Iain Dale gets Aitken story wrong
This gives me great pleasure. Tory blogger Iain Dale proclaims " ITV Gets Aitken Story Wrong". The story is about prison reform. Jonathan Aitken, in the grand scheme of things is but a bit part actor. Iain Dale states that the Centre for Social Justice, is an independent think tank, chaired by Iain Duncan Smith. It has no formal links with the Tory Party whatsoever. However, I Googled it "A think tank founded by a group of Conservative Party politicians".
To paraphrase Iain Dale "This type of sloppiness is just not acceptable from one of Britain's leading Tory bloggers".
Had the policy group instead been headed by Erwin James it would adopt more credibility. Mr James' inside knowledge far outweighs that possessed by Jonathan Aitken. In prison terms Mr James has walked the line whereas Mr Aitken has only been in long enough for a shit and shave.
A mixture of law, politics, autobiography and humour. Once described as "The Devilish Advocate" (Guardian), I do have the ability to provoke a response. Sometimes it comes from someone who uses a thought process, and sometimes from jerks usually associated with the knee.
Site Meter
Sunday, November 11, 2007
Saturday, November 10, 2007
Lest we forget
Lest we forget
A British soldier on patrol in a poppy field in Helmand province in Afghanistan.
If World War 2 was the war to end all wars, why are we still at war in Afghanistan, Iraq and about to go to war in Iran?
A British soldier on patrol in a poppy field in Helmand province in Afghanistan.
If World War 2 was the war to end all wars, why are we still at war in Afghanistan, Iraq and about to go to war in Iran?
Friday, November 09, 2007
Friction in the Tory Party as online TV station is launched
Friction in the Tory Party as online TV station is launched
The Tory Party is set to launch its own online tv channel. Appropriately, it is called Fiction TV.
Hat-Tip to Dizzy Thinks.
The Tory Party is set to launch its own online tv channel. Appropriately, it is called Fiction TV.
Hat-Tip to Dizzy Thinks.
Woods murder police 'held seance'
Woods murder police 'held seance'
Police investigating the murder of a Dundee woman attended a seance in an attempt to find her killer, a former senior detective has told a court.
Is there anybody out there?
Police investigating the murder of a Dundee woman attended a seance in an attempt to find her killer, a former senior detective has told a court.
Is there anybody out there?
BAE inquiry decision challenged
BAE inquiry decision challenged
A pressure group is going to the High Court to challenge the legality of the decision to end investigations into BAE Systems' dealings with Saudi Arabia.
I wish Corner House Research good luck, however, I suspect that the challenge will be dismissed because it was not brought within the 3 months time limit to mount a legal challenge.
UPDATE: Wonders never cease. Judicial review of BAE probe ordered.
Thursday, November 08, 2007
Internment is not a good idea
Internment is not a good idea
Seumas Milne on the Comment is Free in the Guardian argues that the government's proposal to extend the detention limit for suspected terrorists from 28 to 56 days is "A pointless attack on liberty that fuels the terror threat".
I find myself in complete agreement with him.
Seumas Milne on the Comment is Free in the Guardian argues that the government's proposal to extend the detention limit for suspected terrorists from 28 to 56 days is "A pointless attack on liberty that fuels the terror threat".
I find myself in complete agreement with him.
McCanns: Say what you like you cannot escape the truth
McCanns: Say what you like you cannot escape the truth
I was quite flattered the other day to read this post on Noclue's blog about your's truly. And, like me she has got this bug up her arse about the McCanns. She states that YouTube "has some gems but one that does deserve independent recognition is from stukkinikki who seemingly asks the pertinent questions that most British people ask and the media is against printing the self same repetitive questions...". I agree with her that this is a little gem...
UPDATE: Were the McCanns right to court the media?
Listen here.
