oldie
Joined: September 2021
Posts: 7,576
|
Post by oldie on Sept 10, 2024 5:56:39 GMT
That's because you have zero understanding of the law. Nonsense. Most of the videos in the public domain were shot by members of the public on their phones. You cannot suppress this information getting into the public domain unless you have a totalitarian state ! These videos should help the Police to convict these criminals. Time and time again we see the Police issuing videos along the lines of "have you seen this man/woman?". Every time they do that are they not possibly "prejudicing the trial" that could result? Good policing is dependent on the goodwill of the public. To even suggest these videos could prejudice the trial is nonsense and that argument is a just 'barrack room argument'. We are seeing people being sent to prison for something they posted on Facebook, and not only that but some of these are 'first offenders'. I fully expect these criminals involved in this incident at Manchester Airport to be tried, convicted and to receive a lengthy prison sentence. If they had pleaded guilty then it would be all over by now. By declaring they are not guilty I fully expect the sentence to be even harsher, as is the law. Anything less will be a further indication of the two-tier judicial system that seems to have been developed. The same applies to the Labour guy who declared that the throats should be cut of any 'right winger'. He has pleaded 'not guilty'. Should that video have also been suppressed? Has the release of the video of him declaring that 'prejudiced' his trial? Oh, and for a guy who is a local councilor, how can he afford to have a KC defend him? Where has the money come for that? Are you saying that the video of him declaring this should never have been released into the public domain? After all, it is the video that is the main piece of evidence. Another rant and yet another misunderstanding of the law. The CPS are putting a case together to prosecute this guy. Various recorded videos may be part of the evidence against him. To wit. "Publishing information that could potentially prejudice a trial is considered contempt of court, even if unintentional, and can lead to legal consequences for the media outlet." Enough of these simplistic suggestions please |
|
Cheshiregas
Global Moderator
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 2,979 
|
Post by Cheshiregas on Sept 10, 2024 8:19:44 GMT
That's because you have zero understanding of the law. Nonsense. Most of the videos in the public domain were shot by members of the public on their phones. You cannot suppress this information getting into the public domain unless you have a totalitarian state ! These videos should help the Police to convict these criminals. Time and time again we see the Police issuing videos along the lines of "have you seen this man/woman?". Every time they do that are they not possibly "prejudicing the trial" that could result? Good policing is dependent on the goodwill of the public. To even suggest these videos could prejudice the trial is nonsense and that argument is a just 'barrack room argument'. We are seeing people being sent to prison for something they posted on Facebook, and not only that but some of these are 'first offenders'. I fully expect these criminals involved in this incident at Manchester Airport to be tried, convicted and to receive a lengthy prison sentence. If they had pleaded guilty then it would be all over by now. By declaring they are not guilty I fully expect the sentence to be even harsher, as is the law. Anything less will be a further indication of the two-tier judicial system that seems to have been developed. The same applies to the Labour guy who declared that the throats should be cut of any 'right winger'. He has pleaded 'not guilty'. Should that video have also been suppressed? Has the release of the video of him declaring that 'prejudiced' his trial? Oh, and for a guy who is a local councilor, how can he afford to have a KC defend him? Where has the money come for that? Are you saying that the video of him declaring this should never have been released into the public domain? After all, it is the video that is the main piece of evidence. After most incidents like the two mentioned the police ask people to refrain from sharing videos and to provide them to the police so that the case is not considered prejudicial especially if the police use that footage. It is a defence used mostly in the US but I am sure you wouldn't want either the Labour guy or the Manchester miscreants released on a technicality or the defending barrister using the defence of prejudice and inability to get a fair trial. |
|
oldie
Joined: September 2021
Posts: 7,576
|
Post by oldie on Sept 10, 2024 8:38:24 GMT
