What planet do judges come from?

Spitfir3 · 4 Nov 2011 at 17:36

The judge ruled that the detention had been lawful for most of that period, but had been illegal between January and May 2011 because attempts to establish his nationality had faltered and there had been no realistic prospect of deportation.

This just shows how inefficient and rubbish the whole system for processing illegal immigrants is. I guess our HR act "See the European Convention on Human Rights" is to blame for this.

So, the government has an obligation to take reasonable care that, we, the people, will not be adversely affected by this dude. The action taken is pathetic. Therefore they are breaching their duty.... right?

muon · 4 Nov 2011 at 17:38

So basically they imprisoned him between January and May 2011, for the sake of imprisonment?

The judge ruled that the detention had been lawful for most of that period, but had been illegal between January and May 2011 because attempts to establish his nationality had faltered and there had been no realistic prospect of deportation.

I'm guessing the law doesn't allow you to imprison someone in such a scenario.

RobSmith · 4 Nov 2011 at 17:45

These sort of ridiculous stories are happening on an all too regular occurrence now.

I honestly don't give a monkeys any more.. it just happens time and again.

I'll get on with my life and let the country go to **** and hopefully when I've made enough to leave, I'm gone.

Glaucus · 4 Nov 2011 at 17:52

Why the constant rage at judges. They have to follow guidelines.

RobSmith · 4 Nov 2011 at 17:55

AcidHell2 said:
Why the constant rage at judges. They have to follow guidelines.

It's not the Judge's I have a problem with, it's the twisted and illogical system they enforce.

TJM · 4 Nov 2011 at 17:56

bloodiedathame said:
There are a lot of do-gooders on this forum, and I'd like to hear some of them try and justify this... Until then I'll smirk at Daily Mail type comments.

I'd have thought that the need for protection from arbitrary and indefinite detention would be obvious, but I guess not.

The Home Office cannot keep you locked up just because it doesn't know what to do with you. If you have committed criminal offences, the courts can sentence you to imprisonment. If you are facing deportation, the Home Office can detain you. If the Home Office has no idea where to deport you to and has given up trying to find out (as they did for five months, it seems), they can't lawfully hold you because the deportation process has effectively stopped.

shoes said:
Finally? It's been mental for years. Since 1964 it's just gown downhill faster and faster, and with it the left wing lunatics and their socialist wishy washy views have chipped away at the legal system

Oh dear. Why are so many people who hate socialism and big government in favour of the government being able to deny people their rights at its pleasure?

It really baffles me. For some reason, the unjustifiable detention of a man for several months just annoys me more than unemployed people being able to buy food or get medical treatment.

utajoker · 4 Nov 2011 at 17:58

what do you call a judge with no thumbs?

Justice fingers.

I_M_Weasel · 4 Nov 2011 at 18:08

I do not understand how any asylum seekers end up in the UK, we don't border any countries with shocking human rights, I don't think the ROI is persecuting innocents. Surely if you're really in fear of your life you escape your country and stop in the first one you get to - I don't believe the first safe country they've reached is the UK.

PapaLazaru · 4 Nov 2011 at 18:13

The laws in this country need an overhaul. Immediately.

RobSmith · 4 Nov 2011 at 18:14

TJM said:
Oh dear. Why are so many people who hate socialism and big government in favour of the government being able to deny people their rights at its pleasure?

It really baffles me. For some reason, the unjustifiable detention of a man for several months just annoys me more than unemployed people being able to buy food or get medical treatment.

Whilst I can see where you're coming from, and there are probably cases of unlawful imprisonment that did warrant compensation, I fail to see how you can possibly feel any sympathy for someone who so blatantly abused and flouted the system that granted him asylum and provided for him..

domthecondom · 4 Nov 2011 at 18:16

WTH....i swear i am one of the only idiots who comes to england to work :|

cheets64 · 4 Nov 2011 at 18:16

I_M_Weasel said:
I do not understand how any asylum seekers end up in the UK, we don't border any countries with shocking human rights, I don't think the ROI is persecuting innocents. Surely if you're really in fear of your life you escape your country and stop in the first one you get to - I don't believe the first safe country they've reached is the UK.

Thats what Multiculturalism and Enrichment gives you, nothing but vermin leaving countries and saying they are a "political refugee"

Country is a joke

SexyGreyFox · 4 Nov 2011 at 18:28

Rich_L said:
Probably a planet where they know the relevant law and the facts of the case.

Exactly what I was thinking.

PermaBanned · 4 Nov 2011 at 18:29

I did have hope that the link would be about Assange

Vonhelmet · 4 Nov 2011 at 18:30

Clearly half the posters on here don't understand the law. He's being compensated for having been falsely imprisoned. The judge isn't taking his other crimes into account because they aren't relevant to his imprisonment, because he wasn't being imprisoned with regard to those crimes, not least because they hadn't been committed at that point.

Redz · 4 Nov 2011 at 18:33

utajoker said:
what do you call a judge with no thumbs?

Justice fingers.

TJM · 4 Nov 2011 at 18:35

RobSmith said:
Whilst I can see where you're coming from, and there are probably cases of unlawful imprisonment that did warrant compensation, I fail to see how you can possibly feel any sympathy for someone who so blatantly abused and flouted the system that granted him asylum and provided for him..

I don't sympathise with him particularly, but the government should not be allowed to get away with unlawfully detaining anyone. If judges awarded no damages in cases involving scumbags, the government would be free to detain anyone who wasn't sufficiently popular with the public and any damage done to their lives in the several months that it would take for the judge to order their release would just be too bad for them.

semi-pro waster · 4 Nov 2011 at 18:35

shoes said:
Finally? It's been mental for years. Since 1964 it's just gown downhill faster and faster, and with it the left wing lunatics and their socialist wishy washy views have chipped away at the legal system until crimes like rape, murder and paedophilia are trivialised, re-offending rates have sky rocketed, the cost of keeping people in prison is astronomical and the good natured, hard working law abiding citizen get's ****** in the arse more every day.

RIP Great Britain.

Like stockhausen I'm curious about this point, why specifically 1964? What happened on that date to trigger the decline of the legal system in Great Britain?

Vonhelmet said:
Clearly half the posters on here don't understand the law. He's being compensated for having been falsely imprisoned. The judge isn't taking his other crimes into account because they aren't relevant to his imprisonment, because he wasn't being imprisoned with regard to those crimes, not least because they hadn't been committed at that point.

Indeed, judges deal with the instant case only and then when it comes to sentencing they can consider relevant factors with regard to their judgement.

Redz · 4 Nov 2011 at 18:40

semi-pro waster said:
Like stockhausen I'm curious about this point, why specifically 1964? What happened on that date to trigger the decline of the legal system in Great Britain?

Harold Wilson being elected as Labour Prime Minister in 1964?

RobSmith · 4 Nov 2011 at 18:42

Vonhelmet said:
Clearly half the posters on here don't understand the law. He's being compensated for having been falsely imprisoned. The judge isn't taking his other crimes into account because they aren't relevant to his imprisonment, because he wasn't being imprisoned with regard to those crimes, not least because they hadn't been committed at that point.

My point in case, he's being compensated on the basis of just his false imprisonment, despite how much money he has cost the country with all the felonies he has committed, the the whole legal system is a joke.