I was quite flattered the other day to read this post on Noclue's blog about your's truly. And, like me she has got this bug up her arse about the McCanns. She states that YouTube "has some gems but one that does deserve independent recognition is from stukkinikki who seemingly asks the pertinent questions that most British people ask and the media is against printing the self same repetitive questions...". I agree with her that this is a little gem...
UPDATE: Were the McCanns right to court the media?
Listen here.
Carrot 'joke' sex attacker guilty
Carrot 'joke' sex attacker guilty
A driving instructor who hid a carrot in his trousers and pretended it was his erect penis has been convicted of four sex attacks on his pupils.
The confessions of a driving instructor and his carrot and gear stick approach...
A driving instructor who hid a carrot in his trousers and pretended it was his erect penis has been convicted of four sex attacks on his pupils.
The confessions of a driving instructor and his carrot and gear stick approach...
Quick arrest all librarians...
Quick arrest all librarians...
A 23 year old woman, who is a student, has been convicted for possessing books. Apparently, this constitutes a terrorist related offence. Namely, having articles "likely to be useful to a person committing or preparing an act of terrorism".
Three days ago we celebrated November the 5th, in memory of Guy Fawkes who attempted to blow up Parliament.
I am surprised that fireworks are not deemed as having articles "likely to be useful to a person committing or preparing an act of terrorism".
A 23 year old woman, who is a student, has been convicted for possessing books. Apparently, this constitutes a terrorist related offence. Namely, having articles "likely to be useful to a person committing or preparing an act of terrorism".
Three days ago we celebrated November the 5th, in memory of Guy Fawkes who attempted to blow up Parliament.
I am surprised that fireworks are not deemed as having articles "likely to be useful to a person committing or preparing an act of terrorism".
Wednesday, November 07, 2007
Vulture's Paradise
Vulture's Paradise
It's bad enough when someone you know and love kicks the bucket, movingly portrayed in this post. Without having a money-grabbing lawyer clinging onto your grief like a parasite-like leech. In the update to the post the lawyer was shaken off before she could claim a percentage of the estate in cash and property.
As I read the second post, the thought of reading this story "A farmer who toiled on his cousin's land unpaid for more than two decades has won a two-year legal battle to inherit the £2.3 million estate" earlier on crept into my mind. I thought how unfair it was that "David Thorner is facing an inheritance tax bill of about £300,000 for which he may have to take out a loan". I thought it was a shame that "Judge John Randall allowed the blood relatives to keep the remaining £1.1 million cash in Peter Thorner's estate". Had it not been for the unpaid labour of David Thorner for 20 years, it is doubtful that there would have been any farm or estate left to speak of. Therefore, I feel that he should have received the remaining £1.1 million cash as a reward for unpaid wages. To receive a farm and estate without the funds to maintain it appears to be unreasonable. Especially given an inheritance tax bill of about £300,000 for which he may have to take out a loan to keep the farm and estate going. If there is a case for the Chancellor waiving an inheritance tax bill this is surely it?
It's bad enough when someone you know and love kicks the bucket, movingly portrayed in this post. Without having a money-grabbing lawyer clinging onto your grief like a parasite-like leech. In the update to the post the lawyer was shaken off before she could claim a percentage of the estate in cash and property.
As I read the second post, the thought of reading this story "A farmer who toiled on his cousin's land unpaid for more than two decades has won a two-year legal battle to inherit the £2.3 million estate" earlier on crept into my mind. I thought how unfair it was that "David Thorner is facing an inheritance tax bill of about £300,000 for which he may have to take out a loan". I thought it was a shame that "Judge John Randall allowed the blood relatives to keep the remaining £1.1 million cash in Peter Thorner's estate". Had it not been for the unpaid labour of David Thorner for 20 years, it is doubtful that there would have been any farm or estate left to speak of. Therefore, I feel that he should have received the remaining £1.1 million cash as a reward for unpaid wages. To receive a farm and estate without the funds to maintain it appears to be unreasonable. Especially given an inheritance tax bill of about £300,000 for which he may have to take out a loan to keep the farm and estate going. If there is a case for the Chancellor waiving an inheritance tax bill this is surely it?