Nonsense. Most of the videos in the public domain were shot by members of the public on their phones. You cannot suppress this information getting into the public domain unless you have a totalitarian state ! These videos should help the Police to convict these criminals. Time and time again we see the Police issuing videos along the lines of "have you seen this man/woman?". Every time they do that are they not possibly "prejudicing the trial" that could result? Good policing is dependent on the goodwill of the public. To even suggest these videos could prejudice the trial is nonsense and that argument is a just 'barrack room argument'. We are seeing people being sent to prison for something they posted on Facebook, and not only that but some of these are 'first offenders'. I fully expect these criminals involved in this incident at Manchester Airport to be tried, convicted and to receive a lengthy prison sentence. If they had pleaded guilty then it would be all over by now. By declaring they are not guilty I fully expect the sentence to be even harsher, as is the law. Anything less will be a further indication of the two-tier judicial system that seems to have been developed. The same applies to the Labour guy who declared that the throats should be cut of any 'right winger'. He has pleaded 'not guilty'. Should that video have also been suppressed? Has the release of the video of him declaring that 'prejudiced' his trial? Oh, and for a guy who is a local councilor, how can he afford to have a KC defend him? Where has the money come for that? Are you saying that the video of him declaring this should never have been released into the public domain? After all, it is the video that is the main piece of evidence. After most incidents like the two mentioned the police ask people to refrain from sharing videos and to provide them to the police so that the case is not considered prejudicial especially if the police use that footage. It is a defence used mostly in the US but I am sure you wouldn't want either the Labour guy or the Manchester miscreants released on a technicality or the defending barrister using the defence of prejudice and inability to get a fair trial. Precisely put. It's amazing that those who are screaming the loudest against these people seem so intent in potentially undermining the case against them. |
|
|
|
Post by baselswh on Sept 11, 2024 6:23:27 GMT
Germany has plans to check asylum seekers claims at the border,rather than allowing them to waltz in.It's too easy for illegals to enter the country,that borders Denmark,Luxembourg, Holland,France,Poland,Switzerland.
Hungarys wire fence system apparently works well,with Budapest having far less concerns of Islamist attack.Unlike Germany,France and the UK eg.
The recent murders committed by lunatic fanatical Muslims and signs of the Right growing in popularity seems to of woken Germany up.
Apparently they have booted out 30,000 foreigners in recent times.How come they can manage that and the UK cannot?They,like the UK are trapped within the ECHR.
I wonder if the Germans really have the will to stop the invasion.
Edit.
Czech Rep also borders Germany.
|
|
baldrick
Joined: July 2024
Posts: 1,360
Member is Online
|
Post by baldrick on Sept 11, 2024 6:35:36 GMT
Germany has plans to check asylum seekers claims at the border,rather than allowing them to waltz in.It's too easy for illegals to enter the country,that borders Denmark,Luxembourg, Holland,France,Poland,Switzerland. Hungarys wire fence system apparently works well,with Budapest having far less concerns of Islamist attack.Unlike Germany,France and the UK eg. The recent murders committed by lunatic fanatical Muslims and signs of the Right growing in popularity seems to of woken Germany up. Apparently they have booted out 30,000 foreigners in recent times.How come they can manage that and the UK cannot?They,like the UK are trapped within the ECHR. I wonder if the Germans really have the will to stop the invasion. So you agree that it's not the ECHR that is the problem then. |
|
|
|
Post by baselswh on Sept 11, 2024 7:03:41 GMT
Germany has plans to check asylum seekers claims at the border,rather than allowing them to waltz in.It's too easy for illegals to enter the country,that borders Denmark,Luxembourg, Holland,France,Poland,Switzerland. Hungarys wire fence system apparently works well,with Budapest having far less concerns of Islamist attack.Unlike Germany,France and the UK eg. The recent murders committed by lunatic fanatical Muslims and signs of the Right growing in popularity seems to of woken Germany up. Apparently they have booted out 30,000 foreigners in recent times.How come they can manage that and the UK cannot?They,like the UK are trapped within the ECHR. I wonder if the Germans really have the will to stop the invasion. So you agree that it's not the ECHR that is the problem then. I asked a question. |
|
oldie
Joined: September 2021
Posts: 7,576
|
Post by oldie on Sept 11, 2024 7:06:01 GMT
