The law is an ass ( hole )

Discussion in 'Current Affairs' started by hobbit, May 12, 2006.

Welcome to the Navy Net aka Rum Ration

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial RN website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. Dunno how accurate the report is concerning the recent plagarism case and the Da Vinci Code but the report stated that the judge in the case , when writing his findings, found time to write code in his report. For the money he's being paid it demonstrates what type of professionalism we have in charge of the law these days. No wonder democracy is RS,

  2. Most judges are senile old farts.The rest ar kiddie-fiddlers.
    It makes me laugh when they talk about contempt of court; anyone with an IQ above single figure has nothing but contempt for our pathetic excuse for a legal system.
    The main problem with judges is thay forget who pays their wages. They actually think their worthless views and beliefs matter!
    Judges should be elected, just like politicians. And, since we pay their wages, we should be able to fire them when they screw up.
    Maybe then hijackers will end up where thy belong - not living in luxury at the expense of the Poor Bloody Txpayer!

  3. Amen to all of the above and in particular the words in red. Elected by the people not pollies and we should be able to fire any of the bastards for any number of offences in a Public Service Code of Conduct Act. They are getting away with bleedin' murder. A special group to keep an eye on wages travel holidays etc etc. The effing judges in Oz have a convention in Paris next year. Just happens to be when World Cup R/U is taking place . Funny that and how lucky.Grrrr

  4. A Lithuanian with a history of violence who murdered his flatmate three days after arriving in London should be deported, a judge has decided.

    Ricardas Navickas, 45, showed "a disposition to explosive violence" and was jailed for life at the Old Bailey earlier this month for battering Arturas Vilkauskas to death with a hammer.

    Navickas was let into the UK after serving a seven-year term in his homeland for attempting to murder his father by stabbing him in the head, neck and shoulder - leaving him permanently scarred.

    After considering his case, the Common Serjeant of London, Judge Brian Barker, recommended that he should be deported at the end of his sentence here.

    His continued presence in the UK after completion of his sentence "represents a genuine and sufficiently serious threat" that would affect the fundamental interests of society, he said.

    "You have twice showed complete indifference to the safety and welfare of those you might fall out with.

    "You represent a potential detriment to the UK if you remain at the end of your sentence, so I recommend you be deported at the appropriate time," said the judge.

    Navickas had killed his 33-year-old flatmate after a row during a vodka-drinking session.

    When Mr Vilkauskas fell asleep, he battered his head with a claw hammer.

    Navickas, from Plumstead, south London, had denied the murder on March 22 last year.

  5. The same people who attack the judges for being too lenient and then forget to deport them when they are released from jail.
  6. In fairness they’re not all incompetent. The media has the habit of reporting bad news because good news doesn’t sell papers or increase ratings. Its worth bearing in mind that the Judiciary spend a considerable amount of time and money learning their trade. Sadly when they finally reach the top spots in their profession they're usually inhibited by an incredible amount of “political interferenceâ€.

    There are also a few who seem to lose their marbles (with age) for example the guy who agreed that the Afghan Hijackers should be rewarded for their efforts by being allowed to remain in the UK. Now that is barking decision! As if free housing, medical health and benefits weren't enough to encourage these nutters.
  7. From a cost and efficiency standpoint, wouldn't it be much cheaper to just
    hang this twat now and deport his remains on Monday ?
  8. Totaly agree CheefTiff , except I'd hang all the twat's DONE for Murder ,Rape, Kidnapping , Messing with kid's , Terrorist Offences , etc etc,all the remains deported the next day , this once proud Country of ours is sinking into a sewer of it's own making , and it pisses me off no end . :roll: :lol:
  9. Silver Fox, you may be right that there are a number of good judges. But I know for a fact there a lot of others I would'nt trust to stack shelves in Tesco.
    The problem is that judges are an unelected elite who cannot be fired for incompetance. This makes them arrogant.
    Most of them live in very nice, safe neighbourhoods. So they don't have a clue about the impact crime has on those of us who cannot afford to live in their secure, elite enclaves.
    Judges makes shed-loads of money, have flunkies to cater to every whim and are generally treated like royality. Why the fcuk should I stand wwhen a judge comes into courtZ/ My taxes paid for his salary, his perks and his bloody silly wig.
    I firmly believe that most judges are so far out of touch with reality they could not contact it with a ten-foot pole.
    Military and police retire at 55 and can be fired before then if their performance is not up to scratch. Judges should be on the same type of contract.
  10. I have to disagree with this. Most of the judiciary do in fact resist political interference, as has been demonstrated in the last couple of decades by their willingness to rule Ministerial fiat ultra vires. The judiciary are also very resistant to political (or populist) interference in sentencing. A strong, independent judiciary MUST be free to adjudicate without unwarrented interference. This has not always been the case. In practice the judiciary are also conservative in their implementation of, for example, the Human Rights Act 1998.

