What’s going on with our justice system?

She is nuts, but then we have a society that won't lift a finger to help

Why the **** should we lift a single finger to help someone who entered this country illegally in the back of a wagon? The only help she should've received from us is a one way ticket back to Albania. And if that was the case then this innocent little girl would still be alive today.
 
Why the **** should we lift a single finger to help someone who entered this country illegally in the back of a wagon? The only help she should've received from us is a one way ticket back to Albania. And if that was the case then this innocent little girl would still be alive today.
What? We should help by having a tight border and send people back who shouldn't be here, why let them stay!

We should fund mental health, so much is pushed onto the police.
 
Last edited:
Why the **** should we lift a single finger to help someone who entered this country illegally in the back of a wagon? The only help she should've received from us is a one way ticket back to Albania. And if that was the case then this innocent little girl would still be alive today.
If she was sent back to Albania then she would probably be as dangerous there as she was here. Would seem borderline irresponsible to just ‘ship her away’ rather than detaining her for safety.

This case just seems such a tragedy. The killer clearly wasn’t sane and there just wasn’t the ability or willingness to make sure she was under control. Seems like a gross failure of our care facilities - hard to understand how someone known to be so dangerous was just left to their own devices.

I just wrote out a story of a shocking lack of help / responsibility from the police and social services but it’s too personal to share - bottom line is that I know how **** the system is when someone sick is in dire need of help.
 
"prosecution directed the jury to find her not guilty on mental health grounds."

It should be deported along with anyone else who came with it.

The UK is soft to people like this it's not funny.

"Skana told the nurse: “It was premeditated, I waited in a park and picked my victim, I did what I did then tried to run"

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news...lear-woman-of-murdering-emily-jones-in-bolton

Not so mad after all. Only in the UK.
 
Last edited:
What’s the point in having a jury if they are going to be told what to say?
From the Guardian article linked by @deuse:
The judge, Mr Justice Wall, directed the jury to formally return a not guilty verdict after the prosecution withdrew the murder charge and offered no further evidence.
I believe also that:
A jury must reach its verdict by considering only the evidence introduced in court and the directions of the judge. The jury does not interpret the law. The jury must follow the directions of the judge as regards legal matters.
I think that the significant lesson to be taken from this is that our support and treatment services for mentally ill people in this country are completely unsatisfactory.

It is not relevant what the mentally deranged person in this case was doing in the UK; that is and should be an entirely separate question.
 
I think she also stabbed one of her parents? amongst other things If so highlights how she is mentally unstable, coupled with the police finding all of her medication; months worth If I remember correctly in her flat.
Murder charge would have never stuck unfortunately.

Sad state of affairs all around and again someone who slipped through the cracks and was not monitored.
Having had previous of stabbing and attacking peopler they should have bumped her up the to watch list at least (assuming that's what they do)
 
Why the **** should we lift a single finger to help someone who entered this country illegally in the back of a wagon? The only help she should've received from us is a one way ticket back to Albania. And if that was the case then this innocent little girl would still be alive today.

I disagree entirely and I don't even believe this is relevant to the incident.

What is relevant is the person clearly had issues. Was given medication and deemed to be fit to be released into the public domain.

Now we don't know what, how or why. For all we know she could have been okay 2 years ago yet worsened over time to the point she's clearly not okay. I don't think we will ever know. She could have been not fit from the start I don't know.

The real issue is a young innocent child is dead. I don't think that is a border control issue or immigration issue. It's a social issue and policing issue.

The fact she entered this country illegally has zero relation to what happened other than it happened in this country.

We should be focusing on the real issue which is the tragedy of a young innocent death. However unsurprisingly ocuk has turned this into an immigration issue.

I'm sure we also have people like this born in the UK. So let's say they illegally entered France and Frances response was to send them back here to kill kids you don't have a problem with that? I'd rather they stopped them from killing kids anywhere. Focus on the real issue which is the innocent child being dead due to a failed social system if I had to choose between child deaths and no immigrants and no child deaths and immigrants I know which I'd prefer.
 
From the Guardian article linked by @deuse:I believe also that:I think that the significant lesson to be taken from this is that our support and treatment services for mentally ill people in this country are completely unsatisfactory.

It is not relevant what the mentally deranged person in this case was doing in the UK; that is and should be an entirely separate question.

Thank you for the explanation sir, so it is the CPS that have let the family down.
 
Thank you for the explanation sir, so it is the CPS that have let the family down.
No . . .
I think that the significant lesson to be taken from this is that our support and treatment services for mentally ill people in this country are completely unsatisfactory.
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) are not responsible for the support and treatment of mentally ill people in the UK.
 
From the Guardian article linked by @deuse:I believe also that:I think that the significant lesson to be taken from this is that our support and treatment services for mentally ill people in this country are completely unsatisfactory.

It is not relevant what the mentally deranged person in this case was doing in the UK; that is and should be an entirely separate question.


Oh, shock, so sorry, thanks for again reminding us that illegal immigrants committing murder is our own fault for not spending enough money on them and their needs. You really are so wet that all the huckaback towels in the world could never dry you. What an insult to the parents of this victim. I have a cheap and simple solution for the likes of this woman, as I have for mad dogs.
 
What’s the point in having a jury if they are going to be told what to say?

A judge in the UK can't tell a jury to deliver a guilty verdict, only a not guilty one (Wang, 2005).

In the past, that wasn't true. A judge could tell a jury to deliver a guilty verdict if it was absolutely clear that the defendant was guilty. But the jury doesn't have to do it. Juries retain the right to deliver their own verdict, regardless of what a judge says. Clive Ponting is a famous example. He absolutely, definitely and without question was guilty of the charge. No doubt about it. The evidence was overwhelming and he freely admitted it. The judge directed the jury to deliver a guilty verdict and the jury refused and declared Ponting not guilty instead even though he was guilty and all the jury knew he was guilty. The jury decided that the law was wrong. Juries have a great deal of power.

A judge telling the jury to deliver a not guilty verdict is essentially the judge saying that a guilty verdict would be legally wrong and would definitely be quashed on appeal. Once a trial by jury has started, a jury verdict is required. The case can't be dismissed by the judge, regardless of how badly it has collapsed. Even if, for example, the defendant was accused of stealing something and it was discovered partway through the trial that the thing hadn't been stolen at all and had just slipped between the cushions of a sofa and the defendant was on the moon at the time anyway, a jury verdict would still be required.

In this case, the murder charge ceased to exist. The prosecution withdrew the murder charge. But the jury could have convicted her of murder anyway, if they wanted to, regardless of what the judge said. That would have just been a waste of the time and money needed for an appeal, but they could have done it.
 
Oh, shock, so sorry, thanks for again reminding us that illegal immigrants committing murder is our own fault for not spending enough money on them and their needs. . . .
How on Earth did you arrive at that conclusion based on anything at all that I wrote?

Let me repeat:
I think that the significant lesson to be taken from this is that our support and treatment services for mentally ill people in this country is completely unsatisfactory.
 
Back
Top Bottom