Germany has plans to check asylum seekers claims at the border,rather than allowing them to waltz in.It's too easy for illegals to enter the country,that borders Denmark,Luxembourg, Holland,France,Poland,Switzerland. Hungarys wire fence system apparently works well,with Budapest having far less concerns of Islamist attack.Unlike Germany,France and the UK eg. The recent murders committed by lunatic fanatical Muslims and signs of the Right growing in popularity seems to of woken Germany up. Apparently they have booted out 30,000 foreigners in recent times.How come they can manage that and the UK cannot?They,like the UK are trapped within the ECHR. I wonder if the Germans really have the will to stop the invasion. So you agree that it's not the ECHR that is the problem then. It's almost to laughable to comment on isn't it, in reality. Contradicting himself in the same paragraph whilst ignoring the fact that under EU rules asylum seekers can be sent back to the country within the EU they crossed the border from. The bigger issue here is Shengen. When that treaty was envisaged the idea that citizens could move freely within the EU without border checks was wonderfully idealistic. But the governments of the day could not have envisaged the migratory patterns that were to come, which makes the idea problematic. But of course the UK was never part of that, never signed up to it. |
|
|
|
Post by baselswh on Sept 11, 2024 7:11:45 GMT
So you agree that it's not the ECHR that is the problem then. It's almost to laughable to comment on isn't it, in reality. Contradicting himself in the same paragraph whilst ignoring the fact that under EU rules asylum seekers can be sent back to the country within the EU they crossed the border from. The bigger issue here is Shengen. When that treaty was envisaged the idea that citizens could move freely within the EU without border checks was wonderfully idealistic. But the governments of the day could not have envisaged the migratory patterns that were to come, which makes the idea problematic. But of course the UK was never part of that, never signed up to it. Your pal Nige did warn you. |
|
baldrick
Joined: July 2024
Posts: 1,360
Member is Online
|
Post by baldrick on Sept 11, 2024 7:16:40 GMT
So you agree that it's not the ECHR that is the problem then. I asked a question. You answered it too, though. Membership of the ECHR clearly isn't holding back others, so as I've stated before, it's the way we go about it and not our membership itself. |
|
baldrick
Joined: July 2024
Posts: 1,360
Member is Online
|
Post by baldrick on Sept 11, 2024 7:19:51 GMT
It's almost to laughable to comment on isn't it, in reality. Contradicting himself in the same paragraph whilst ignoring the fact that under EU rules asylum seekers can be sent back to the country within the EU they crossed the border from. The bigger issue here is Shengen. When that treaty was envisaged the idea that citizens could move freely within the EU without border checks was wonderfully idealistic. But the governments of the day could not have envisaged the migratory patterns that were to come, which makes the idea problematic. But of course the UK was never part of that, never signed up to it. Your pal Nige did warn you. EU member states have always had the right to close borders under certain circumstances. |
|
oldie
Joined: September 2021
Posts: 7,576
|
Post by oldie on Sept 11, 2024 8:44:42 GMT
Your pal Nige did warn you. EU member states have always had the right to close borders under certain circumstances. Yep.... |
|
Cheshiregas
Global Moderator
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 2,979
|
Post by Cheshiregas on Sept 11, 2024 9:07:46 GMT
Germany has plans to check asylum seekers claims at the border,rather than allowing them to waltz in.It's too easy for illegals to enter the country,that borders Denmark,Luxembourg, Holland,France,Poland,Switzerland. - so Germany are a sovereign state within the EU and can make their own decisions. That's not what Nigel said, he said the EU had taken away our Sovereignty!! Who would have thought it?Apparently they have booted out 30,000 foreigners in recent times. How come they can manage that and the UK cannot? They,like the UK are trapped within the ECHR. - they unlike the UK didn't slash back on the part of Government responsible for sorting out applications. Perhaps if the Tories hadn't slashed Government budgets we too could have been booting people out. Oh and look the ECHR isn't a problem for them.....I wonder if the Germans really have the will to stop the invasion. Edit. Czech Rep also borders Germany. So Germany has sovereignty within the EU, and has no problems with the ECHR. Better have a word with Nigel, that's not what he and Dickie said.... |
|
|
|
Post by baselswh on Sept 11, 2024 9:21:39 GMT