    It has been suggested here that the judiciary should be elected, as in the US, but that would simply increase the possibility of miscarriages of justice and could also promote bigotry with the majority blaming minorities for wrongful acts. The media are very adept at labelling "others" for deviant behaviour, such as focussing on asylum seeks or "loners". Most offenders are just like you and me: they are NOT loners, they are NOT immigrants, in fact most are males below the age of 30 and you'll find most prisoners are married. The most common characteristic of prisoners are their propensity to smoke tobacco. Does it follow that most tobacco smokers are criminals? Of course not! Inconvenient facts are ignored by the media.

    Regarding stringing up people accused of certain types of crime. We should always be aware that too many innocent people get wrongfully punished. Where people are guilty, one should always consider the reason why they have committed those offences: these are not unnecessary impediments to justice but very relevant considerations. For example abortion used to be a serious offence. Were we to hang all women who had abortions this would have to include both the insane, the deliberately promiscuous as well as rape victims and children who have been sexually abused by a male family member or friend. This would be profoundly unjust.

    On a practical level, you'll find that many children, or to be more precise girls (who are the vast majority of victims), being sexually abused are abused by their dad, close male relative or close male friend of the family. Many sexually abused children are reluctant to come forward to the police/social services or even give evidence becuase they feel they are in part responsible, feel guilty, are worried about breaking up the family and their siblings going into care, amongst other reasons. Then there is the propensity of jurors to accept the abuser's excuse: the lawyers' "textbook" defence is that the husband's wife or partner was frigid and that he therefore abused his daughter.

    Severe penalties, as we saw when we actually still had capital punishment, and as was recorded during the so-called Bloody Code (eg. hanged for stealing a sheep), do not effect justice. In practice jurors are less likely to convict.

    On a naval parallel: when I was a Junior and ran away because, frankly, I was not mentally tough enough at 15 to cope with the training regime, I got 6 cuts. Although my messmates witnessing this barbaric ritual (and believe me, it WAS barbaric) may have been deterred, as intended, under a proper judicial system my remitting circumstances might have warranted a less severe, more appropriate, punishment!

    Justice should never be blind to circumstances.
  11. If not elected, they must at least be subject to regular checks on their competance by an independant body. And removed if they fail to meet the standards required. Police have to answer to the IPCC. The Armed Forces, who do a far tougher job than any judge can be Court Martialed if they screw up.
    It's very easy to blame the media. And to be honest, I would'nt p1ss on a journo to put out the flames. But any dispassionate appraisel of our legal system acn only come to one conclusion: that the judges, politicians and probation service are both cowardly and dangerously incompetant.
    Time and time criminals have recieved sentances which in no way fit the crime. The prisons themselves are holiday camps. And most cons serve only half their sentances anyway. They are released to pray on real people once more. If they are caught, some whore - sorry, lawyer - will tell a sob story to a judge who has never worked a day in his life, never beeen the victim of crime. The judge will then sentance Mr Worthless Scum to the minimum amount of time. Of which - you guessed it - he will serve only half before some Guardian-reading morons on a Parol Board let him out to to rape, steal, kill, sell drugs - or all four.
    The concept of an indepednet judiciary only works if the judges are of the highest calibre. The ones we have are strictly third-rate.
  12. Have you ever visited a prison?

    This is not automatic, but conditional upon good behaviour. Without it there would be few incentives for prisoners to behave themselves or, crucially, to try to change.

    Lawyers are paid either through legal aid or by their client to defend their client. That is their professional duty. If they do not they can be suspended or barred from practicing law. The alternative is the Soviet system, where lawyers are employed by the state: a very dangerous proposition.

    Me? Yes I like the Guardian, and the FT. Parole Boards are very careful only to release offenders, on licence, who satify the board that they have learned the error of their ways. If they reoffend, they find themselves back in custody.

    Incidentally you'll find many members of the judiciary have in fact served in the Forces! Or don't the Forces count as a real job?

    Our views again diverge here. Most of those I know are of a very high calibre!
  13. I don't think you can blame judges for some of the apparent silly sentences or rulings they make.

    The Judge basically is a reader of Law as written and by precedent so all he does basically is to define within the laws as they are written and of course listen and take note of defence and prosecutor findings during the hearing.

