesn’t answer to the EU or EU courts.  Of course, Obama is doing his honest best to appease and gain favour with euro left by continuing to rant about Guantanamo.  Our borders in the US aren’t any more secure now than they were a few years ago, although I have read otherwise.  But when all is said and done, we (USA) still are fortunate in not having this ongoing problem.  Question is of course, for how much longer?

Two more foreign rioters foil attempts to deport them because of their ‘right to a family life’ under Human Rights Act

· Immigration Minister says he is ‘disappointed’ by the judgment
· New legislation will aim to halt use of Human Rights Act by foreign criminals to avoid deportation
By Damien Gayle

Two foreign rioters jailed for their part in England’s civil unrest two years ago have foiled attempts to deport them by citing their human right to ‘family life’.
The successful appeals by Ubong-Luke Nkanta, of south-east London, and a second man, who has been granted anonymity, defy the Government’s pledge to deport any foreign national convicted over the 2011 disturbances.

Critics say the decisions sharply contradict official efforts to take exemplary action against those involved in the outbreaks of violence in London and elsewhere that summer.

Government anger over the use of Article Eight of the Human Rights Act, which enshrines the right to a family life, has prompted Home Secretary Theresa May to draft new laws to stop foreign criminals avoiding deportation.

Ministers believe judges will be unable to ignore the new legislation, as they appear to have ignored rules introduced last July that they should only allow the use of Article Eight in ‘exceptional circumstances’.

In the first case, Nigerian-born Ubong-Luke Nkanta, from Thamesmead, was in November 2011 jailed for 18 months for burglary during the riots in London.
The 25-year-old entered a building which was being looted by rioters but did not steal anything because, he told the court, ‘there was nothing left to take’.
The Home Office began deportation proceedings against him as he approached his release from jail last summer, but he appealed against the move by citing his ‘right to a family life’.

He argued his relationship with his two biological children in the UK as well as his current partner’s children meant his human rights would be breached if he was deported.
The lower immigration tribunal agreed and, following an appeal by the Home Office, the decision was upheld by Upper Immigration Tribunal Judge Isabel Murray.

The second case is of a Zimbabwean who can only be named as ‘TS’ after senior immigration judges granted him anonymity - despite the fact criminal courts had allowed him to be named.

He was convicted of violent disorder and jailed for 15 months after joining a group of 30 to 50 youths who rampaged through two Buckinghamshire towns in copy cat riots three days after the initial outbreak of violence in Tottenham.
The gang, which was later described in court as a ‘mindless mob’, launching attacks on vehicles and shops, including a Chinese takeaway whose owners were robbed of their takings.

TS was identified as one of the main culprits who launched an attack on a bus which left its driver ‘frightened for her life.
More than 200 foreign criminals were convicted for their part in the riots in which shops were plundered, businesses set ablaze and hundreds of millions of pounds of damage done.

In the following months, it emerged that non-UK nationals played a central role in the mayhem.
The largest group was Jamaicans, followed by Somali and Polish offenders. Other rioters came from Colombia, Iraq, the Congo, Vietnam and Zimbabwe.

Of course it doesn’t help any when your own govt. agencies are committed to foreign interests and laws as opposed to your own.  Once upon a time it was called treason.  BTW, I am not posting photos here, see the link for that if you need a reminder of what this “disturbance” looked like.

He argued his relationship with his two biological children in the UK as well as his current partner’s children meant his human rights would be breached if he was deported.

The lower immigration tribunal agreed and, following an appeal by the Home Office, the decision was upheld by Upper Immigration Tribunal Judge Isabel Murray.

This is what losing your sovereignty looks like people. You’ll get lots more names that look like, Ubong-Luke Nkanta. ??!!~@!#!??  And mooohamid and maaaachhhmood.

Posted by peiper     on 05/05/2013 at 05:46 AM   
Filed Under: • Democrats-Liberals-Moonbat Leftists • Illegal-Aliens and Immigration • Judges-Courts-Lawyers •  
• Comments (2) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

DISCLAIMER

THE SERVICES AND MATERIALS ON THIS WEBSITE ARE PROVIDED "AS IS" AND THE HOSTS OF THIS SITE EXPRESSLY DISCLAIMS ANY AND ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, TO THE EXTENT PERMITTED BY LAW INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF SATISFACTORY QUALITY, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, WITH RESPECT TO THE SERVICE OR ANY MATERIALS.

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.

THE INFORMATION AND OTHER CONTENTS OF THIS WEBSITE ARE DESIGNED TO COMPLY WITH THE LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. THIS WEBSITE SHALL BE GOVERNED BY AND CONSTRUED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND ALL PARTIES IRREVOCABLY SUBMIT TO THE JURISDICTION OF THE AMERICAN COURTS. IF ANYTHING ON THIS WEBSITE IS CONSTRUED AS BEING CONTRARY TO THE LAWS APPLICABLE IN ANY OTHER COUNTRY, THEN THIS WEBSITE IS NOT INTENDED TO BE ACCESSED BY PERSONS FROM THAT COUNTRY AND ANY PERSONS WHO ARE SUBJECT TO SUCH LAWS SHALL NOT BE ENTITLED TO USE OUR SERVICES UNLESS THEY CAN SATISFY US THAT SUCH USE WOULD BE LAWFUL.

Copyright © 2004-2015 Domain Owner