 | Forum
Reply | Norwich City v Swansea City : Mach day thread
at 22:50 25 Jan 2025
Something doesn’t look right.
I feel for the fans who spent their hard earned travelling up to East Anglia, departed Swansea 4.30am, £53 for the supporters bus, £26 for the ticket, plus spends and a 5-1 spanking to cap it all. Not good. |
| Forum
Reply | The Southport attack and Starmer
at 22:45 25 Jan 2025
In the eyes of the law is reference to the judge and to the CPS who would have made the decision about which offences to Charge after reviewing the file.
In this case it’s clear Rudakubana’s actions fall within Section 2, however there is no evidence that the conduct was designed to influence government or an international governmental organisation or to intimidate the public or a section of the public AND that the use or threat is made for the purpose of advancing a political, religious [F2, racial] or ideological cause.
If the police had found evidence, I’m sure it would have been made public. The 3 referrals to Prevent didn’t identify any links with terrorism which is why they didn’t do anything with him apart from refer him on.
There definitely needs to be an enquiry regarding the way this kid was dealt with because to most of us there’d be alarm bells ringing. |
| Forum
Reply | Norwich City v Swansea City : Mach day thread
at 22:22 25 Jan 2025
A few weeks ago several posters commented that the club could get pulled in to a relegation battle, to be honest I didn’t think that would be the case, but 1 win in 6 v Luton who are in the drop zone and 4 points from 18 and it’s now looking very uncomfortable. The Swans form is the third worst in the league and the next 2 games sees them playing inform teams. Not good. |
| Forum
Reply | The Southport attack and Starmer
at 18:34 25 Jan 2025
I agree with you, it beggars belief something like this can happen in our society, but, sadly it doesn’t surprise me because there are some real sickos out there. Rubakana should spend the rest of his days in prison and never see the light of day again. [Post edited 25 Jan 20:32]
|
| Forum
Reply | The Southport attack and Starmer
at 18:14 25 Jan 2025
In the eyes of the law there is no evidence to support what you’re suggesting. If there was evidence to corroborate that this was a terrorist act it would have been discovered during the course of the investigation or obtained during the course of questioning.
We can speculate all we like, but in the absence of any hard evidence to the contrary, according to the Terrorsim Act 2000 it cannot be a classified as terrorist act. |
| Forum
Reply | The Southport attack and Starmer
at 17:48 25 Jan 2025
The fact he has an Islamic state manual doesn’t make him an Islamist, you could download a copy of it if you wanted to but that wouldn’t necessarily make you an Islamist? I could download a copy of Mein Kampf, but it wouldn’t make me a nazi. |
| Forum
Reply | The Southport attack and Starmer
at 17:45 25 Jan 2025
You may not be talking about religion, but some are - he is not an Islamist.
I’m not defending him. I have pointed out the legislation and the points to prove the offence was a terrorist offence. Unlike many, you’ll understand the importance of the points to prove. |
| Forum
Reply | The Southport attack and Starmer
at 23:57 24 Jan 2025
Where is the evidence he is an Islamist? He’s an autistic kid from a Christian family. The police and security services haven’t proved he’s an Islamist. |
| Forum
Reply | The Southport attack and Starmer
at 22:41 24 Jan 2025
Not sure I follow you.
Below is an extract from the Terrorism Act 2000.
To satisfy/prove that the offence was a terrorist act, the police have to prove a) b) AND c) - unless all 3 are proven it cannot be classified as a terrorist offence. It’s that simple.
This is what the judge alluded to and is the reason it’s not a terrorist offence.
The points to prove are:-
(1)In this Act “terrorism” means the use or threat of action where—
(a)the action falls within subsection (2),
(b)the use or threat is designed to influence the government [F1or an international governmental organisation] or to intimidate the public or a section of the public, and
(c)the use or threat is made for the purpose of advancing a political, religious [F2, racial] or ideological cause.
