Wednesday - October 31, 2012

it really never ever ends. nobody learns anything, especially the wanker judges here.idiots!

Just another very sorry example of a totally fucked up (sorry about the language but) lack of justice system I’ve ever seen.  Not that I have seen a lot mind you.  But we’ve all read a lot about this kind of judicial screwing of the victim, by letting off the perp. Three of them in this case actually. See the video at the link.

So here’s another idiot judge with a word to the scum. He is telling her;

‘Your record is terrible for violence given that you are 26 years of age.”

So the slut has a violent record already. Not the first time she’s had problems and is known to the authorities.

But now the wanker judge says,

‘People have been killed and maimed through being kicked in the head.’

The conviction is her fourth in six years. The three defendants have 21 previous convictions between them.

They were also given a 12-month sentence each, suspended for two years, and a community order.
Here’s how serious this group takes .... Community Orders.

However, the court heard that Wray had not complied with previous community orders.

Now then, since one of the group is this young mommy of three,

pram-pushing mother, 26, repeatedly stamps on innocent man’s head in racist attack in front of her two children

Amanda Lowe spared prison by judge at Manchester Crown Court
Lowe left baby girl and eight-year-old daughter to attack Khuram Nisar
Baby’s father Wesley Earls and Lowe’s cousin Daniel Wray also threw punches during the unprovoked assault in Piccadilly Gardens
Group have 21 previous convictions between them

By Helen Lawson

But despite the shocking violence, she walked free from Manchester Crown Court on Friday.

Judge Lindsey Kushner QC told Lowe, of Rochdale Road, Blackley, Manchester, that she had been spared jail because of the impact on her children.

see the complete article and photos here

Spared because of the impact on her children?
Wouldn’t you think that being brought up by a slag like that would be worse?  How long before this criminal scum kills someone?
How old will her offspring be when they commit their first crime? 

Her kids should be taken away for their protection as well as that of society. And she should be permanently sterilized.
Might be a good idea to have someone stomp on her head too, just so she knows what it feels like.  That goes as well for all involved in this. Jeesh. Conviction after conviction and they’re out and about.
Hope the judge is their next victim. What a fool.

Posted by peiper     on 10/31/2012 at 01:27 PM   
Filed Under: • Crime • CULTURE IN DECLINE • Daily Life • Judges-Courts-Lawyers • Justice - LACK OF • UK •  
• Comments (4) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Monday - October 29, 2012

VICTIM BEATEN UP BY A GREMLIN AND THEN SCREWED BY THE COURT. SO MUCH FOR JUSTICE

Now this is one hell of an outrageous article.
What kind of a justice system says it is unfair to a defendant to reschedule a trial for assault, because changing things would be unfair to him?
A totally screwed up system and court. That’s what. 
And get ready ... it was all for just THIRTY DAMN MINUTES.

Meanwhile, the leaches in government and various spokesmen and women perhaps, continue to talk tough and promise stern measures against miscreants like this guy who, at the moment must be laughing his head off.  And why not?  Look what he got away with and all due to a mistake made by the prosecution. Was it a mistake of evidence?  DNA? A bad witness? A missing witness? 
Yes to the last. The witness being in this case , the victim.
But she didn’t skip court.  The prosecution gave her an incorrect time for court, and so she missed the court where she was supposed to be.
So instead of the court coming down on the whoever who screwed things up, the court screws the victim.
AGAIN!

WTF is wrong with ppl?  If he had wanted to hit someone, why didn’t he pick a fight with another bodybuilder?  At least that would have been one hell of a challenge.

Take a look at this.

Bodybuilder ‘who beat girlfriend black and blue’ walks free from court when she fails to give evidence (because blundering CPS told her wrong time to appear)

Harriet Atkinson, 22, was wrongly told to attend court in the afternoon for the morning trial of fitness trainer Lewis Rookyard

Magistrates thought it would be unfair to the accused to reschedule, so dropped the case because she failed to turn up

By Martin Robinson

A young woman whose boyfriend allegedly beat her ‘black and blue’ says she has been denied justice after he walked free from court because of a Crown Prosecution Service blunder.

Harriet Atkinson, 22, was wrongly told to attend court in the afternoon for the trial of fitness trainer Lewis Rookyard who denied a charge of assault by beating.

But unknown to her, the trial where she was due to give evidence against her former lover had been fixed to start in the morning at South East Suffolk magistrates court in Ipswich.

Officials realised she had been given the wrong time when she did not appear at 10am and a police car was sent to pick her up.

The prosecutor applied for the case to be postponed for 30 minutes, pointing out that Miss Atkinson was on her way and was in no way to blame.

But magistrates rejected the application and dismissed the case due to her non-attendance.

Miss Atkinson, who works in the fashion industry, said: ‘It was the fault of the CPS that I was given the wrong time for the trial to start - but it was just a case of human error which I can understand.

‘What I am really angry about is that the magistrates threw the case out even when they were told that I was not at fault for being given the wrong time and I was on my way.

HERE FOR THE PHOTOS AND MORE TO READ

Posted by peiper     on 10/29/2012 at 11:17 AM   
Filed Under: • Crime • Judges-Courts-Lawyers • Justice - LACK OF •  
• Comments (1) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Wednesday - October 24, 2012

lots of law, lots of disorder, not much justice, in fact, maybe none.

There is so god damned much evil in our world, and the powers that be seem to make it that much worse.  Excuses for the vermin who commit crime after crime for years with little consequence.  Early release even for violent low lifes.
Men abusing women or threatening violence given orders to stay away.  Oh right. Harsh words from a court are really going to put the frighteners on the scum.
And how many times are we going to hear that some miserable rat bastard is released early or else given bail, and immediately goes out and kills the person who has been granted a restraining order.  It’s sickening.  Nobody wants to see an innocent person convicted of any kind of crime.  No one would condone the death penalty given an innocent man or woman.  But good grief, there are criminals out there who all but advertise their careers in crime.  If the state doesn’t want to end the worthless life of killers and other overly violent people, then they should be put away for life and given no perks and all rights forfeited.  After all, what rights of their victims were honoured?  True justice would also demand an eye for an eye in the most literal sense.

Not long ago a young man who it is said was mentally unbalanced, tore the eyes out of his former girl friend.  It is highly doubtful he will spend the rest of his life in jail.
I’d say don’t jail the SOB. Rip his eyes out and ask him how it feels and how he likes it. 

