Poll: Poll: Terror vote 'will be very tight'

Do you think that terror suspects should be held for up to 42 days without charge?

  • Yes: Suspects should be held without charge for up to 42days

    Votes: 173 36.3%

  • No: Suspects should have the same rights as any other suspect

    Votes: 186 39.0%

  • It should be kept at up to 28 days.

    Votes: 118 24.7%
  • Total voters
    477
AcidHell2 said:
as all ready shown pretty much anything can convince them, even university students doing there course.
Click to expand...

Well no, because a judge wasn't involved in that case. The suspect was held under the normal powers given to police in terror cases.
 
AcidHell2 said:
Thus proving the point, that it's a law that should not be in existence.
Click to expand...

AcidHell2 said:
You are innocent till proven guilty, that's a fundamental part of are legal system,. This law undermines that and are entire legal system.
Click to expand...

You're innocent until proven guilty in a trial at a court. Holding suspects after charge but before trial is an affront to that principle as well. So is holding suspects before charge while the police investigate. Where do you draw the line between a presumption of innocence and protecting the public?
 
Jet said:
You're innocent until proven guilty in a trial at a court. Holding suspects after charge but before trial is an affront to that principle as well. So is holding suspects before charge while the police investigate. Where do you draw the line between a presumption of innocence and protecting the public?
Click to expand...

About 24hours like it always used to be. certainly not over a month. To charge you have to have sufficient evidence for the cps not to throw the case out, so then it is ok to hold someone till trial. But holding someone without charge and thus no evidence is a travesty.
 
Jet said:
You're innocent until proven guilty in a trial at a court. Holding suspects after charge but before trial is an affront to that principle as well. So is holding suspects before charge while the police investigate. Where do you draw the line between a presumption of innocence and protecting the public?
Click to expand...

A remand in custody post charge but pre-trial is an essential part of the justice system.

Ian Huntley, Mustaf Jamma, Peter Sutcliffe etc ...... could freeing them on bail post charge but before trial be justified ?
 
AcidHell2 said:
About 24hours like it always used to be. certainly not over a month.
Click to expand...

It takes more than 14 days to decrypt a hard-drive. Terror plots are so complex that it would be impossible to charge within 24 hours. Plus if you charge a suspect but don't have enough evidence to charge others I think you'll find the rest of the cell will disappear.

AcidHell2 said:
To charge you have to have sufficient evidence for the cps not to throw the case out, so then it is ok to hold someone till trial. But holding someone without charge and thus no evidence is a travesty.
Click to expand...

To detain someone longer than 14 days will require enough evidence to convince the judge, similar?

The second bit makes no sense. If there was no evidence the custody sergeant wouldn't even agree to the initial detention never mind a Crown Court judge agreeing to extend the detention.
 
Von Smallhausen said:
A remand in custody post charge but pre-trial is an essential part of the justice system.

Ian Huntley, Mustaf Jamma, Peter Sutcliffe etc ...... could freeing them on bail post charge but before trial be justified ?
Click to expand...

I know I agree. But it's still an affront to the presumption of innocence. My point is that the presumption of innocence needs to balanced against protecting the public.
 
I hope this gets rejected when put to the vote, but I have a feeling that it won't, not least because the Labour whips will do everything in their power to avoid a humiliating defeat for Brown when there's been speculation about a leadership contest.
 
I'm all for a extra 14 days,if a potential terrorist was released after 28 days then went on to plant a bomb or something related those who are against it would soon change their tune.

You dont become a terror suspect for doing nothing.
 
Deluxe1 said:
I'm all for a extra 14 days,if a potential terrorist was released after 28 days then went on to plant a bomb or something related those who are against it would soon change their tune.

You dont become a terror suspect for doing nothing.
Click to expand...

And if a potential terrorist planted a bomb on the 43rd day I'm sure you would change your tune yada yada what a flawed argument, going by your logic where do you draw the line?
 
When are people going to wake up to the fact this has nothing to do with terrorism and everything to do with control.If we just stopped worrying about it (or should I say stopped listening to their manipulations) terrorism would disappear. The 'threat' of terrorism is actually less than it used to be yet we are sleepwalking into becoming good little obedient drones.

Remember, governments are supposed to work for us, not the other way round. :mad:
 
Laws like these would be acceptable if we had a benevolent government and police force that could be trusted. Obviously the people voting 'yes' trust the charlatans we have in power, I simply can't understand why people would want these idiots to have even more power over our lives.

Take a look through history, never trust a government with your civil liberties, they're scum.
 
mr jamez said:
Laws like these would be acceptable if we had a benevolent government and police force that could be trusted. Obviously the people voting 'yes' trust the charlatans we have in power, I simply can't understand why people would want these idiots to have even more power over our lives.

Take a look through history, never trust a government with your civil liberties, they're scum.
Click to expand...

Haha, well said. :D
 
Von Smallhausen said:
Numerous cases have resulted in charge and conviction don't forget.

I am not anti liberty ....
Click to expand...

If innocent people must be locked up without charge then the system has failed the people, regardless of any convictions that may come from other non innocents being detained.

Also, you are anti-liberty if you support this law are the right to equal treatment under law is an essential liberty and it is being removed for one type of criminal.

The risk of being blown up does not outweigh the right to essential liberty.
 
Von Smallhausen said:
Sorry, but I can't agree where burglary is the factor.
Click to expand...

I have edited your quote. Re-read it and you'll see how absurd what you have posted is. Why is terrorism so special it needs to be excluded from common law?

Jet said:
It takes more than 14 days to decrypt a hard-drive..
Click to expand...

So? Given the level of encryption available it could take a lot longer or prove impossible. The police should do good old fashioned police work and gather evidence. It's not hard and doesn't need for somebody to be held without charge for 42 days nor will banging 'em up stop terrorism.
 
AJUK said:
When are people going to wake up to the fact this has nothing to do with terrorism and everything to do with control.If we just stopped worrying about it (or should I say stopped listening to their manipulations) terrorism would disappear. The 'threat' of terrorism is actually less than it used to be yet we are sleepwalking into becoming good little obedient drones.

Remember, governments are supposed to work for us, not the other way round. :mad:
Click to expand...

Ahh, the voice of reason, no wonder you are a man of honor.

/me agrees 100% and tips my hat to you sir! :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom