Saturday, 7 August 2010

LEGAL AID AT TRIAL AND APPEAL, THEN NO MORE!

Ian Huntley

Taxpayers are spending almost £60,000 a day on legal aid for convicts demanding release from jail, softer punishments or compensation, it emerged last night. 
The £21.6million bill has doubled in two years - sparking fears the cost of providing inmates with their human right to legal protection is spiralling out of control.   That figure excludes criminal legal aid and is for internal prison matters only - cases brought by burglars, rapists and other convicts while they are behind bars.
They can demand lawyers to represent them at Parole Board hearings to insist they are ready for release or demand better treatment from governors.

Most of these fuckwits shouldn't have human rights.  If they are convicted of multiple murders like that twat, PETER SUTCLIFFE, or whatever his real name is, IMO they should be done away with unless they can prove mental illness.  But that would , of course mean POLITICIANS had to make decisions.
They should get the Trial and the Appeal on Legal Aid, then they should pay for it themselves.  In SCOTLAND, they got away with having to 'slop' out, meaning that they had to empty their toilets in the morning if they had used it.   Half of the EVIL BASTARDS are lucky they don't have a FUCKING BIG HOSE STUCK UP THEIR ARSE!

21 comments:

Mr. Mxyzptlk said...

And what would of happened with these innocent men who had three appeals


1991: Birmingham Six freed after 16 years


Paddy Joe Hill, Hugh Callaghan, Richard McIlkenny, Gerry Hunter, Billy Power and Johnny Walker, who between them have served 96 years for a crime they did not commit.

We have Human rights to protect us from the state(especially Nationalist ones) and from people such as yourselves who would string people up on the flimsiest of evidence.

Dark Lochnagar said...

Mixedupgreek, welcome to the blog. Obviously there are examples lke the Reault five and the Birmingham six, who BTW IMO were guilty of something. There would be nothing to stop them having all the appeals they wanted, all I am saying is that the State shouldn't pay for them. They get the trial and their first appeal, then they pay for it themselves. There would be plenty of Barristers would take it on Pro Bono. I wouldn't have the death penalty for people who commit a single act of murder but serial killers like Shipman, Brady and Nilsen should be done away with. They are a stain on humanity and even under the present rules should never get parole. I am willing to concede that someone who kills on the spur of the moment may have a case for some leniancy, but if they murder time after time, there can be no excuse for letting them survive.

Harbinger said...

I remember reading some very interesting articles on the Soham murderer Ian Huntley. There is a possibility that he is in fact innocent of the murders of Jessica and Holly. This article (here) shines new evidence on the case.

Remember the papers had already tried and found him guilty before the courts did. There are just far too many oddities regarding this case.

You no doubt know all about the Holly Greig case and the massive cover up there, leading to the murder of Holly Greig's uncle (by the establishment). It is believed that Huntley took the rap because of his love for his partner, who was no doubt facing prison as well.

If you ask me, I reckon he was framed in order to cover up for paedophiles in the USAF Lakenheath nearby.

How many innocent people would still be in prison were it not for appeals? How would you feel stuck in prison, knowing you're 100% innocent, hated by the public because they believe what they read in the media, itself a terribly controlled information (read propaganda) outlet?

You, I and many who are waking up from being plugged into a false reality know that possibly 95% of what we read in the news, see on the TV and listen to on the radio is lies.

More so, how many people are actually in prison through their own consent of accepting the law of the sea (corporate law/Admiralty law)?

One day the truth will out and I'd hate to be those people who have been lying to the public for so long. I see visions of people strung up by their feet being, dead, opened up, urinated on and hacked at, all to vent the anger of the public, when it eventually loses it. And they'll deserve everything they get!

Harbinger said...

(cont)

The thought of being locked up all day in a cell, sharing with another is too hard to bear.

The thought of being locked up all day in a cell sharing with another, knowing 100% that I'm innocent would drive me to complete and utter insanity. I would lose it. I would lose all compassion for anyone. I would turn into a mad animal. The beast would be released within and I would most undoubtedly start inflicting grievous bodily harm upon people. So ironically, they would create a criminal from a law abiding member of the public.

Could you imagine being locked up and totally innocent? No amount of money in compensation could make up for incarceration. What about that poor f*cker Sean Hodgson, 100% innocent and locked away for 27 years?? Then there was Stefan Kiszko, Stephen Downing, Barry George, Derek Bentley (and more spoken of in the link for Hodgson) and what about those hanged for murder, in the same boat?

People only ever realise reality when it hits them. I'd like to see all those people complaining about this situation when they find themselves in prison unlawfully, with a failed appeal, screwed by the state and framed for something they never committed.