The cards are stacked against the law abiding public.  The public I think knows it, and the bad guys definitely know it.  Btw, with regard to the guy who blinded that young woman.  Might be a great idea to treat his defense attorney to the same. See how he likes it, and then ask him to be your defense council.

But no. The public will continue to be at the mercy of not just the criminal community, but their civil right and no justice system enablers.
A pox on all those Mo**********rs.

So here’s the latest.  See the link for a bit more. The frighteners I believe have been put on the public, but not as we see, on the criminal.

A murder by a criminal on bail is committed every ten days, and the real number could be even higher

By Daniel Martin

A murder is committed every ten days by offenders out on bail, according to figures released yesterday.

At least 37 criminals were convicted of murder while on bail for another offence in 2011 – around three every month.

Over the past 12 years, 436 murders have been committed by people granted their freedom while under investigation for a variety of crimes in England and Wales.
The total could be even higher because the fact that a murderer has been on bail is not always recorded by police, the Ministry of Justice admits.

Overall, around 180 crimes are committed every day by someone who had been granted bail. The official statistics – released on the day David
Cameron made a speech pledging to be ‘tough and intelligent’ on crime – will re-ignite the debate over soft justice.

Last night the chairman of the home affairs select committee called for a review of the bail rules, saying those who are dangerous should always be remanded in custody.

Keith Vaz, who obtained the information following a parliamentary question, told the Daily Mail: ‘We need to review our bail laws. I am shocked by these figures.
‘Judges must consider very carefully applications for bail. These criminals have already been identified by the justice system as potentially dangerous, and we must use that knowledge to keep our communities safe.’

Critics said the pressure to reduce the prison population means that judges are granting bail to more and more dangerous offenders.

The statistics show that 436 offenders were convicted of a murder committed while they were on bail between 2000 and 2011.

Over the course of past decade, the total has been generally rising, from 25 in 2002 to 37 last year. A high point of 50 was reached in 2007. Justice minister Helen Grant admitted the total could be an underestimate.

‘The recording of information on whether or not the offence was committed while the offender was on bail is known to be incomplete,’ she said.
‘This is because the police have a number of ways of recording the bail status of an offender.’

She added: ‘The information held does not indicate the nature of the earlier offence for which the bail was granted but it is likely that most of the offences summarised in the table will have been committed while the offender was on bail for a less serious offence.’

David Green, from the Civitas think tank, said the justice system was ‘giving the benefit of the doubt to people who don’t deserve the benefit of the doubt’ by allowing them bail.

SEE ALL OF IT AND PIX HERE

Posted by peiper     on 10/24/2012 at 05:18 AM   
Filed Under: • Crime • Daily Life • Judges-Courts-Lawyers • Justice - LACK OF • UK •  
• Comments (3) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Saturday - October 20, 2012

good cop fair bust undone by dumb rules as cop faces inquiry but killer’s ‘rights’ protected

It’s things like this that drive me nuts.
Yes. I recognize there are rules in place regarding police procedure that are meant to protect us.  No, I don’t want a police state even if I often appear to favor the opposite. I just get very frustrated at the insanity and blow off steam but to tell the honest truth, I always tend to believe and trust the cops. Even when I know better from personal experience.  I suppose it could be my generation or I’m just stupid. Or both.

Shouldn’t there be exceptions made when the circumstances are exceptional?

If I commit a crime in full view of a 100 people, or take the police to where I buried the latest missing body, isn’t the fact that I robbed that bank or knew where the body was incriminating enough?  So what if the cop didn’t read me the rights.  That’s BS anyway as far as I am concerned.  Is there anyone anywhere in the UK or the USA who is unaware of that card cops must read?  And if I killed someone and brought the police to where the body has been for ten freeking years, why aren’t “rights” suspended? 

That’s what happened in this latest story.  Maddening.

In the last day or so I exchanged an email or two with Drew.  In which I said that I was born into the wrong time period. Or words to mean that.  I said I was so sick of this pc driven world, that I should have been born in time to enjoy the Jazz Age, be in the audience for the Goodman Carnegie Hall concert in 1938, and be gone and forgotten by 1950. 
Don’t take me too liberally but you get the feeling I hope.  Nothing seems to follow logic anymore.  There are a million (it feels like it) agencies or govt. bodies that cater to a million different ethnic or religious or lifestyle choices.  And everyone must toe a pc line or else be branded with some new word that ends in either ‘phobia’ or else ‘ism.’ Sometimes both.

This miserable excuse for a human murdered a young woman.
Cops had a suspect, a taxi driver, who showed up on a security camera.  Yeah. One of things that people seem to resent as they see so many as intrusions.  Big deal.  But for that camera and there are other examples of their advantage, the cops might still be looking for a body.  He took the lead detective to where the body was. He didn’t even bury her. Just dumped her body like a sack of rubbish.
Well, as long as he was talking, the perp asked the cop if he could confess something.
He then took the police to where he’d hidden the body of a young woman, TEN YEARS AGO.  And for 10 years believe it or not, nobody knew she was dead. How’s this for a case?  One paper says 10 yrs another says 8 years. Take your pick. The girl is still dead.

OK, enough of that.  Here’s what happened, and here’s one of the many headlines that greeted us this morning.

I fail to see any disgrace attached to the officer.  The full unedited version of this is at the link below.

DETECTIVE’S BID TO CRACK CASE LED TO A BODY-AND DISGRACE

Close surveillance, set up in the hope that he would lead the Wiltshire police team to where she had been hidden, had proved fruitless. So the last hope for Det Supt Fulcher was that Halliwell would talk after his arrest in a supermarket car park. When he snatched up the phone to speak to his colleagues, he learned that he had refused to comment.

Those were the facts facing Det Supt Fulcher when he took the remarkable decision to order Halliwell to be taken to an isolated hilltop where he took personal charge of his questioning.

Over four extraordinary hours, the experienced policeman and the suspect embarked on a tour of rural southwest England. Halliwell first led the detective to the site where he had dumped Ms O’Callaghan’s body.

And then in a remarkable unburdening of past wrongs, he took him to a field where he had dumped another body some eight years earlier. Until then, nobody had even known that Rebecca Godden-Edwards was dead.
But the detective’s unconventional tactics were “serious and irretrievable” breaches of the rules surrounding police questioning and meant that Halliwell could not stand trial for Ms Godden-Edwards murder. And it ensured that Det Supt Fulcher now faces an independent police watchdog inquiry into his actions.

