Thursday - December 16, 2010

once you grasp the idea that it’s about ‘human rights,’ you’ll feel better about the stupidity.

Right. Sure you will.

Leading off I can’t ignore the subject matter of this even tho I haven’t got a link. And lord knows I have tried every which way.
Since a previous post I did said all I had to say I’ll just give you the lunatic facts of the case.
Here’s the headline I saw in the Telegraph, but as usual for them, no on line copy that I could locate,

FAMILY OF DEAD DRUG MULE CAN SUE CUSTOMS, SAY JUDGES

So here’s what essentially happened.
A professional drug smuggler swallowed 116 packages of raw cocaine.  He was arrested as he was about to go thru customs in London after arriving on a flight from Brazil.  The packets showed up clearly on x-ray. At the hospital he was taken to, he refused all food or drink for a week in an attempt to stop the drugs passing out of his system. Just after he gave up his hunger strike, he died.  Scratch one gremlin.
His name was Anthony Daniel, the paper reports. His wife is ... Ayesha Al Hassen-Daniel.  Just thought I’d add that for whatever.
Well, she and his father are now suing for a “substantial” amount, but they claim it isn’t about money.  Nooooooo.  It’s to do with “RIGHTS.” Isn’t it always?
Their lawyers say there were violations of his rights under the Euro-pee-on Convention on Human Rights.

Now then, in spite of the fact that this Daniel fella was the person responsible for his own demise, apparently the law allows for a law suit altho a high court judge say that he doubts the family can win its case. BUT, of course the Customs service will have to spend money defending itself. Won’t it?

I think in a case like this, it should be allowed but with a difference.  If the Customs people win .... then the lawyers for the family should be put against a wall and shot graveyard dead!  If the family wins .... then add the family to the wall along with the lawyers and stop their breathing also.
That might put the brakes on similar cases waiting for a hearing or trial. 

Now then .... as long as the subject is human rights, and lets please stay with the topic cos things really do get dumber ... I offer you these.
This next item is kind of a surprise because I never thought a female would approve of this. 
Take a look.

Sex offenders including paedophiles should be allowed to adopt

Rules which bar sex offenders from working with children are ‘unfair’ and even convicted paedophiles should have the right to adopt, a leading legal academic has said.

By Rosa Prince, Political Correspondent

Helen Reece, a reader in law at the London School of Economics, called on Theresa May, the Home Secretary, to relax rules which automatically ban sex offenders from caring for children, saying that this could breach their human rights.

In an article in the respected Child and Family Law Quarterly, Miss Reece suggested that reoffending rates were not high among sex criminals, adding: “despite growing public concern over paedophilia, the numbers of child sex murders are very low.”
A review is currently ongoing into the Vetting and Barring Scheme, introduced following the 2002 Soham murders, amid concerns by ministers that it is too heavy handed.

In her article, Miss Reece suggested that the review should also introduce an assumption that sex offenders including child abusers posed no threat once they had served their sentence.
She said: “There is no reason why all sex offenders should not be considered as potentially suitable to adopt or foster children, or work with them.
“The Vetting and Barring Scheme and other legislative measures single out sex offenders for unfair special treatment and they destroy the principle that a prisoner pays his or her debt by serving their sentence before re-entering society on equal terms.”

Individuals are placed on the “Barred List” and banned from working with youngsters or vulnerable adults if they are convicted of a sexual or violent offence, or one involving the mistreatment of a child.

Miss Reece criticised the rules for leading all sex offenders to be “tarred with the same brush,” saying that while “careful screening” was “important,” the issuing of a “blanket ban” violated the rights of criminals who wanted to adopt or work with young people.

She highlighted the case of a grandfather with a conviction for having sex with a 15-year-old dating back to when he was 29, who was refused permission to adopt his own grandchildren.

The ban could contravene the principle of non-discrimination enshrined in the European Convention on Human Rights, and may leave the Government open to legal challenge, Miss Reece warned.

READ ALL OF THE ARTICLE HERE

OK, before making up your mind on the issue, read the entire story.  There might be places where she may be correct. BUT ...

“re-offending rates were not high among sex criminals” and “the numbers of child sex murders are very low”

Come on. If you’re a parent, hearing that the numbers of murders are low or that the re-offending rate isn’t high, is still not reassuring. Is it? And does anyone want to take the responsibility of the risk with regard to allowing a sex offender to have kids in their care?
Pedophiles and kids somehow do no strike me as a thing to aspire to. I don’t know if it’s really a sickness but think whatever else it might be, it’s a terrible evil.  Just doesn’t sit well.

So while we’re on the subject of “human rights” even tho all too often the ppl involved aren’t human at all ... here’s an update on an older story with no surprise.  Remember now ... it’s okay cos it’s all about “RIGHTS!”