How would you feel DL?

Harbinger said...

DL,

I have another far more detailed account of The Soham Murders case:

THE CASE OF THE SOHAM BADGERS - Ian Huntley and Maxine Carr

Enjoy!

Jim Baxter said...

Usua glossing over of facts, distortions and insupoortable assertions - 'it couldn't have taken this long,' typical of conspiracy theories there.

Huntley changed the tyres on his car - he was nailed becuase he didn't change the insides of the wheel arches too. The pollen profile matched the site where the bodies were found.

What were the B6 guilty of DL? They lied about the fact that they were going home to an IRA man's funeral. Anything else?

Mr. Mxyzptlk said...

Jim Baxter

could be on a jury near you........FFS

Harbinger said...

Jim Baxter,

Ever heard of fabrication?
There's no doubt in my mind that many people currently residing at the pleasure of her majesty are 100% innocent.

Remember, if the establishment can murder David Kelly and related to this case as in paedophilia, the brother of Anne Greig who's husband molested their down syndrome daughter and was part of a paedophile ring, then don't you think it would be incredibly easy/possible to frame an innocent man, by drugging, blackmailing and torturing him, all in order to keep relations happy with Americans, whom at the time we were in a war with in Iraq, for the pursuit of oil?

And yes, 'conspiracy theorists....'
Hmm....All I can say is thank goodness for them, those seekers of truth who continue to ask questions that others won't, either because they're too stupid too or because it will affect their current business position in life.

Dark Lochnagar said...

Harbinger, first of all if you read my comments, I would only use capital punishment for serial killers. Huntley committed a double murder, that's not a serial killing.I've no doubt that there are people inside who shouldn't be there, same as there are people walking about who should be inside. I also have no doubts that evidence has been fabricated to get innocent men inside. My point is that they should get the original trial and their first appeal on legal aid after that they should pay for it themselves. There will be plenty of barristers who will take the case, pro bono to try and make their name. Christ, I just got a sense of deja vu there. I could have sworn I said that last night, maybe not, I was half pished. When someone goes to prison for a serious crime like taking the life or lives of other human beings, they should IMO have no rights while in prison apart from the ones that the prison and the system sees fit to give them. It's a bit like these animal rights nutters. Animals don't have rights apart from the ones, we as a society give them, prisoners should fall into the same situation. No system is going to be 100% failsafe but going by what you are saying everyone is stitched up and our prisons should be empty in case someone is in there who is innocent. Ridiculous.

Dark Lochnagar said...

James, I have no doubt the B6 were up to something if not the crime they were convicted of. But that's just my assertion, I have no proof. Aye, there are innocents inside but there are also guilty people outside who should be in. There are also people who were guilty and got off because of our Jury system. No system is perfect, but I think ours is as close to perfect as can be, at least it would be without the 'flying squad's' fit them up policy of a few years ago.

Dark Lochnagar said...

Mixedupgreek, How would you feel if your wife, mother, father was murdered. If the police told you they had a suspect who they were sure was 99% guilty would that be enough or would you say if it's not 100%, I'm not interested. If you accepted 99% how low would you go. 95%, 90%, 80%, 75%, 50%? You tell me.

banned said...

DL, a retired magistrate once told me that it is entirely likely that each prison landing contains at least one innocent inmate.
Worse, as long as he maintains his innocence he will be inside for the full stretch with no parole since he can show no 'remorse' nor take part in re-hab programmes as the lying guilty lags do.

On a lighter note, that cunt X Police Commander Ali Dizaei (jailed for trying to stitch up an Iranian web-designer who he owed money to) will be delighting the Legal Aid Community by claiming that his cell mate beat him up and poured said slops (bucket of shit'n'piss) all over him. His cell mate is counter sueing that Dizai asaulted him

Independent On Sunday, Dizai gets Slopped

@Harbinger, interesting links, ta.

Dark Lochnagar said...

Banned, I've no doubt, but by the same respect many must get off. No system can be perfect. On your lighter note, fuck him!

Jim Baxter said...

H,

The Seriuos Fit-Up squad are still very active, no doubt about that. Look at wat they tried to do to Colin Stagg and did do to Barry George.

The objection to what's in the link is ignorant sweeping remarks to the effect that it doesn't take 13 hours to establish that a badger's sett is just that. No it doesn't but it might to establish that there are no human remains. Those people don't do things by halves. Once they start on a site the sift for any human remains, not just whole bodies. That's why that story stinks - grabs at the first conclusion that suits the conspiracy - thinking further might spoil it.

