Doesn't This Make You Want To Weep?

[anotheoldgit]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3178456/Islamic-terrorist-prisoners-win-Supreme-Court-cas-segregation.html

Supreme-Court indeed, I wonder how much this cost the taxpayer?

[andy-hughes]

AOG - I have repeated this view many times, but it does bear repeating again -

the law and human rights legislation are not selective, they apply to everyone, that is the only way the law can function correctly.

Sympathetic with the idea as I am - on an emotional level - that sub-humans like this should be denied any and all rights, the law is dispassionate, and so it has to be.

The law does not operate on a sliding scale of perceived deservedness for its protection, it works for everyone, from the highest to the lowest, and so I am pleased to see that it is operating here - because that means it will continue to operate if you or I were to find ourselves in prison.

[whiskeryron]

Hand them some fruit, how about a pineapple each but make sure you remove the safety pin first.

[andy-hughes]

whiskeyron - very droll - and very unpleasant!

[chaptazbru2]

LOL wr ......

[anotheoldgit]

andy-hughes

So you are in favour of equal treatment for all prisoners regardless of whether they are TV licence dodgers, rapists, or mass murderers?

Don't certain measures have to be taken for the smooth running of the Gaol, and the safely and well being of the rest of the prisoners?

[Hypognosis]

I was only half-listening to this story when it was mentioned on the TV and the only bit which stuck was that they were "converting other prisoners" (to Islam, presumably). Was this the -main- reason behind the initial segregation?

(I will read into this in more detail when I can find time).


Note: in the USA, it is common for prisoners to "find God/Jesus", all of a sudden. There is an obvious and immediate payoff in that parole boards are complete suckers for a recent convert. This is not what I am on about. I don't think (maybe it's merely a hope) that British parole boards are swayed in any way by Islamic conversion, while imprisoned. It is just that the preachy ones have a - literally - captive audience and time on their hands.

[andy-hughes]

AOG - I have opined many times on the AB that, when someone opens a response with 'So ...' - it usually means that the response will indicate either that the original post has been misunderstood, or, as in this case, that the original post said something which it clearly did not say.

//So you are in favour of equal treatment for all prisoners regardless of whether they are TV licence dodgers, rapists, or mass murderers? //

No I am not in favour of equal treatment for all prisoners, and a firm indication of my disagreement is that I have never ever said that, and I did not say it in my post.

//Don't certain measures have to be taken for the smooth running of the Gaol, and the safely and well being of the rest of the prisoners?//

Absolutely, and that again is not argued by me - here or anywhere else.

The point of the issue is that the law was broken by the prison authorities - and they are not above the law.

Legislation applies to everyone under the justice system, and that is the point I was making.

It doesn't matter that the individuals may not appear deserving of the protection of the law, the fact remains that they are - and that is why their case was upheld.

Hope that has cleared up any misunderstanding.

[Mamyalynne]

The Human Rights side was not upheld..

//The pair had also raised human rights issues - they claimed their rights had been violated - but that aspect of their case was rejected by the Supreme Court.//


It was the Issue of segregation and how it was done that was upheld.

[andy-hughes]

Thanks Mamya - although I believe the thrust of my argument remains valid - the law was broken, that action was challenge was upheld, and that is the law in action.

[Mamyalynne]

Hard though it is to stomach, if there are rules about how things are done , they must be done that way or changed accordingly through proper channels.

Otherwise cases like this will increase.

[naomi24]

Yes, it does make me want to weep.

[douglas9401]

Are we absolutely sure that the supreme court isn't, in fact, run by The Supremes?
This might go some way to explaining some judgements handed down.

[anotheoldgit]

/// In 2012 Bourgass and Hussain, who denied trying to influence other inmates, failed to persuade appeal judges that their treatment was unlawful. But the Supreme Court ruled yesterday that their segregation did breach prison rules after initial periods of 72 hours. Legislation allows prisoners to be segregated, but not for more than 72 hours without the authority of the Secretary of State. ///

The questions that must be asked is why were the appeals judges not aware of this seemingly simple '72 hours legislation'?

Also who initially provides the prisoners with this information, so that they can appeal against their treatment?

[retrocop]

aog

//Also who initially provides the prisoners with this information, so that they can appeal against their treatment?//

People like Cheryl Blair and their ilk who virtually camp outside prisons with a wad of blank legal aid applications in their grubby hands.
Yes it does make you weep.

[DTCwordfan]

It doesn't make me weep - if any of us had our rights infringed, we would raise holy cane - it's a fundamental plank of our justice system. Discrimination is not an option to a fair and decent society.

Deportation is another issue - and that needs seriously looking at.

[DTCwordfan]

I can see some advocating that the whole principle of habeus corpus being removed if one extends the argument that there should be segregation and discrimination.....and bang would go the scales of justice in this country.

[andy-hughes]

AOG - most legal statutes, and I am sure prison regulations come under this umbrella - are in the public domain, so anyone can find out.

That is as it should be - rights should not be withheld from anyone on the basis that some people think they are not entitled to them.

[Togo]

Bourgass and Hussain represented by Dinah Rose QC instructed by Birnberg Pierce, who's 'firm' have represented many infamous terrorists. The charity 'The Howard League for Penal Reform was represented at court by Edward Fitzgerald QC whose previous clients include Abu Hamza ( the one with hooks ) and Myra Hindley. Strange the causes some people choose to specialise in.

[DTCwordfan]

Human rights, togo, is a perfectly credible branch of law and often involves immense specialism as a detailed knowledge of other legal systems is required. I have a friend who specialises in this - along with Indian and Pakistani law - it pays well but then it does require a lot of dedication and skill.