Accompanied only by a civilian note-taker, Det Supt Fulcher led Halliwell 50 yards from the police cars and conducted a nine-minute interview. With the murder of Joanna Yeates in Bristol still fresh in the memory, the detective warned the suspect that he would be vilified if he did not tell him where she was.

According to the notes, Halliwell first told the detective: “I don’t know anything” and repeatedly asked to see a solicitor. “You think I did it,” he told the detective. “I know you did it,” came the response. By the end of the interview, Halliwell told the officer: “Have you got a car – we’ll go.”
They continued to speak in the back of a police car for 45 minutes until they reached Uffington, the site of the medieval horse etched into the hillside. Halliwell gave enough information for specialist search teams to find the body later that afternoon.

It was at this point, when Det Supt Fulcher prepared to have him charged with murder, that Halliwell told him: “We need to have a chat.”
They drove a short distance, sat down together on the grass and had a cigarette. Halliwell became more candid, saying that he was a “sick f***er” and asking the detective if he wanted “another one”.

They drove 30 miles into south Gloucestershire where Halliwell pointed to an area in a 40-acre field where he said he had buried another woman between 2003 and 2005.

The story emerged in February but can only now be made public. Halliwell’s team insisted the way the evidence was gathered breached the Police and Criminal Evidence Act, which gives any suspect the right to legal advice and to be questioned without oppression. It was “an assault on the integrity of the legal system,” said Ian Latham QC, for Halliwell.

When asked to justify his tactics, Det Supt Fulcher told the court: “I did think it was utterly ridiculous that someone who took me, 12 people and a surveillance helicopter to the deposition sites of two bodies would then seek to find some loophole or quirk in the law to get away from the fact that he was a multiple murderer.”

He was backed by senior colleagues including the deputy chief constable, Patrick Geenty, who called it a “gutsy decision”. However, the trial judge, Mrs Justice Cox, ruled that none of the evidence gathered during the four-hour period could be used in a trial. With no other evidence linking Halliwell to the murder, prosecutors were forced to drop the charge.
So now, he has been given life with 25 years minimum.  He could conceivably be out at some point.  Probably not but hey, there’s always a chance. Isn’t there? But he could only be charged with one killing due to the actions of the head officer.

The trial judge, Mrs Justice Cox, ruled that none of the evidence gathered during the four-hour period could be used in a trial. With no other evidence linking Halliwell to the murder, prosecutors were forced to drop the charge.

No evidence?  He knew where the body was cos he buried it.  Why isn’t that evidence?
Cos the law and regulations and even the judge, are as fucked up as a soup sandwich.

What a screwed up world.

SEE ALL OF THE ARTICLE HERE

Posted by peiper     on 10/20/2012 at 05:29 AM   
Filed Under: • Crime • Judges-Courts-Lawyers • Justice - LACK OF •  
• Comments (6) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Friday - October 12, 2012

no law but lots of disorder as idiot judge ruins a good cop

Just the sort of thing to make us see red.

I can’t see what the cop did wrong. The little shit asked for the treatment he got.  I’m sorry the officer didn’t break his face. Little creep.
This is what law enforcement has to deal with. Daily I guess.  I could never do their job in a hundred years.  Wouldn’t want to either. Besides, I’d get banged up for shooting dead some bit of grime like the punk in this article.  This is why the bad guys are winning. Cos courts and bleeding heart, wimpy hand wringers and idiot judges turn on cops doing their job.  Just wish some of these judges and other critics could see the punks up close and personal. As victims.  Why the hell do people go into police work these days?  Take a look at this.
I’ve deleted all my expletives. Howz that for self control?

Moment a policeman lost his temper. . . and his career: CCTV catches officer using ‘pain restraint’ to calm 15-year-old who refused to do as he was told
· PC Stephen Hudson quit his job after 12 years of service
· Officer ‘likely to be declared bankrupt and is a broken man’
· Teenager suffered nose bleed and bruised chest
By James Tozer and Nazia Parveen

This is the moment a police officer lost both his unblemished career and his reputation by losing his temper with a disruptive teenage tearaway.
PC Stephen Hudson bent the 15-year-old boy’s arm behind his back and lifted him off the ground after he refused to empty his pockets.
CCTV captured the 6ft 1in officer – who in a 12-year career suffered injuries including a suspected fractured skull, cracked rib and broken finger while tackling criminals – slam the 4ft 8in boy on to the counter, causing him to scream in pain.

The 43-year-old then pushed his face against the teenager’s ear and shouted: ‘You are not the big man. You might think you are but you’re not.’
However the divorced father-of-three was himself arrested after the boy – described in court as a ‘local nuisance’ who had repeatedly tried officers’ patience – complained of bruising and a nosebleed.

Hudson claimed to have been using an authorised police restraint technique called ‘pain compliance’ and said he himself had been assaulted by the youth.
The boy, who cannot be named for legal reasons, had been arrested for a breach of bail.

He had been in the custody suite at Swinton police station in Greater Manchester ‘numerous times’ before and had previously kicked cell doors and refused to obey the rules, a court heard.

However a jury at Bolton Crown Court found the former officer, who worked at the suite, guilty of misconduct in a public office.
Hudson, who has quit his job, was given a nine-month jail term suspended for 18 months.

The court heard he had been left ‘a broken man’ facing bankruptcy, while his children had to be taken out of school as a result of bullying over the incident.
In addition, he faces being sued by the boy’s family.

But Judge Peter Davies accused Hudson, of Westhoughton, near Bolton, of ‘besmirching’ the reputation of a force which last month lost two female officers in a shooting by inflicting ‘deliberate degradation and humiliation’ on the teenager.

And he branded the laughter of three other watching officers, including a sergeant, ‘bullying of the worst form’ and said they ought to have been in the dock alongside Hudson.
The two PCs and a custody sergeant are now facing disciplinary action.
Judge Davies declared: ‘The overwhelming majority of police officers discharge the faith and trust invested in them by the public with diligence, courage and fortitude.
‘A tiny few, however, betray that trust, and I am afraid you have been found to be one of those few.’

Read and see more , Daily Mail source

Oh screw self control. Judge Davis, FUCK YOU. You are a major ass and so are all who buy your line of pap and bullshit.
Please drop dead soon and hopes for your nearest and dearest to do the same at the hands of a punk like this yob filth.

Little bastard is now 15. His family will sue no doubt, he’ll be a hero in his own tiny mind and grow into manhood a vile and violent creature of a limp wristed court and judge.  What a shit system and no better in the states either I’ll bet.