The world's weirdest cases
The world's weirdest cases
From the man who sued God to the man who sued TV for making his wife fat, people turn to lawyers for the strangest things
Hat-Tip to Barnacle Bill for finding this report.
From the man who sued God to the man who sued TV for making his wife fat, people turn to lawyers for the strangest things
Hat-Tip to Barnacle Bill for finding this report.
Why we should not trust the Head of MI5
Why we should not trust the Head of MI5
It was hardly a coincidence that, barely 24 hours before the Queen's Speech, with its promise of an anti-terrorism Bill and consultation on tougher measures, the head of MI5 was cautioning about the threat from an estimated 4,000 potential terrorists, recruited in Britain, and even now plotting attacks against innocent citizens. “Terrorists are methodically and intentionally targeting young people in this country,” intoned the Director-General, Jonathan Evans. “They are radicalising, indoctrinating and grooming young, vulnerable people to carry out acts of terrorism”.
In case you have forgotten it was Jonathan Evans who played a large part in drafting the Dodgy Dossier which sought to justify the invasion of Iraq. There was, of course, no WMD. Why should we now believe him when he claims that there are 4,000 potential suspected terrorists in this country? It would appear that his intelligence is based upon the need of the Prime Minister to scare us enough to into accepting draconian measures supposedly for our own good.
It was hardly a coincidence that, barely 24 hours before the Queen's Speech, with its promise of an anti-terrorism Bill and consultation on tougher measures, the head of MI5 was cautioning about the threat from an estimated 4,000 potential terrorists, recruited in Britain, and even now plotting attacks against innocent citizens. “Terrorists are methodically and intentionally targeting young people in this country,” intoned the Director-General, Jonathan Evans. “They are radicalising, indoctrinating and grooming young, vulnerable people to carry out acts of terrorism”.
In case you have forgotten it was Jonathan Evans who played a large part in drafting the Dodgy Dossier which sought to justify the invasion of Iraq. There was, of course, no WMD. Why should we now believe him when he claims that there are 4,000 potential suspected terrorists in this country? It would appear that his intelligence is based upon the need of the Prime Minister to scare us enough to into accepting draconian measures supposedly for our own good.
Should prisoners get time off for poor prison conditions?
Should prisoners get time off for poor prison conditions?
The sentence must fit the crime, but should judges start granting time off for poor prison conditions?
Marcel Berlins
The Guardian
Wednesday November 7 2007
He was the Latvian-born owner of a popular Knightsbridge restaurant, convicted of raping one of his customers and sentenced to nine years' imprisonment. There was no doubt of his guilt, but he appealed against the length of his sentence. The job I had then, dealing with criminal appeals, required me to analyse his grounds for wanting his sentence reduced, and report to the judges who would be hearing his appeal. His main argument was that, because of his past personal history, nine years in jail for him would be a far worse punishment and ordeal than for other prisoners. During the second world war, in Latvia, he had been incarcerated for some time under terrible conditions, with the result that he had a deep psychological fear of being cooped up in captivity. The judges reduced the sentence to seven years.
I was fascinated by the case because it raised, for me, a philosophical issue about sentencing and punishment that is seldom debated. The other evening, a few remarks by one of our most senior judges revived my memory of the Latvian rapist. Speaking at a meeting of the Prisoners' Education Trust, Lord Justice Judge - the head of criminal justice in our courts - posed, in effect, the same interesting question: when deciding on the length of a prison sentence to impose, how far - this is my way of putting it, not his - should the judges base their decisions on the actual level of pain and distress caused to the prisoner? This was Lord Justice Judge's comment (in the context of a question put to him about how far prison overcrowding should affect sentencing): "I have believed for some time that you have to take into account, in the punitive element of the sentence, that in conditions which are wildly overcrowded, you may be serving your sentence in dreadful conditions, locked up with other people, or forced into a situation where there is no exercise." In those circumstances, he argued, judges could be justified in passing a lower sentence than that which would normally be appropriate. It's time off for poor prison conditions.
