and the coppers have to wear a silly costume with a giant tit on their heads.... sadly it IS a game, but a game where people wrongly get fined or put behind bars, a dangerous people who should be behind bars, walk the streets to rape again and where the system furnishes the nice big houses for the other clowns to park their nice big cars in front of. Ps: Was your partner a PC or WPC?...just askin'...(this is bait for a 'bent police officer' gag from Toro btw).:wink:
If you keep interpreting stuff you read as "condescending" that is what is commonly known as an inferiority complex. Brave of you to own up to it, though.
The whole objective of the "game" is to sort the sheep from the goats, so that the right ones get convicted and acquitted. The game is complex, and sometimes (not too often) it arrives at the wrong answer even though a load of very able people are doing their best to get the system to work properly. It's really easy to sneer, but much harder to effect actual improvements. If anybody has anything genuinely constructive to say, as opposed to vague whinging, I would love to hear it.
There are two options here, (A) a system in which only the rich have access to good lawyers so the poor go unrepresented; or (B) a system in which legal aid is available so that both rich and poor have equal access to good lawyers. Some people seem to disapprove of option (A) and other people sneer at option (B). Some, mystifyingly, even seem to dislike both. So which option is actually preferable?
That is simply not true in criminal cases. If you are accused of a serious offence which justifies a QC to defend you, the QC you get on legal aid can be just as good as any other, and just as good as the prosecution advocate or better.
How about speeding...or shoplifting...or fraud...seems the poor don't quite get the rub in these cases
there must be a lot of inferiority complexes about……or is it just the ones who challenge your posts then….
Coming up for sentencing tomorrow, apparently. Judges, Tribunals and Magistrates | 2013 | R -v- Marines A, B, C, D & E
+1 I hope there may be an appeal, and good luck to him, if there is. I don't condone what he did, but to name him was wrong.
The message is John don't film it, brag you are breaking the Geneva Convention and then keep the video on your laptop. Hey with good behaviour he'll be out in no time.
The Court Martial Appeal Court (which also reconstituted itself for part of the hearing as the Divisional Court of the Queens Bench Division) upheld the JAG's ruling, so the anonymity was therefore lifted.