Posted by peiper     on 10/12/2012 at 05:10 AM   
Filed Under: • Crime • Judges-Courts-Lawyers • Justice - LACK OF • Stoopid-People •  
• Comments (2) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Saturday - September 01, 2012

to hell with free speech!  oh, okay. no problem.

An arrest made over unpopular speech. Only politically correct sentiments are allowed to be expressed in our brave new world.

The guy’s thinking may be askew, but it’s what he feels and so he expressed himself on Facebook.
I think he’s being stitched up due to his very unpopular opinion. Not because he incited racial hatred.  These days where muzzies are concerned, nobody can incite anyone else to hatred because the hate already exists.  People read papers and blogs and communicate over the net and are aware of how things are.  How many times over the last few years have we read about folks or heard them express deep concern that they are losing their country?  And it isn’t all hate at all, although there is that as well of course. 

This guy approved of what the mass killer in Norway did.  Well, that’s quite a stretch really.  He thinks that killing those young people was right, because they were future liberal leftists, who he sees as responsible for the mass immigration of an alien people and culture and religion that will sink the west.  Well now, he’s correct about that and no argument there. They will eventually sink the west, because the west doesn’t have the will to protect itself in a manner necessary to insure it’s survival.  It’s much, much too busy being politically correct, as the arrest for a race crime of this man shows.  But I’ll have to hand it to the authorities.  When someone expresses an unkind and unpopular opinion, shut him down quickly.
We can not afford any of that there free speech nonsense. No sir.  The only speech that should be free is that speech approved by the police.

“To Hell With Free Speech”

Does that look familiar?

Father-of-three arrested after praising Anders Breivik for trying to stop ‘invasion by the Muslim population’ on Facebook

Philip Horn says he ‘takes his hat off to mass murderer
Horn is thought to have links with the English Defence League

By Daily Mail Reporter

A British dad has been arrested on suspicion of inciting racial hatred after praising mass murderer Anders Breivik on Facebook, it emerged today.

Philip Horn, 44, allegedly said on the social networking site that he ‘takes his hat off’ to the infamous gunman.

The Norwegian slaughtered 77 adults and teenagers when he bombed government buildings in Oslo and carried out a mass shooting on the island of Utoya in July last year.

Horn, a father-of-three, from Gillingham, was arrested by Kent Police on Thursday afternoon and is currently being held in custody.

Horn, who is reported to have links with the English Defence League, is also alleged to have publicly supported Breivik’s crusade to ‘protect his country from Muslims’.

The unemployed builder from Gillingham, Kent, is said to have posted a message saying: ‘Well done Anders Breivik. I take my hat off to you sir.

‘You proved you were not insane and that you are just one of many like myself who wish their country to return to the way it was before it was invaded by the Muslim population. Respect to you.’

He was also filmed by a national newspaper saying: ‘If someone came to my door in a uniform and said they were going to bang me up for six months then fine. I’m not going to retract any remarks I made.

‘To a certain extent I do defend what he’s [Breivik] done. Go back 40-50 years ago to Norway, would you have seen people walking around in burkas and all that?

‘I am a racist to a certain extent. Of course it’s wrong to kill children, but if he had to do it that way to get his point across, so be it.’

A Kent Police spokesman said: ‘During the afternoon of Thursday, August 30 a 45-year-old man from Gillingham was arrested on suspicion of inciting racial hatred.

‘He is currently in police custody.’

SOURCE

Posted by peiper     on 09/01/2012 at 11:12 AM   
Filed Under: • Big Brother • CULTURE IN DECLINE • Democrats-Liberals-Moonbat Leftists • Illegal-Aliens and Immigration • Jack Booted Thugs • Justice - LACK OF • Politically Correct B.S. • Politically-Incorrect • UK •  
• Comments (4) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Tuesday - July 24, 2012

bowel problem trumps wife’s right not to be abused and beaten. it figures.

Oh, so now having a bowel problem is cause enough to earn nothing serious in the way of punishment for wife abuse.

Back in the bad old days of advertising, one maker of loo paper (sounds better then toilet paper) advertised the softness of their brand and suggested that the rougher paper used by the competition made ppl irritable and led to divorce.  So they aimed the ads at the women who in those days did most of the shopping and told them they’d save their marriage with the right paper.  Which of course only they produced.

And that has nothing directly to do with the story but I remembered it thought I’d drop it in here.  I have a feeling most of the readers here may be too young to recall those glorious days.  Maybe not so glorious for abused women because based on things I’ve read or heard about, courts were not generally sympathetic to women.  There weren’t any shelters on the scale there are today, and there wasn’t much public awareness.
So I’d guess that for some minority groups, women have not gotten far beyond 1700.

What we have here is another idiot judicial decision, and the excuse this time is that the abusive RAT in question is ill. Poor soul.
He has a medical condition.  He has Ulcerative Colitis.  Well hell.  We can all see the urge to bully and beat up a woman with that sort of illness. Can’t we?  Jeesh.  Makes me wanna do bad things but not to my wife.  I’d like to batter the stupid judges. 

I happen to have a similar and related problem. Not too much fun and the older you are the worse off you are.  Funny thing tho.  I’ve never been tempted to abuse or beat up my wife.  Must be something wrong with me I suppose. 

Husband refused to take wife to hospital during pregnancy scare until she made him LUNCH

Riasaf Ahmed kept Ruqayyah Ghani a prisoner in her own home after their 2006 marriage
Even his defence barrister called him a bully
But lets him leave court with suspended sentence after hearing about Ahmed’s serious medical condition

By HELEN LAWSON
Daily Mail

A man whose wife suffered a pregnancy scare the day after he viciously beat her in a row over money refused to take her to hospital until she had made him lunch.

Riasaf Ahmed, 25, who would attack Ruqayyah Ghani on the orders of his ‘controlling’ mother, frequently left his wife covered in bruises and in fear of her life.

And on Christmas Day 2010, Ahmed, from Middlesbrough, launched an horrific hour-long attack on his pregnant wife, punching her in the face and grabbing her wrists to get her to hand over money as a crisis loan.

The following day he even refused to take Miss Ghani to hospital for treatment for stomach pains unless she made him a meal.

She was then led to fear for her life when he told her: ‘If I’ve got to go to jail, I might as well do things properly.’

But he has avoided jail, in a decision that has angered domestic abuse charities.

The court was told how Miss Ghani was effectively kept prisoner in the family home in Middlesbrough for four years.

A lock on the telephone meant she could not contact her family in West Yorkshire.