Let me put it another way and get back to the philosophy. A criminal deserves say, 20 Berlins-units of punishment. He can get that by being sent to a comfortable, uncrowded prison, but he'd have to stay there for five years. If, however, he went to a rubbishy prison, he'd accumulate his 20 units in four years. And if, like the Latvian, he could prove extra distress, his anguish would allow him out after three years. In theory, this is not as silly as it might at first seem. It is undeniable that some prisoners take to their confinement easily (one consequence being that the threat of possible subsequent imprisonment is no deterrent), while others find it almost unbearable. Given the same sentence for the same crime, one prisoner will have suffered mildly, another greatly. There will have been no equality or fairness of punishment. To achieve that, even at the minimalist level hinted at by Lord Justice Judge, creates forbidding problems. (What, for instance, if the prisoner is shifted from a nice prison to an unpleasant one? Does he get his sentence reduced?) If, as is morally just, length of imprisonment should depend on the volume of actual pain and distress suffered by the prisoner, our whole sentencing structure will have to be revolutionised.
The sentence must fit the crime, but should judges start granting time off for poor prison conditions?
Marcel Berlins
The Guardian
Wednesday November 7 2007
He was the Latvian-born owner of a popular Knightsbridge restaurant, convicted of raping one of his customers and sentenced to nine years' imprisonment. There was no doubt of his guilt, but he appealed against the length of his sentence. The job I had then, dealing with criminal appeals, required me to analyse his grounds for wanting his sentence reduced, and report to the judges who would be hearing his appeal. His main argument was that, because of his past personal history, nine years in jail for him would be a far worse punishment and ordeal than for other prisoners. During the second world war, in Latvia, he had been incarcerated for some time under terrible conditions, with the result that he had a deep psychological fear of being cooped up in captivity. The judges reduced the sentence to seven years.
I was fascinated by the case because it raised, for me, a philosophical issue about sentencing and punishment that is seldom debated. The other evening, a few remarks by one of our most senior judges revived my memory of the Latvian rapist. Speaking at a meeting of the Prisoners' Education Trust, Lord Justice Judge - the head of criminal justice in our courts - posed, in effect, the same interesting question: when deciding on the length of a prison sentence to impose, how far - this is my way of putting it, not his - should the judges base their decisions on the actual level of pain and distress caused to the prisoner? This was Lord Justice Judge's comment (in the context of a question put to him about how far prison overcrowding should affect sentencing): "I have believed for some time that you have to take into account, in the punitive element of the sentence, that in conditions which are wildly overcrowded, you may be serving your sentence in dreadful conditions, locked up with other people, or forced into a situation where there is no exercise." In those circumstances, he argued, judges could be justified in passing a lower sentence than that which would normally be appropriate. It's time off for poor prison conditions.
Let me put it another way and get back to the philosophy. A criminal deserves say, 20 Berlins-units of punishment. He can get that by being sent to a comfortable, uncrowded prison, but he'd have to stay there for five years. If, however, he went to a rubbishy prison, he'd accumulate his 20 units in four years. And if, like the Latvian, he could prove extra distress, his anguish would allow him out after three years. In theory, this is not as silly as it might at first seem. It is undeniable that some prisoners take to their confinement easily (one consequence being that the threat of possible subsequent imprisonment is no deterrent), while others find it almost unbearable. Given the same sentence for the same crime, one prisoner will have suffered mildly, another greatly. There will have been no equality or fairness of punishment. To achieve that, even at the minimalist level hinted at by Lord Justice Judge, creates forbidding problems. (What, for instance, if the prisoner is shifted from a nice prison to an unpleasant one? Does he get his sentence reduced?) If, as is morally just, length of imprisonment should depend on the volume of actual pain and distress suffered by the prisoner, our whole sentencing structure will have to be revolutionised.
