UK Justice, does it exist?

[Scooter]

Oh, I see.

Weère basing our positions on two irreconcilably contradictory versions of the facts.

Even assuming your version to be true, if he had already been ordered deported, he would have been in custody. So he had not yet been ordered deported, and was therefore in the country legally.

Oh, and this article illuminates why he received such a light sentence - the girl was jaywalking and therefore bears primary fault for her own death.

[Sean]

Even assuming your version to be true, if he had already been ordered deported, he would have been in custody.

Not necessarily... this is the UK remember...

Most likely he would've been given a house, full benefits and 'x' weeks to leave the country.

[Gob]

Oh, and this article illuminates why he received such a light sentence - the girl was jaywalking and therefore bears primary fault for her own death.

Nobody has disputed the fact that she was at least in part responsible for the accident.

But you, for reasons best known to yourself, in your desperate attempts to attack me, have totally ignored the thrust of the debate, which is anyone (ANYONE) running off leaving a dying 12 year old under a car, for WHATEVER reason, deserves greater punishment than a four month sentence.

Seriousness Scoot, is there some way we can work out your problem with me, before it sours the boards.

I wrote to your when the board first started thanking you for your input in getting the board going, since then things seem to have gone down hill.

I can honestly say hand on heart that I bear you no ill will, but you seem to have a hair up your arse about me for some reason.

[Scooter]

Re-read my posts in this thread. Where is the attack? Where is it in any other threads, for that matter?

On the other hand, I can point to numerous instances where I have pointed out fallacies or inconsistencies, not in your words necessarily, but in some of the sources you have used, and have got nothing but harangues about "nitpicking" and the like, for no reason that I can fathom, other than that I don't seem willing to swallow wholesale a position which you have chosen to take.

My "problem", if I have one, is that I don't see some issues in the stark black and white that you appear to, and whenever I point out reasons that a situation might not actually be precisely what it appears to be on the surface, I get jumped on. If reacting to that has coloured my posting, I am sorry, but you might think about why you have such a need to belittle or dismiss the arguments of those who don't completely subscribe to your point of view.

The thread about the fire marshal removing the picture from the hallway of an apartment building is a classic example. The fact that the picture was in a common area along an escape route, and not inside the woman's private apartment, was THE reason the picture was removed. But you had a point to make about "jobsworths" and by God, you weren't going to facts get in the way, so the actual reason for removing the picture became "irrelevant" and "nitpicking".

You do it all the time. And you wonder why it might be causing friction? Gee, that's a tough one.

Don't so flippantly dismiss facts and arguments that do not favour your point of view, or accuse others of not wanting to deal with the "real" issues because you don't like the direction that a discussion is turning, and I wouldn't have any "problem" with you.

[Gob]

I was hoping for a little more negotiation and accomodation than that Scoot.

Do you honestly believe that you have not the slightest culpability in this friction? If not then I do not suppose there is much I can say to change your mind.
Why do you have to (appear) so hostile though?

Anyway, if we cannot agree, and I'm certainly not changing my posting style or personality for you, (:D) then we can always ignore each other.

Anything so as not to turn this place into CSB mark II!!

[Scooter]

I didn't say I didn't have any culpability, I seem to remember just proferring an apology in there.

What precisely are you wanting to negotiate? You just said you aren't prepared to make any changes on my account. We're negotiating what then, that I'm never supposed to disagree with anything you say?

And if I'm appearing hostile, perhaps it's because you began by accusing me of something that hasn't happened in this thread. Not exactly a basis for "negotiation". If you are saying that you do not see even a kernel of truth in what I had to say about the way you have reacted to my posts, then I guess you re right, there isn t much else to say.

[Scooter]

And if you feel I am the cause of turning this place into another version of the CSB, Im happy to walk away. I certainly dont want to be accused of being responsible should anything like that happen to go down here.

[Gob]

No I'm not suggesting that, and I'm happy to admit that I have started threads here using contraversial quotes (Daily Mail esp,) as I want this place to be a success, and they do get things going.

I was hoping to tune down the heat (I percieved) as between us.


I just read your replies to my posts as hostile and agreessive, I even see you as following me about and attacking me, though I'm happy to admit that this may be purely my perception.

I'd like us to not fall out, I'd like us to accept that each other has a different standpoint, but I feel that you in some way "have it in for me."

Again, I may be alone in this, I may be wrong, I may be at fault.

I'd hate you to leave as you are thought provoking and intelligent. (But at the moment not at the top of my Xmas card list!)

[Sue U]

Needz moar smileys ... ?

FWIW, Gob, I think Scooter can be a bit blunt in style but I have rarely seen him actually hostile. Indignant, maybe ... but then both of you can get your backs up a bit when you have strongly held views. Doesn't make either of you evil, though. (Except for Scooter's avatar, of course.)