Miss Ghani’s family had taken her back to West Yorkshire in August 2010 after finding her bruised when they became seriously concerned by their daughter’s silence.

She had returned to her husband after discovering she was pregnant to try to make the marriage work, but nothing changed.

His own defence barrister branded the former call centre worker a bully as a Teesside Crown Court judge handed out a suspended sentence for common assault and an assault causing actual bodily harm.

Judge Tony Briggs said Ahmed’s campaign of brutality and humiliation was disgraceful, but gave Ahmed the suspended jail term after hearing he has a serious medical condition.

Jonathan Walker, mitigating, said Ahmed had struggled after losing his job and was suffering from ulcerative colitis.

He said: ‘He is not a teenager, but he is a fairly vulnerable, fairly immature young man who seeks to blame others for his failings.’

Domestic violence campaigners said that Ahmed’s sentence did not reflect the nature of the ‘horrific’ assault.

Sandra Horley, chief executive of domestic violence charity Refuge, said: ‘It takes a huge amount of courage to testify against a violent partner or ex-partner.

‘It is crucial that victims feel protected by having the full weight of the law behind them.

‘It is very disappointing that the severity of this horrific assault does not seem to have been reflected in the sentence.’

Posted by peiper     on 07/24/2012 at 11:48 AM   
Filed Under: • Judges-Courts-Lawyers • Justice - LACK OF • Stoopid-People •  
• Comments (0) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Tuesday - July 03, 2012

BOY 14 ABUSES 5 YEAR OLD AND TELLS POLICE, ‘I think my hormones took over.’

Really judge, it was me ormoans got inna way and that 5 year old girl just looked yummy.
I’m sorry. Can I go now?
Sure thing boy .... I know it isn’t your fault. It’s society and the world and on line porn etc. It’s everyone’s fault but yours cos you were only 14.

More judicial soft soap bullshit. The judge even looks stupid.

He watched porn that was “inappropriate” to his age. 
Oh well. It’s okay then.  We’ll just give him a slap on the wrist instead of a broken face.
Jeesh.  If there’s something wrong with the world and with society, it’s made wrong by idiot judges and systems that make excuses.

For example, making the rounds again after being discovered some years ago, is a medical condition called “Intermittent Explosive Disorder.”
Looks good.  Really judge, it isn’t that I meant to stab the guy 80 times. But I’m ill. I have IED.

What a bullshit culture. What a fraked up world when ppl actually buy this crap.

Babysitting teen, 14, who raped girl, 5, spared custody as judge says he was corrupted by internet porn

Judge blames ‘the world and society’ for teen’s exposure to explicit sexual material on the web

Boy, now 15, appeared in dock wearing school uniform

Boy admitted he regularly looked at pornography on his laptop at home

Judge: ‘I’m satisfied it was impulsive and I believe you have become sexualised by your exposure to and the corruption of pornography’

By MATT BLAKE

A teenager who raped a five-year-old girl while babysitting her was spared a custodial sentence after a judge heard he had been ‘corrupted’ by internet pornography.

In a disturbing case that has raised fresh concerns about the sexualisation of children, the 14-year-old told his young victim to cover her eyes before performing an indecent act on her while her parents were out.

But instead of jailing the boy, a judge spared spared him, blaming ‘the world and society’ for his exposure to explicit sexual material on the web.

The case comes amid growing alarm about the impact of sexual content on the internet on Britain’s children.

Just last month, a government report found a wave of depraved sex attacks across Britain was being carried out by youngsters who have had their minds warped by online porn.

Appearing in the dock wearing his school uniform, the teenager, now 15, was handed a three-year community order at Cambridge Crown Court.

The boy who cannot be named for legal reasons pleaded guilty to raping a girl aged under 13 after his victim told her father what had happened.

Prosecutor John Kellett said the boy had been paid £10 to look after the little girl at her home in Cambridge last December.

But after he left, the girl described to her father how she had been subjected to the oral rape after the teenager told her to cover her eyes.

read more

Posted by peiper     on 07/03/2012 at 07:31 AM   
Filed Under: • Crime • CULTURE IN DECLINE • Daily Life • Judges-Courts-Lawyers • Justice - LACK OF • UK •  
• Comments (0) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Thursday - June 28, 2012

pedophile who rapes one 14 yr old and molests two 11 yr olds, has “rights” victims have nightmares.

I feel kind of odd trying to post anything that will interest our American readers after today’s ruling.  I don’t understand how that will work to the advantage of those who may be down and out.  Ya can’t make em any poorer if that’s their case.  I’ve read the arguments about auto ins. being mandatory and so why not health care. Seems like a whole different world between auto ins. and health ins.  I won’t even try and guess just where this is going to end. At the moment, I might be luckier to be here, as I’d most likely get arrested back home. 

Well, this is another one of those here we go agains.  Bit of a difference here tho. 

Apparently this turd who enjoys rape is an American who ran from the law in the USA.  His crimes are old ones and he was even on the Interpol list.
So he ran to europe and more specifically Ireland and then here.
But the problem is, the Brit judges think his human rights as defined by guess who?  The european court of human rights. But you may have known that.
Well the USA wants the vermin but the Brits are concerned that his rights will be violated back home.
Heck, you can read it for yourself.
Take a look.  And oh btw, did I not jump up and down and rant and rave some time ago that I thought the way things were, eventually the EU and their court in some way would get in our hair.  I think I mentioned something along those lines. 

And another thing just so ya know.  If you check the link here, you will find a poll asking if you think this creep should be sent back to the USA.  89% of the folks here voted yes. Send the bastard back.  But heck, even though the man on the street (who isn’t a libtard) knows how things ought to be, and even when they do vote an opinion, the folks with the real power ignore them and continue their lives in their ivory towers above it all.

Paedophile spared extradition to US on human rights grounds

One of America’s most wanted pedophiles has been spared extradition from Britain by the High Court on human rights grounds.

By Martin Beckford, Home Affairs Editor

Shawn Sullivan faced spending the rest of his life behind bars under a controversial sex offenders’ programme in the US, but two senior judges said this would amount to a “flagrant denial” of his rights.

As a result the 43 year-old – who married a Ministry of Justice official while in jail on remand – will not be put on trial for abusing three young girls almost 20 years ago, and can live freely in London.

Sullivan, who has a previous conviction for assaulting two girls in Ireland and was on an Interpol most-wanted list, is now the 10th person in recent years to see their extradition to the US blocked by either the courts or Home Secretary in this country.