Germany has plans to check asylum seekers claims at the border,rather than allowing them to waltz in.It's too easy for illegals to enter the country,that borders Denmark,Luxembourg, Holland,France,Poland,Switzerland. - so Germany are a sovereign state within the EU and can make their own decisions. That's not what Nigel said, he said the EU had taken away our Sovereignty!! Who would have thought it?Apparently they have booted out 30,000 foreigners in recent times. How come they can manage that and the UK cannot? They,like the UK are trapped within the ECHR. - they unlike the UK didn't slash back on the part of Government responsible for sorting out applications. Perhaps if the Tories hadn't slashed Government budgets we too could have been booting people out. Oh and look the ECHR isn't a problem for them.....I wonder if the Germans really have the will to stop the invasion. Edit. Czech Rep also borders Germany. So Germany has sovereignty within the EU, and has no problems with the ECHR. Better have a word with Nigel, that's not what he and Dickie said.... Nigel warned that immigrants, after being in eg Germany for 5 years,would be allowed to settle in the UK. |
|
Cheshiregas
Global Moderator
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 2,979
|
Post by Cheshiregas on Sept 11, 2024 9:29:40 GMT
So Germany has sovereignty within the EU, and has no problems with the ECHR. Better have a word with Nigel, that's not what he and Dickie said.... Nigel warned that immigrants, after being in eg Germany for 5 years,would be allowed to settle in the UK. He also said that millions of Turks were going to invade us as they were joining the EU. That hasn't happened yet! |
|
oldie
Joined: September 2021
Posts: 7,576
|
Post by oldie on Sept 11, 2024 11:44:11 GMT
Nigel warned that immigrants, after being in eg Germany for 5 years,would be allowed to settle in the UK. He also said that millions of Turks were going to invade us as they were joining the EU. That hasn't happened yet! Shhhhhh....you will only upset the natives |
|
|
|
Post by Nobbygas on Sept 11, 2024 12:08:04 GMT
Nigel warned that immigrants, after being in eg Germany for 5 years,would be allowed to settle in the UK. He also said that millions of Turks were going to invade us as they were joining the EU. That hasn't happened yet! I lived in a city called Offenbach, which is joined at the hip with Frankfurt. Offenbach has a population of (I believe) around 150k. It is one of the poorest cities in Germany, compared to Frankfurt next door, which is one of the richest. Offenbach has a migrant population that makes up 63.9% of the inhabitants. Offenbach is twinned with Tower Hamlets. Offenbach is a so-called "Sozialer Brennpunkt" (deprived area) because of unemployment, poverty, gang related crime and migration. The effects of migration is quite plain to see if you walk through the city center. |
|
oldie
Joined: September 2021
Posts: 7,576
|
Post by oldie on Sept 11, 2024 13:28:38 GMT
He also said that millions of Turks were going to invade us as they were joining the EU. That hasn't happened yet! I lived in a city called Offenbach, which is joined at the hip with Frankfurt. Offenbach has a population of (I believe) around 150k. It is one of the poorest cities in Germany, compared to Frankfurt next door, which is one of the richest. Offenbach has a migrant population that makes up 63.9% of the inhabitants. Offenbach is twinned with Tower Hamlets. Offenbach is a so-called "Sozialer Brennpunkt" (deprived area) because of unemployment, poverty, gang related crime and migration. The effects of migration is quite plain to see if you walk through the city center. Was Offenbach always defined as a deprived area, or is it a more recent phenomenon? It seems the downfall of the city has roots in WW2 when we bombed it to pieces. |
|
|
|
Post by Nobbygas on Sept 11, 2024 14:08:13 GMT
I lived in a city called Offenbach, which is joined at the hip with Frankfurt. Offenbach has a population of (I believe) around 150k. It is one of the poorest cities in Germany, compared to Frankfurt next door, which is one of the richest. Offenbach has a migrant population that makes up 63.9% of the inhabitants. Offenbach is twinned with Tower Hamlets. Offenbach is a so-called "Sozialer Brennpunkt" (deprived area) because of unemployment, poverty, gang related crime and migration. The effects of migration is quite plain to see if you walk through the city center. Was Offenbach always defined as a deprived area, or is it a more recent phenomenon? It seems the downfall of the city has roots in WW2 when we bombed it to pieces. It's a spiral. It's much much cheaper than living in Frankfurt, yet on the S-Bahn you can reach the center of Frankfurt in about 14 minutes! Cheaper housing/rental attracts the developers, who convert housing into multi-roomed small apartments housing migrants. If you provide a 10sqm room for a migrant the government will give you 500 euro per month. I know of a house where it had three bedrooms initially. The developers made it into 20 10sqm rooms, with shared toilets and kitchen. Housing 20 migrants brought in 10,000 