[Gob]

I love that avatar! (It's very gay though )

[Scooter]

I dont have it in for you at all (except that sometimes this #%%?$%#$ site wont take punctuation for me). You begin a lot of threads, and as you say, you try to be thought provoking, so it stands to reason that you would see me replying a lot to what you write (instead of some of the more insipid stuff that some others post).

I ll try to be a bit more conscious of the tone I am projecting; as Sue says, I can be pretty blunt (and frankly, more so IRL than here if you knew me).

You ve done a great thing here, so yeah, lets try to make it work.

[Gob]

Thanks Scoot, I'd offer to kiss and make up, but you're just not my type

[Sean]

Sheesh! Get a room you two!

[Scooter]

You're just jealous

[Sean]

Is it that obvious...

[Scooter]

I love that avatar! (It's very gay though )

That is Lorne, aka the Host, from the TV series Angel (the spinoff from Buffy the Vampire Slayer). He was a (good) demon from Pylea, a world in another dimension. He ran a nightclub called Caritas where he welcomed demon and human, good and evil alike, because the club was protected by a spell that prevented any patron from doing any sort of violence. He had the ability to perceive the thoughts and feelings of anyone who sang karaoke for him.

And yeah, he acted pretty gay, but I think he was supposed to be sort of androgynous/bisexual.

[@meric@nwom@n]

I thought it was Herman Munster.

[Gob]

Ok, this is another fine example of why UK justice is a laughing stock.

A thieving woman who ran over a police officer will not face sentencing for two months as magistrates have allowed her to take a holiday to Australia.

Saphhia Da-Silva, 28, could face jail time but incredibly magistrates adjourned sentencing for longer than normal to grant her plea to go on a seven-week trip of a lifetime Down Under.

Da-Silva had stolen from a Gap store at a Kent retail complex and as she attempted to escape in a silver BMW, hit an empty pushchair and then PCSO Daniel Smith, sending him flying in the air.

Her case had been adjourned for pre-sentence reports, and a sentencing hearing would have likely been held in mid-December.

But the mother-of-two's planned seven-week trip Down Under, on a visa, is from November 28 to January 15 so Ashford magistrates agreed to adjourn the date until January 31.

Nigel Numas, for Da-Silva, said: 'She wants to go to Australia and take her mother and children to see her nan.'

Chairman of the bench Anne Norris told him: 'We are dealing with something extremely serious. Is it relevant for your client to go on holiday?

'There is also a victim who is off sick and has been seriously injured.'

But Mr Numas explained that Da-Silva cared for her mentally ill mother, as well as her two children, a six-year-old daughter and four-year-old son.

He said: 'In terms of going to Australia this is to get a bit of respite and a bit of help from her grandmother."

Mrs Norris asked for authentication of the trip and Mr Numas said it had been approved by a clinical team.

Magistrates studied documentation before agreeing to the longer adjournment.

Da-Silva had admitted physically assaulting PCSO Smith, failing to stop after a road accident and shoplifting £236.12 worth of clothes from Gap on November 5 this year.

She also asked for a further offence from that day - of stealing £205.95 in clothes from Ralph Lauren at the same retail outlet - to be taken into consideration.


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... z16LILiYk7

[SisterMaryFellatio]

As someone who lives and is a citizen of a country I was not born in (and i am still grateful for it everyday). The man needs to be deported had I or any other permanent resident who breaks the law in this country can have their residency revoked if they commit a serious crime.

So that withstanding the fucker should be out period. However he should get the death penalty he murdered a child, he now has 2 of his own. I hope the bastard can't sleep at night!

[Gob]

Blackburn death crash driver will not be deported

An asylum-seeker who left a girl dying under the wheels of his car when he fled the scene can stay in the UK, two immigration judges have ruled.

Iraqi Kurd Aso Mohammed Ibrahim was jailed for four months after knocking down Amy Houston in Blackburn in 2003.

Her father Paul Houston, from Darwen, told judges last month they had the power to bring his "seven years of hell to an end" by sending Ibrahim to Iraq.

But two senior immigration judges have now ruled he can remain in the UK.

Mr Houston had to make the decision to turn off his daughter's life support machine hours after the crash.

He has since campaigned to get Ibrahim deported.

Mr Houston said he was "frustrated and angry" at the decision.

The Upper Tribunal of the Immigration and Asylum Chamber, sitting in Manchester, heard Ibrahim had previous criminal convictions.

The 33-year-old, who did not hold a driving licence, was jailed for four months for driving while disqualified and failing to stop after an accident.

On his release he met a British woman and they had two children, Harry, four, and Zara, three.

He was due to be deported but won the right to stay in the UK in December 2009 after arguing that, because he now had two children since being freed from prison, he had a right to a family life under Article 8 of the Human Rights Act.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-la ... e-12007100

If I was the girl's father I would hunt him down and kill him.