Despite this, campaigners insist the treaty is “lop-sided” in favour of America, and attempts are still being made to block the extradition of alleged computer hacker Gary McKinnon and Richard O’Dwyer, accused of running a website that linked to pirated films.

A spokesman for the US Embassy said: “We strongly disagree with the decision of the court that he should not be extradited to face trial in the U.S.

“Civil commitment is not a penal or criminal sanction; it is rather a means by which the State can protect the community from dangerous behaviour that the committed individual is unable to control.”

Sullivan, originally from Fort Benning, Georgia, was accused of raping a 14 year-old girl and sexually molesting two 11 year-olds in Minnesota between 1993 and 1994.

He fled the US as charges were filed against him and moved to Ireland, where in 1997 he was given a suspended sentence for sexually assaulting two 12 year-old girls.

Sullivan came to London on an Irish passport, using the Gaelic spelling of his name, and was arrested in Barnes, south-west London, in June 2010, where he was living with MoJ policy manager Sarah Smith. The couple married in Wandsworth Prison when he was held on remand, before he was released on bail with an electronic tag.

Initially a judge agreed to his extradition and the Home Office dismissed his appeal.

But Sullivan took his case to the High Court earlier this year, with his lawyers claiming that if he were convicted in the US, he faced being put under a “civil commitment” order at the end of his jail term that effectively meant he would be deemed “sexually dangerous” and never released.

The court was told that no one had ever been released from the treatment programme in Minnesota since it was set up in 1988.

Initially the US authorities suggested Sullivan would not be put under civil commitment but later said it was too early to tell.

In a judgment published last week, the High Court judges said there was a real risk he would be put on the program, and that it would breach his right not to suffer loss of liberty without due process as protected by the European Court of Human Rights.

“It is clear to me that were an order of civil commitment to be made, it would be a flagrant denial of this appellant’s rights under Art. 5.1,” Lord Justice Moses said.

He and Mr Justice Eady gave the US government a final chance to offer assurances as to Sullivan’s treatment but it declined to do so.

In a note released on Thursday, Lord Justice Moses announced that “the United States will not provide an assurance” and so the appeal under the 2003 Extradition Act was allowed.

“The appellant will be discharged from the proceedings,” the judge said.

TELEGRAPH SOURCE

Posted by peiper     on 06/28/2012 at 01:25 PM   
Filed Under: • Judges-Courts-Lawyers • Justice - LACK OF • UK • USA •  
• Comments (2) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

is it rape if a woman is drunk? are the rapists a danger to the public? 3 judges say NO to the last

Another bizarre article I just could not let pass.
I have spent the better part of 20 minutes looking for a funny story with a French connection that I saw yesterday, but got distracted, posted something else and by the time the day was over, I forgot to go back and bookmark.  But I will find the darn thing and post it momentarily.
Anyway, while looking for that story I found this and so once again, distraction is the cause for another post.  And what a distraction this is.

I think we need to be fair to the Judges here because I can see where they thought the vermin are not dangerous.
They laughed while they raped thus showing they possessed a sense of humor. And anyone with a sense of humor no matter how perverted, can not be a danger. Right?

A reader at the mail under comments has asked if there are any rapists or killers here in the UK that are thought to be dangerous.
Good question.

Are there any murderers or rapists that are actually deemed ‘dangerous’ in Britain? I am constantly reading about murderers and rapists that have their time in prison reduced (if they even managed to get more than 2, 3 years in the first place) because they are not dangerous. How does that logic work out?
- Angie, Australia, 28/6/2012 08:49

And here is what she is referring to.

Pair who laughed as they raped woman they ‘came across’ in town centre have sentences CUT because they are not ‘dangerous’

* Rezgar Nouri, 27, and Mohammed Ibrahim, 24, repeatedly raped the woman, 24, in Preston

* But judges rule there was ‘insufficient evidence’ that they should be defined as ‘dangerous’

* They allowed the men’s appeal against original indeterminate sentence and instead handed each a 12-year term

By MATT BLAKE

Two men who laughed during a horrific ‘gang rape’ of a drunken woman have had their sentences slashed after three senior judges ruled they were not ‘dangerous’.

Rezgar Nouri, 27, of Preston, and Mohammed Ibrahim, 24, of London, were jailed indeterminately after being convicted of assaulting the 24-year-old in Preston last June.

Sitting at the Court of Appeal, Lord Justice Hooper, Mr Justice Silber and Mr Justice Hamblen heard how the men ‘came across’ the woman before taking her to a flat where Ibrahim pinned her down while another man raped her.

After that, Ibrahim raped her before Nouri ‘grabbed’ her and ‘dragged’ her into a bedroom where he raped her, judges were told.

But today, despite the evidence, they ruled at the Royal Courts of Justice there was ‘insufficient evidence’ that Nouri and Ibrahim should be defined as ‘dangerous’

They said Judge Anthony Russell QC had been wrong to decide that ‘imprisonment for public protection’ was necessary and hand down a jail sentence which gave the men no automatic right of release.

They allowed the men’s appeal against the imposition of an indeterminate sentence and instead handed each a 12-year term.

The court earlier heard how the woman had become separated from friends - when she was ‘quite drunk’ - in the early hours after visiting a number of bars and clubs, the court heard.

I think you get the picture but if you want to read the rest of the article, which is worth it for the comments alone, go HERE

Posted by peiper     on 06/28/2012 at 06:04 AM   
Filed Under: • Crime • CULTURE IN DECLINE • Daily Life • Judges-Courts-Lawyers • Justice - LACK OF • Outrageous • UK •  
• Comments (4) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Wednesday - June 06, 2012

latest score from the law courts. Gremlin 1 …. Justice 0

This is a real short one and posted to show just how ludicrous the criminal system is.
Maybe there’s a valid reason and not being a legal eagle, I just do not understand.

Here’s a guy who attacks someone with a ball bat and who has previous convictions for assault and criminal damage. So it isn’t his first brush with the law.
So he’s arrested and says no he didn’t do it but hey, the guy what got whacked knows but no matter. He’s going to trial.
Meanwhile .... he goes on Facebook and brags that he thinks he “got away with it.” Smart huh?

However .... someone grasses him and shows the court his postings and so he had to change his plea to guilty.
Justice will be served.
Oh yeah? Ya think?
Have another thunk.