(2)Action falls within this subsection if it—
(a)involves serious violence against a person,
(b)involves serious damage to property,
(c)endangers a person’s life, other than that of the person committing the action,
(d)creates a serious risk to the health or safety of the public or a section of the public, or
(e)is designed seriously to interfere with or seriously to disrupt an electronic system. [Post edited 24 Jan 23:17]
|
| Forum
Reply | The Southport attack and Starmer
at 22:36 24 Jan 2025
If you apply the legal definition of Terrorism as per the Terrorist Act, the monstrous attack isn’t a terrorist act regardless of how it’s spun. |
| Forum
Reply | The Southport attack and Starmer
at 21:55 24 Jan 2025
“… but I wonder if the racial aspect has been fully investigated.”
I’m pretty sure the answer to that would be an overwhelming yes. This is a heinous monstrous crime and the security services, Special Branch and every other man and his dog would have been crawling all over it. On top of that the CPS and then the prosecuting barrister would have reviewed every aspect of the file. If they could gave proved the Terrorism aspect they’d have charged him either it. |
| Forum
Reply | The Southport attack and Starmer
at 18:37 24 Jan 2025
Check out the definition of terrorist act, it’s quite accessible as it’s online - the piece of legislation you’ll be looking for is the Terrorism Act 2000. What part of his actions last July make the offence complete?
In answer to your question, kill people lots of them but that doesn’t make his actions a terrorist offence. Harold Shipman was a mass murderer but he wasn’t a terrorist. For the offence to be a classified a Terrorist Offence the component parts of the definition (points to prove) have to be made out. [Post edited 24 Jan 18:38]
|
| Forum
Reply | The Southport attack and Starmer
at 18:02 24 Jan 2025
Anybody with half a brain will want justice for the victims and their families, the big difference is some right wingers are seeking to make this about race and to stir up racial hatred.
As SirJohnalot has previously said, barristers have take cases they may not want to and to deal with them to the best of their ability, I’d expect a professional barrister to do their job. The barrister in this case has done a decent job, entered a guilty plea and saved the families from even more anguish than they’ve already suffered. [Post edited 24 Jan 23:49]
|
| Forum
Reply | The Southport attack and Starmer
at 17:37 24 Jan 2025
If you apply the definition of a terrorist act as per the Terrorism Act 2000, it’s clear that Rudakabana’s conduct at the dance studio wasn’t terrorism. The guy is a monster, but his actions on that day did not amount to terrorism. Anyone that tells you otherwise is talking rubbish. |
| Forum
Reply | The Southport attack and Starmer
at 15:57 24 Jan 2025
There's no doubt there are questions that need answering, but the original post contains many inaccuracies and incorrect statements and has clearly been written by someone who has difficulty in understanding SOME of the issues surrounding this incident. The author is ranting about Starmer and the gangs, it was nothing to do with Starmer, he’s actually made it easier to prosecute offenders.
I [Post edited 24 Jan 16:20]
|
| Forum
Reply | We have too many...
at 21:52 23 Jan 2025
He is right that most contacts are in Primary Care, but that’s a very simplistic way of looking at it things. It’s clear that many beds in hospital are taken by people who don’t need to be there, but as care in the community is really poor and there is nowhere for patients to be discharged to what does he expect? Carers get a poor deal and often, with house prices as they are, 2 incomes required to buy a house etc lots of families struggle to support elderly and unwell family.
Maybe, if care was resourced properly we’d see less bed blocking and with advances in technology more day surgery etc etc and less stays in hospital, but resourcing care properly is years away. Too many hospitals, if we were a densely populated area like London maybe, but we aren’t, our population is spread overcast huge area and it doesn’t start and end in Cardiff.
I wonder if he thinks we’ve got too many politicians or too many local authorities?
Drakers just needs to retire and get lost - that’s the polite version!! [Post edited 23 Jan 22:31]
|
| Forum
Reply | And today’s stabbing murder is 12
at 23:29 22 Jan 2025
I’m not in agreement with the first sentence, but I agree with the rest. I would stop the short term sentences and try to ensure as much effort is put in rehabilitating through community based sentences, however when that approach fails I’d adopt a ruthless approach. Offenders would go down for a minimum 2 years and they would undergo educational activities, training programmes so when they come out they’ve been given the skills to make a good living without resorting to offending. If they don’t take the chance, then the next time it’s 4 years and so on. No half sentences, you serve what you’re given. |
| | majorraglan
|
Site Scores| Forum Votes: | 2648 | | Comment Votes: | 0 | | Prediction League: | 0 | | TOTAL: | 2648 |
|
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.