Failed asylum seeker who left girl, 12, to die after crash can stay in UK as deporting him would ‘breach his human rights’

By Daily Mail Reporter
Last updated at 5:46 PM on 16th December 2010

* Father says ‘criminals have free rein’ after losing battle to deport killer
* Failed asylum seeker Aso Mohammed Ibrahim had a string of convictions
* Outcome ‘may have been different’ if Iraqi didn’t have children, judges say

A failed asylum seeker who left a 12-year-old girl dying under the wheels of his car while banned from driving will be allowed to remain in the UK, judges ruled today.

Aso Mohammed Ibrahim, 33, an Iraqi Kurd, was jailed for four months over the 2003 crash which cost Amy Houston her life.

Her father, Paul Houston, 41, begged judges at a recent deportation hearing to bring ‘my seven years of hell to an end’ by sending Ibrahim back to Iraq.

Today two senior immigration judges rejected a final appeal by the UK Border Agency to have him deported. Ibrahim will now be allowed to live in the UK permanently.

The UK Border Agency said they were ‘extremely disappointed’ with the decision - and that Ibrahim should have been removed.

The Upper Tribunal of the Immigration and Asylum Chamber sitting in Manchester also heard Ibrahim, given leave to remain in the UK, had a string of criminal convictions.

Ibrahim’s lawyers argued that his human rights would be impinged if he was sent back to Iraq.

Mr Houston was left to make the decision to turn off her life support machine hours after the crash in Blackburn, Lancashire, in November 2003.

He has since campaigned to get Ibrahim deported in a tortuous legal battle.

Last month he handed in a letter to judges, containing an impassioned plea asking for Ibrahim to be deported.

Mr Houston, from Darwen, Lancashire, said he was ‘frustrated and angry’ at the decision.

‘I’m really angry. We should all be angry. It is a ridiculous state of affairs,’ he said.
Angry: Paul Houston, father of Amy, said today: ‘This is a perversity of our society.’

Angry: Paul Houston, father of Amy, said today: ‘This is a perversity of our society’

‘I’m battling away here on my own. This is a perversity of our society.

‘What are the judges saying here? They are saying it doesn’t matter what you do when you come here, who you kill, what laws you break, as long as you have a child here you can stay?

‘You work hard, play by the rules, pay your taxes and this is how you get treated. What does that say about politicians, our leaders and the legal system? It’s a joke.

‘They are obsessed with the rights of others from Pakistan, Afghanistan and Iraq. Where are my human rights?

‘This man is a criminal, do we have no say who we allow in this country?

‘He’s not a life-saving surgeon or a Nobel prize winner. He was a criminal before, a criminal now and he will continue being a criminal.

‘The Human Rights Act is for everybody, not just asylum seekers and terrorists.

‘How can he say he’s deprived of his right to a family life? The only person deprived of a family life is me. Amy was my only family.’

Ibrahim’s lawyers claimed human rights laws permitted him to remain in the country, as his right to life and to family life trumped attempts to return him to his native Iraq.

Mr Houston was not allowed to address judges at the last appeal hearing.

Lawyers for the Border Agency asked for Ibrahim to be deported on the grounds that the judge who originally allowed Ibrahim leave to remain on the basis of his right to a family life did so incorrectly.

Although he now has two children, there was little evidence to suggest he was living at the same address so could not claim a right to family life, it was argued.

The judges were also told of Ibrahim’s convictions, including a further incident of driving while disqualified in 2006, harassment and possession of drugs.

But Senior Immigration Judges Lane and Taylor, in a reserved judgment made public today, rejected the Border Agency appeal.

They said the original decision should stand but added that the outcome might well have been different if the process to remove Ibrahim had begun before he had children.

more here

If you aren’t sick enuff by now, I have more I can share. I sincerely hope the idiot judges before long will personally feel what her family feels and go through the same agony. 

Here’s a few reader comments.

Time this country woke up and started voting all the parties out of office who dont care for the Britsh citizen any more.Disgusting that we cant deport a criminal from another country back home.In the real world the goverment would ignore the judges and still deport him

- british justice, edin uk,

What a marvellous country the UK is - safe haven for the scum of the world.

WHEN ARE WE GOING TO WAKE UP -

When are we going to START TAKING ACTION TO GET OUR COUNTRY BACK.

Even the French would not have allowed this !!!!
Anne Smith, Grey & Sad & Weary UK

Hope you human rights leftys are happy with this. This is what you wanted, this is what you got.
How would you feel if this was you or your family going through what Paul Houston has to deal with?

- mick, Glos UK

So for him it's "dangerous" to go back to Iraq, well it looks like it is "dangerous" for Brits with him as a squatter in the UK.

- Joyce, Ft Worth, TX USA

Posted by peiper     on 12/16/2010 at 02:44 PM   
Filed Under: • Crime • CULTURE IN DECLINE • Judges-Courts-Lawyers • Justice - LACK OF • UK •  
• Comments (7) • 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