    Judgement ,Sentencing--and recommendations are usually set by the time honoured table of offences /sentences.or by precedent--what has gone before!!

    Bad news is the law makers [the commons/Lords etc] never seem to make the statutes in plain English or because they are so open to question
    when an actual trial or test is applied its a bit hard to define right from wrong .

    What seems unlawful -sometimes isn't .
  14. Why doesn't a life sentence mean Life, not 25 years with time off for good behaviour could mean they only serve half the sentence. Just recently we have seen persons let out on parole who have repeated their crimes with months and some caseds days after their release into the unsuspecting public.

    In the most heanious of crimes Life should mean WHOLE OF LIFE and do away with, in the case of multiple convictions have them run consecutively so that they do time for each crime, not lump them altogether like now
  15. Yep , agree with you there , and what's the betting the bastard up in South Sheilds , will only get charged with causing death by dangerous driving for killing a grandmother and causing utter misery to the rest of the family , in a stolen car , and get a couple of year's , it's a bloody joke , and yes if some one did it to one of my kid's [all grown up] , I would happily slot them , hold my hands up and do the 14 year life sentance ,cheap at half the price , coz you woud'nt do the full term anyway , so where is the deterent , there is'nt one , :roll: :lol:
  16. Fortunately the bastard who shot my son did the right thing and shot himself. Saved me the job
  17. No, I've never been in prison. I was never stupid/pathetic enough to break the law in the first place.

    All prisoners should serve the FULL sentance, whatever it is. If they don't obey the rules in prison - the sentance should be increased. That's the incentive right there.

    I dispise lawyers. But I grudgingly admit they are a necessary least until we abolish Trial by Jury and replace it with Trial by Chemical Interogation.

    Parole Boards get it wrong way too many times. Your comment that if the prisoner reoffends he will be taken back to jail is, frankly, stupid. By definition, it's too late; someone else has been hurt because the PB gave soem worthless scumbag the benefit of the doubt.

    Every British prison should be run on the lines of the US Super-Max; cons are in their cell 23 hours a day, 7 days a week. The bare minimum of luxuries - visits, exercise, books etc - are allowed.

    I know several people who work in so-called high security prisons. They all paint the same picture; drugs, porn, and luxuries like DVD players and peronnel computers are freely available. Screws are often sent out to shop for the inmates!

    I am sick and tired of people making excuses for criminals. Moomy did drugs? Daddy abused you? You grew up in a bad neighbourhood? Sorry, don't care. Obey the law or suffer the consquences. And the emphasis should be on SUFFER.

    Our legal system does not work. It protects the criminals. It either changes or we will see vigilantes hanging scum from lamposts. Either waay, the status quo is not an option.

    Oh, and I've met several judges in the course of on of my previous jobs. None of them were fit to lick my boots clean.
  18. Some interesting perspectives of the law indeed and I believe the general view of judges and lawyers is justifiably not good. I have been in prison many times as a visitor and in the region I was working most of the inmates are better off in gaol than where they live. Comfortable living, regular food, exercise, education, entertainment a lot of which many hard working and honest people on the outside cannot afford,PCs , gyms, swimming pools, basket ball courts, it goes on.
    Whatever is wrong with the system it certainly needs fixing and regardless of any good judges / magistrates/ lawyers too many are fkcingu crooked, twisted or perverted. I don't know the answer I admit but there must be one surely. Strangely enough many politicians are of the legal profession, surprise surprise

    Anyone involved with criminal behavior ( corrections sort of thing) will find Crime Times an interesting site
  19. Our legal system does not work. It protects the criminals. It either changes or we will see vigilantes hanging scum from lamposts

    I wouldn't trust a lamp post these days shipmate, they aren't strong enough. Use a tree instead.

    Although I am afraid that until we get rid of the pc brigade and the mummies boys who make the laws I fear that we shall just have to keep stumping up more and more taxes to keep them in their luxury en suite cells with all mod cons
  20. I stand corrected, CT. We'll try the Chinese PLA method; shoot them, then strip the organs for transplant.

    Sidon55: condolances on your loss. I hope the scum who killed your bairn is burning in Hell as I type this. Suicide is probably the one thing he did right with his waste of a life.

    If, God forbid, one of my family was killed, I would not hesitate to take the law into my own hands. I have absolutely no faith in our criminal (in)justice system.

    Ironically, if Siddon55 had killed the man who murdered his son, he would have no doubt recieved a longer sentance than the scumbag he shot would have got for murder!

    British justice. Soft on crime, soft on the causes of crime.

Share This Page