‘I think I got away with it’: ‘Stupid’ ABH criminal convicted after bragging to friends on Facebook before jury began deliberations

Michael Ruse changed his plea to guilty after his Facebook updates were printed off and delivered to court anonymously
He had been on trial for attacking his friend’s father with a baseball bat and baton
Asked by a friend how the case was going, he wrote: ‘Yeah I think I get away with it tbh x (sic)’

He described the judge as ‘stuck up’ in another update after he was convicted

But he escaped with a suspended prison sentence, a curfew and a fine

By ROB PREECE

Michael Ruse, 21, was on trial at Portsmouth Crown Court with his friend Terry Reeve for attacking Reeve’s father, Gareth, with a baseball bat and baton.

But he changed his plea to guilty after the court was shown a printout of his updates about the case on the social networking website.

Even after he was convicted, he went back online to call the judge in the case ‘stuck up’ - only hours before he was sentenced.

Just before the jury was sent out, Ruse, of Leigh Park, Hampshire, posted a status update on the social networking site saying: ‘Another week at court.’

When asked by a friend about the case he added: ‘Yeah I think I get away with it tbh x (sic)’.

Ruse, who used the name Michael Miles online, added that the case was ‘looking good’ for him.

There is more HERE if you want the rest.

Posted by peiper     on 06/06/2012 at 09:14 AM   
Filed Under: • Crime • Judges-Courts-Lawyers • Justice - LACK OF •  
• Comments (2) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Saturday - May 26, 2012

crime and no punishment that means anything

Well, looks like there really is only one side to this coin and it’s called soft justice.
Awhile ago I ranted on about the lack of justice and black girl gangs getting away scott free. Yadda,yadda,
Then I ran across two stories one of which is sickening. Both are pretty damn bad but I just can’t get my head around an adult who batters a baby, breaks bones, doesn’t do squat for two days before taking babe to hosp., and a judge that says since it was a first offense ..... lets be kind to the perps.
Who btw happen to be white folks. Scummy, bottom of the barrel trailer trash honky types. I really wish there was an ‘N’ word for white ppl.
What kind of mother breaks a child’s arm and legs? What kind of judge lets them off just cos it’s the first time? What kind of looney tune system allows that?

Not posting the whole story in either of these. See the links for that.

Mother and partner who broke toddler’s leg, arms and foot are spared jail because horrific beating was their first offence

· Child had a broken leg for at least two days before it was taken to hospital
· Emma Cartwright, 27, also slapped a baby while her partner Neil Gleaves, also 27, violently shook it
· Couple convicted of child cruelty but spared jail by Recorder Simon Ward
By SUZANNAH HILLS

A couple who beat a toddler so severely it was left with two broken arms, a broken right leg and a broken left foot have been spared jail because it was their first offence.
Emma Cartwright and partner Neil Gleaves, both 27, then left the child’s broken leg untreated for ‘at least two days’ before taking the toddler to hospital. 
Cartwright was also convicted of slapping a baby in the face before Gleaves violently shook it.
The couple were convicted of child cruelty and neglect at Stoke Crown Court on Thursday but walked free after a judge heard it was their first offence and Gleaves was ‘hardworking’.
Instead, the couple from Wolstanton, Staffordshire, were given a 36 week prison sentence suspended for two years with a supervision order.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2149935/Mother-partner-broke-toddlers-leg-arms-foot-spared-jail-horrific-beating-offence.html

Recorders

Main article: Recorder (judge)
A Recorder is a part-time circuit judge, usually a practising barrister or solicitor. Recorders are addressed in court in the same way as circuit judges (as ‘Your Honour’). There is no formal abbreviation for the position and recorders are referred to as ‘Mr/Mrs Recorder Smith’ (as opposed to circuit judges, who can be referred to as ‘HHJ Smith’ in judgments, law reports or other legal documents).
Formerly, Recorders could only be drawn from barristers of at least 10 years’ standing.[9] However, in 2004, calls for increased diversity among the judiciary were recognised and the qualification period was changed[5][6] so that, as of 21 July 2008, a potential Circuit Judge must satisfy the judicial-appointment eligibility condition on a 7-year basis.[7]
The senior circuit judge in a metropolitan area will often be given the honorary title of the Recorder of the city – e.g. the Recorder of Manchester. Despite still being circuit judges, these recorders are addressed in court as ‘Your Lordship/Ladyship’ as if they were High Court judges.

From ...  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judiciary_of_England_and_Wales

I would hardly describe this bit of female yob as pretty but I guess that a matter of taste. Judging by these pix I’d say more evil looking then pretty looking. But that just me.  What she did could have cause a death. Her victim will not be the very same woman she was before Blondezilla’s attack. 

Accounts manager who left woman fighting for her life after nightclub glass attack walks free as judge describes her as a ‘decent young woman’

By CHRIS HANLON

An accounts manager who left a student fighting for her life after smashing a wine glass into her neck walked free after a judge described her as a ‘decent young woman’.

Pretty blonde Claire Stephens, 23, attacked Rachel Spikula after the pair knocked into each other on the dance floor at Club 49 in London’s West End.
The American national was rushed to hospital in a passing ambulance after suffering a severed artery in the assault in the early hours of June 11, 2011.

Prosecutor Gavin Ludlow-Thompson said the victim would have been in serious danger had she not been treated so quickly.
‘Suggestions have been made that if the ambulance had not been there and the immediate treatment not been available this victim might very well have lost her life,’ he said.

But Judge Nicholas Loraine-Smith spared Stephens from a jail term after hearing she was a ‘decent, hardworking, young woman.’
Handing her a ten-month prison sentence, suspended for two years, he said: ‘Nothing suggests that you have ever been violent before - indeed it would appear to be the very opposite, this was completely out of character.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2149452/Claire-Stephens-walks-free-nightclub-glass-attack-left-woman-fighting-life.html

Posted by peiper     on 05/26/2012 at 11:27 AM   
Filed Under: • Crime • Daily Life • Judges-Courts-Lawyers • Justice - LACK OF •  
• Comments (2) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

same movie, same plot, same species with different cast.

Well here we are again. Same story but another cast and coincidentally members of the same sub species. Verminous scum.

You can bet your boots that had the attack been against the overprotected minority insects, the ladies who in this case are the victims, would have landed in jail.
But just as bad, what we have here is yet another idiot judge.  Some of you may recall another case some months ago when a girl gang (same low life species) were allowed to go free because the poor dears were drunk when they beat up someone.
Well here we are again. I believe it’s a different judge but the result is the same.  So I take it that provided you’re a member of a favored racial group, getting drunk and beating the crap out of someone is ok cos being blotto is a mitigating factor. Unless of course you’re white in which case it’s the crime of the century and racially motivated.  Not that there aren’t too many drunken white yobs about these days. Sadly, there are.