DL, I don't know what you're on about regarding the B6. If they didn't plant the bombs - and they didn't - or help them to be planted they were innocent.

Dark Lochnagar said...

James, I have no doubt they were innocent, but why were they arrested in the first place. I don't think, but I may be wrong, that if the Police want to fit someone up, as they did in those days, they just pick someone off the street. Or am I incorrect. I don't know what the B6 were up to, but it would have have to be something at least connected with the bombings for them to have been arrested in the first place. Did they not find explosives on one of their hands or something.

Jim Baxter said...

DL,

The police were watching all the boats to Ireland, reasonably enough. Some of the B6 group were due to attend an IRA man's funeral. It was a community duty as they saw it, not a political thing. They lied about this, not suprisingly in the circumstances really, and the lie got found out.

Then they were picked up and a discredited test administered by a bumbling oaf of a chemist, Frank Skuse, suggested they'd been handling nitro. That was good enough for the cops who beat the living shit out of them and threatened to have their families mudered. They got beaten again by the prison warders.

Trouble was, the test was crap - it also showed up positive for varnish and playing cards. The men had been in pubs with varnished counters and had been playing cards. Judge's summing up was nothing short of criminal.

Harbinger said...

DL,

Hello on this fine Sunday (and I'm typing to you - LOL)

My mention of Capital punishment was simply to mention those poor bastards who were innocent and murdered by the state.

Regarding Huntley, I'd like to see a proper trial, not a show one. I'd like to know why he was sent to a high security mental institution and drugged out of his head. I'd also like to see the other questions answered, especially asked by Roy Whiting in the article on the second link at justjustic.org. There are too many discrepancies and if you're going to lock a man up for a very long time, then you need to know that you're 100% correct in doing so and for all information out. (P.S. you're welcome Banned)

Regarding legal aid, what if these people are poor DL? If the first is paid by the state, evidence is fabricated to keep them in, what then? This is what I propose - AN END TO LEGAL REPRESENTATION, BY PEOPLE WHO ARE PAID FAR TOO MUCH MONEY TO DO SO. In doing so, children (and people) are educated on their rights and how to represent themselves in a court of law. After all, why bother going full out to defend someone, when it's their neck on the line and not yours? Therefore, we take back our common law for the people, kick out the law of the sea (Admiralty/corporate law) and we wise up. That is there will be no lawyers in society profiteering off of society and thus many cases simply wouldn't end up in court, possibly 75%. It's time for personal responsibility and as far as I'm concerned, no one can defend themselves better than themselves. Learn how to defend yourself physically and orally. That's what I believe.

I'm beginning to have second thoughts about prison. Firstly it should be up to the family to decide the punishment of the convicted, not another. Although there is the rule of impartiality, if murderers had to face the verdict of the family, which would be through emotion then murderers would think twice about murdering. I know this may sound to those who know my stance on emotion and logical common sense logic, but I don't agree in locking people up, firstly because it costs too much money and secondly they go in and come out no different, many doing exactly the same when they get out that got them there in the first place! But then to contradict myself, what about those poor sods who are stitched up? Again this is a tricky situation and something that I'd need to seriously think about. Then I'll give you your answer.

Remember DL, there are many reasons why people kill. it's not so clear cut as made out. Sure there is premeditated murder and manslaughter, but the outcome is still the death of someone. I'll get back to you when I've thought more on this. Hell, I may even write about it on my blog.

Harbinger said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Harbinger said...

JB,

There are too many discrepancies regarding the Huntley case. This can be seen by all who read it. What is needed is a retrial with all brought in that was previously disallowed by the court.
Once everything has been brought to light and discussed can we only then come to a conclusion. As I stated in my reply to DL, if you're going to lock up a man for a very long time, you'd better have good reason and evidence to do so.

Having read the evidence, I'm of the belief that he was stitched up to cover up a very possibly paedophile ring involving the USAF and possible local authorities. Sure my conspiracy senses are tingling, but as said, I think the Huntley trial was a joke and everyone should be given a fair, unbiased trial regardless of crime.

Dark Lochnagar said...

James, fair enough, I bow to your superior knowledge on the circumstances. Can you not lock an Irishman up for playing cards? Only asking!

Dark Lochnagar said...

Harbingers, if you're worried about someone going to jail and coming out and committing the same crime, jail is obviously not working. Therefore if you took the American three and out rule, but gave it a wee twist in that they would face corporal punishment the third time, unless it was for something really petty like a wean nicking sweets out of a shop, I could guarantee you that the crime rate would drop like a stone and then you could say that prison was working. If you think that's too harsh, you could make it 5 and out, or 7, or whatever. Just throwing it into the ring for consideration!