'Torture' lawyer close to Attorney General role and political prisoners
'Torture' lawyer close to Attorney General role and political prisoners
I find it unbelievable and unacceptable that President George W Bush's nominee for the role of Attorney General refuses to say whether or not he considers "waterboarding" terror suspects to be legal. Of course it is not legal because it is a form of torture. Given that Michael Mukasey is deemed an expert on national security legal questions, he would know that it is not legal. So, why is he not expressing an opinion on the matter? Unless the US is going to be truthful about what it gets up to in its so-called war on terror, the dividing line between the law-abiding and the lawless becomes so blurred that there is no difference between terrorists and the forces of law and order.
The fact that the US is now prepared to release Iranians detainees held in Iraq shows that their detention had nothing to do with them being deemed as terrorist suspects, and all to do with them being hostages and political prisoners.
I find it unbelievable and unacceptable that President George W Bush's nominee for the role of Attorney General refuses to say whether or not he considers "waterboarding" terror suspects to be legal. Of course it is not legal because it is a form of torture. Given that Michael Mukasey is deemed an expert on national security legal questions, he would know that it is not legal. So, why is he not expressing an opinion on the matter? Unless the US is going to be truthful about what it gets up to in its so-called war on terror, the dividing line between the law-abiding and the lawless becomes so blurred that there is no difference between terrorists and the forces of law and order.
The fact that the US is now prepared to release Iranians detainees held in Iraq shows that their detention had nothing to do with them being deemed as terrorist suspects, and all to do with them being hostages and political prisoners.
Tuesday, November 06, 2007
UK chooses 'most ludicrous laws'
UK chooses 'most ludicrous laws'
A little-known law which prohibits people dying while in the Houses of Parliament has been voted the UK's most ludicrous piece of legislation.
I wonder how they are able to differentiate between a member of the House of Lords who is asleep and one who has died?
Prince Harry not charged over shot rare birds
Prince Harry not charged over shot rare birds
Police officers identified three suspects - Prince Harry, William van Cutsem and David Clarke, a gamekeeper.
Perhaps he should be in Iraq getting shot at and shooting at?
Police officers identified three suspects - Prince Harry, William van Cutsem and David Clarke, a gamekeeper.
Perhaps he should be in Iraq getting shot at and shooting at?
Most influential Right-wingers in UK
Most influential Right-wingers in UK
Iain Dale the Tory blogger has failed to get on a list of the top 100 most influential people on the Right of British politics today.
Other bloggers such as Guido Fawkes and Tim Montgomerie manage to get a mention. There are some odd entrants such as Nick Clegg and Shami Chakrabarti of Liberty.
Iain Dale the Tory blogger has failed to get on a list of the top 100 most influential people on the Right of British politics today.
Other bloggers such as Guido Fawkes and Tim Montgomerie manage to get a mention. There are some odd entrants such as Nick Clegg and Shami Chakrabarti of Liberty.
The ventriloquist's dummy
The ventriloquist's dummy
Amid all the pomp and ceremony of the annual State Opening of Parliament, the Queen delivered her Government-written speech to members of both Houses of Parliament from the golden throne of the House of Lords.
Many of the Bills set out today had already been announced in the summer...
Given that The Queen's Speech is really the government's speech, and that the content has already been previously announced, do we really need the Queen any more or should we dispense with this rather expensive puppet?
Amid all the pomp and ceremony of the annual State Opening of Parliament, the Queen delivered her Government-written speech to members of both Houses of Parliament from the golden throne of the House of Lords.
Many of the Bills set out today had already been announced in the summer...
Given that The Queen's Speech is really the government's speech, and that the content has already been previously announced, do we really need the Queen any more or should we dispense with this rather expensive puppet?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)