euros per month. On an initial outlay of 350,000 to buy and convert the house 120,000 euros per year is a damn good ROI. This sort of action has decimated the housing for first time buyers, as the developers will always outbid them. In the inner city of Offenbach 34% of the residents are on the lowest level of benefits. As there is no money to spend (as such) the shopping area is disgraceful. No decent shops, just loads of hairdresser's, nail bars, phone shops, kebab or fried chicken bars etc. The local council are broke as they have very little income, so facilities and services get ignored. The more migrants that arrive, the poorer the place gets. That's the nature of the beast. A local saying in Frankfurt is "what is the best thing about Offenbach?", with the answer being "leaving it!" |
|
trymer
Joined: November 2018
Posts: 2,561
|
Post by trymer on Sept 11, 2024 19:21:06 GMT
Was Offenbach always defined as a deprived area, or is it a more recent phenomenon? It seems the downfall of the city has roots in WW2 when we bombed it to pieces. It's a spiral. It's much much cheaper than living in Frankfurt, yet on the S-Bahn you can reach the center of Frankfurt in about 14 minutes! Cheaper housing/rental attracts the developers, who convert housing into multi-roomed small apartments housing migrants. If you provide a 10sqm room for a migrant the government will give you 500 euro per month. I know of a house where it had three bedrooms initially. The developers made it into 20 10sqm rooms, with shared toilets and kitchen. Housing 20 migrants brought in 10,000 euros per month. On an initial outlay of 350,000 to buy and convert the house 120,000 euros per year is a damn good ROI. This sort of action has decimated the housing for first time buyers, as the developers will always outbid them. In the inner city of Offenbach 34% of the residents are on the lowest level of benefits. As there is no money to spend (as such) the shopping area is disgraceful. No decent shops, just loads of hairdresser's, nail bars, phone shops, kebab or fried chicken bars etc. The local council are broke as they have very little income, so facilities and services get ignored. The more migrants that arrive, the poorer the place gets. That's the nature of the beast. A local saying in Frankfurt is "what is the best thing about Offenbach?", with the answer being "leaving it!" Kickers Offenbach were always trouble,I remember them playing Frankfurt and it was much worse than the trouble at football here ever was,cars torched etc,saw them in Munich but there wasnt trouble that night. Proper ****hole of a place, I think that Neu Ulm has the largest percentage of immigrants though ? Blaming bombing for making a town a deprived area is bonkers,Hamburg,Dresden, Leipzig,Cologne in fact anywhere in the Ruhr pott all got carpet bombed,why arent they hell holes I wonder ? |
|
|
|
Post by Nobbygas on Sept 11, 2024 20:45:02 GMT
It's a spiral. It's much much cheaper than living in Frankfurt, yet on the S-Bahn you can reach the center of Frankfurt in about 14 minutes! Cheaper housing/rental attracts the developers, who convert housing into multi-roomed small apartments housing migrants. If you provide a 10sqm room for a migrant the government will give you 500 euro per month. I know of a house where it had three bedrooms initially. The developers made it into 20 10sqm rooms, with shared toilets and kitchen. Housing 20 migrants brought in 10,000 euros per month. On an initial outlay of 350,000 to buy and convert the house 120,000 euros per year is a damn good ROI. This sort of action has decimated the housing for first time buyers, as the developers will always outbid them. In the inner city of Offenbach 34% of the residents are on the lowest level of benefits. As there is no money to spend (as such) the shopping area is disgraceful. No decent shops, just loads of hairdresser's, nail bars, phone shops, kebab or fried chicken bars etc. The local council are broke as they have very little income, so facilities and services get ignored. The more migrants that arrive, the poorer the place gets. That's the nature of the beast. A local saying in Frankfurt is "what is the best thing about Offenbach?", with the answer being "leaving it!" Kickers Offenbach were always trouble,I remember them playing Frankfurt and it was much worse than the trouble at football here ever was,cars torched etc,saw them in Munich but there wasnt trouble that night. Proper ****hole of a place, I think that Neu Ulm has the largest percentage of immigrants though ? Blaming bombing for making a town a deprived area is bonkers,Hamburg,Dresden, Leipzig,Cologne in fact anywhere in the Ruhr pott all got carpet bombed,why arent they hell holes I wonder ? If the Kickers ever have to play Eintracht, maybe in the cup, all Police leave is cancelled. It's pure hatred! Eintracht fans have a bad reputation, but the Kickers fans are on another level! |
|