Woman attacked by girls who ‘rained fists’ and wiped pizza in her face slams court for letting thugs go free

Kalee Powell and Precious Gordon attacked their victims ‘like a pack’

By ANTHONY BOND

A legal secretary savagely assaulted by a girl gang during the Royal Wedding celebrations today slammed a decision to let her attackers walk free from court.

Daniela Holischeck, 41, was left with a bloodied face after being battered by ‘raining fists’ following a street party to mark Prince William and Kate Middleton’s marriage in April last year.

Kalee Powell, 18, and Precious Gordon, 19, along with a 17-year-old who cannot be named, attacked her and fellow legal secretary Birgit Habersetzer ‘like a pack’ after spending the day boozing.

Gordon admitted affray and assaulting Ms Holischeck and Ms Harbersetzer, while Powell was convicted of affray for her part in the attack on Ms Holischeck after a trial at the Old Bailey.

Both were given community orders and told to pay a total of £300 compensation to their victims.

After the sentencing, Ms Holischeck, who worked for a City law firm, said she had been denied justice and was still haunted by the attack near her home in Kensal Rise.

Ms Holischeck said: ‘It’ll probably be a bit of street cleaning for a year and won’t hurt them. But I will remember this for the rest of my life.

‘I’ve decided to move away from the area to the home counties. I’m trying to forget. I haven’t been allowed to do that until now.’

Ms Holischeck, who worked for City law firm Paul, Hastings, Janofsky & Walker, was left a bloodied mess and had pizza smeared in her hair during the beating.

She spent the night in A&E after the attack and had to take a fortnight off from work.

Judge Stephen Kramer QC said Ms Holischeck and her flatmate had been caught up in ‘an ugly incident in which mindless, drunken and unlawful violence was used’.

‘It must have been a shock and thoroughly frightening for the two women who were victims,’ he added.

This part just has to have a space all its own. The judge continued with:

‘I am satisfied what you both did you did that night because you were fuelled by alcohol, having gone to a street party and drunk alcohol celebrating the Royal Wedding.

Oh heck. That’s okay then.  See, when it’s explained properly, it all becomes clear as **** mud.
Now then, as for celebrating a royal wedding. Take a good look at these two beauties.  Do they look like anyone who’d care about the monarchy or their weddings?  They were simply doing something that’s second nature to them.  It’s in the DNA ya know.  And thanks to their birthrate, the times-a-comin when they’ll be fully in charge along with muzzies-gypos-travellers and all the other, friends of the liberals.

MORE TO READ HERE. PLEASE DO.

Posted by peiper     on 05/26/2012 at 09:08 AM   
Filed Under: • Crime • CULTURE IN DECLINE • Daily Life • Judges-Courts-Lawyers • Justice - LACK OF •  
• Comments (3) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Wednesday - May 23, 2012

Do a good deed? That’s a ticketing!

I honestly don’t believe the stupidity, of both the police officer AND the law cited. Here’s the story:

Last Monday, May 14th John Davis was exiting I-90 at the West 117th ramp when he saw a man in a wheelchair. The man was pale, thin and holding a sign that had a religious sentiment and also a request for help.

Maybe I should add the possible stupidity of Mr. Davis for falling for what I already suspect was a scam. If the guy really was disabled enough to be in a wheelchair (how did he get to the exit ramp?) there’s an almost infinite number of Federal, state, and local programs to help him. Add in friends, family, private charities and this guy shouldn’t be panhandling anyway. But I digress. Let’s continue:

John reached into his wallet and grabbed a couple of bucks to give to the man. As he approached the light at the exit, he rolled the money up vertically and stretched his arm out of his window. He says, the man touched the cash and one of the dollars fell to the ground.
The man then bent over and picked it up.
Moments later as John travelled North on West 117th he says a Cleveland police officer pulled him over.
“He proceeds to tell me he’s pulling me over for littering,” said John.

Obviously Cleveland police have solved all other crimes. Since when is money trash? Doesn’t it have to be trash to be considered litter. In any case, the ‘litter’ was immediately picked up! Am I going to be ticketed for littering every time I drop something and immediately pick it up? That’s the stupidity of the police officer. Now let’s get to the law cited:

The ticket cited Section No: 613.06 of Cleveland’s Municipal Codes, which is littering from a motor vehicle.
His offense was listed as, “Throw paper out window,” and in parenthesis, “money to panhandler.”
John said he was confused because money is paper but it’s not trash.

I made that point earlier. Plus the money wasn’t ‘thrown’. It was handed to someone. But now it gets even better:

Cleveland police can’t comment on the ticket at this time but according to a spokesperson there is another code that may have been violated.
There is a code which states that it is illegal to panhandle or give money to panhandlers near a highway or street including a berm, shoulder, treelawn or sidewalk.

Have you ever encountered a panhandler anywhere else? Ticket the panhandlers then. But last time I checked, If I own something, including the money in my wallet, I can give it to who I wish to.

Section No: 471.06 states in part that “No person shall stand on a highway for the purpose of soliciting…contributions…”
It also reads that “No driver” is to “transfer currency….to any person standing on a street or highway.”
But John says that’s not what he was ticketed for. He was cited for littering from a motor vehicle, and the officer advised him to “take it up with the courts.”

The person in question was not ‘standing’ on a street or highway. He was sitting in a wheelchair. A technicality? Yes, but if you’re stupid enough to write a law, you better cover every possible variation. Anyway, Mr. Davis is going to fight it.

John does plan to challenge the ticket in court, mainly because it carries a hefty fine. It could cost him $500 once you add the fine plus court costs.
John says he has always had a deep admiration for Cleveland police, and he isn’t trying to start trouble, but that’s a lot of money for helping out someone less fortunate.

No word on if the panhandler was ticketed also. Probably not, since he wasn’t ‘standing’. I’d certainly bring that up in court.

Maybe Cleveland should adopt how Dayton handles panhandlers. They are legal if they’re licensed. Their licenses must be prominently displayed, usually hung on a cord around their neck. In other words, the City gets their cut.

Posted by Christopher     on 05/23/2012 at 01:17 PM   
Filed Under: • Crime • Government • Insanity • Justice - LACK OF • Outrageous • Stoopid-People •  
• Comments (3) • 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