Spectator N0 2657 - Out The Back By...
Crosswords0 min ago
Should This Savage Be Granted Compensation?
69 Answers
http://
Well one of the judges seems to think highly of him.
/// 'He forms relationships easily,' the judge said. ///
/// 'He is charismatic. There is intelligence suggesting that he has had some influence on the conversion to Islam of some individuals.' ///
/// The judge added: 'There is a large group of people who look up to Adebolajo.' ///
Ah! that's nice isn't it? So pleased that he is getting along.
/// Mr Justice Langstaff said Adebolajo had not been given legal aid to pay for lawyers to represent him. ///
/// He said Adebolajo might have to represent himself at any trial and suggested that it would be in the interests of justice if public funding could be given. ///
/// 'If and when this case comes to trial it will be a great pity to justice, and in particular the presentation of the claimant's case, if some means were not found to ensure he had professional help,' said the judge.
'If that could be done by public funds all the better.' ///
Well one of the judges seems to think highly of him.
/// 'He forms relationships easily,' the judge said. ///
/// 'He is charismatic. There is intelligence suggesting that he has had some influence on the conversion to Islam of some individuals.' ///
/// The judge added: 'There is a large group of people who look up to Adebolajo.' ///
Ah! that's nice isn't it? So pleased that he is getting along.
/// Mr Justice Langstaff said Adebolajo had not been given legal aid to pay for lawyers to represent him. ///
/// He said Adebolajo might have to represent himself at any trial and suggested that it would be in the interests of justice if public funding could be given. ///
/// 'If and when this case comes to trial it will be a great pity to justice, and in particular the presentation of the claimant's case, if some means were not found to ensure he had professional help,' said the judge.
'If that could be done by public funds all the better.' ///
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by anotheoldgit. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Naomi - // andy-hughes, perhaps we should have a system whereby those who think people like him should have the same rights as everyone else contribute towards any compensation awarded. That’ll be you then. Personally, I wouldn’t give him a penny. //
I think I know you well enough to know that you are offering an imaginary solution in this instance - because if it was enacted, we would be in a serious situation.
What if a group of adults decided that they are going to withdraw a proportion of their payments towards the NHS because they don't agree with old people being kept alive? The list goes on and on and on, so I don't think we'll bother pursuing that any further, and put it down to you having a bit of a moment, rather than offering anything serious to the debate.
I think I know you well enough to know that you are offering an imaginary solution in this instance - because if it was enacted, we would be in a serious situation.
What if a group of adults decided that they are going to withdraw a proportion of their payments towards the NHS because they don't agree with old people being kept alive? The list goes on and on and on, so I don't think we'll bother pursuing that any further, and put it down to you having a bit of a moment, rather than offering anything serious to the debate.
Naomi - // He practically hacked Lee Rigby's head off - and we're indulging him for broken teeth? Crazy! //
We are not 'indulging him' for anything. His crime is reflected in the law's determination of his punishment.
That punishment does not include denial of rights - and if he has lost teeth through ill-treatment, then he is entitled to recompense, if that is proven. That's the law.
We are not 'indulging him' for anything. His crime is reflected in the law's determination of his punishment.
That punishment does not include denial of rights - and if he has lost teeth through ill-treatment, then he is entitled to recompense, if that is proven. That's the law.
ladybirder - // Where does he get the neck from to ask for compensation for broken teeth etc after what he did to Lee? //
Let's not make this personal shall we? I didn't know Mr Rigby, I doubt you did, so we are not debating this from an emotional point of view.
Mr Adebolejo does not require 'neck', he merely has to exercise his rights under the law, and that is what he is doing, the same as you or I can.
That is how the law works. It doesn't get skipped, or bent, or ignored or missed simply because he has committed a horrible crime.
If we start down that road, we lose our right to the moral high ground in dealing with people like him, and the cause for which he stands, and I for one am unwilling to see that happen.
Let's not make this personal shall we? I didn't know Mr Rigby, I doubt you did, so we are not debating this from an emotional point of view.
Mr Adebolejo does not require 'neck', he merely has to exercise his rights under the law, and that is what he is doing, the same as you or I can.
That is how the law works. It doesn't get skipped, or bent, or ignored or missed simply because he has committed a horrible crime.
If we start down that road, we lose our right to the moral high ground in dealing with people like him, and the cause for which he stands, and I for one am unwilling to see that happen.
andy-hughes, where do you get off telling those who disagree with your point of view that they're 'having a bit of a moment'? I meant what I said. In fact if it were really up to me I'd do with him what we, eminently sensibly, do with dangerous dogs - and I'd have no qualms about doing it. Is that a serious enough offering to the debate you appear to want to chair?
Naomi - // andy-hughes, where do you get off telling those who disagree with your point of view that they're 'having a bit of a moment'? I meant what I said. In fact if it were really up to me I'd do with him what we, eminently sensibly, do with dangerous dogs - and I'd have no qualms about doing it. Is that a serious enough offering to the debate you appear to want to chair? //
To quote our ex-Prime Minister - calm down dear!
To quote our ex-Prime Minister - calm down dear!
But seriously Naomi - I am not looking to 'chair' the debate at all, merely adding my view.
If I misunderstood your point, then I would apologise, but I know you don't regard my apologies as sincere, so let's move on.
You advise that you would shoot this man like a mad dog. I contend that in your mind you would, but in reality you would not, but that is merely a difference in view.
My opinion is this - do I find it teeth-gnashingly horrible that this odious creature has rights at all?
I absolutely do, but then I remember that the fact that the law gives him rights, means that those rights are there for me too, and you, and the rest of us, and that is what we must never lose sight of.
Laws make us civilised - not savage terrorists.
If I misunderstood your point, then I would apologise, but I know you don't regard my apologies as sincere, so let's move on.
You advise that you would shoot this man like a mad dog. I contend that in your mind you would, but in reality you would not, but that is merely a difference in view.
My opinion is this - do I find it teeth-gnashingly horrible that this odious creature has rights at all?
I absolutely do, but then I remember that the fact that the law gives him rights, means that those rights are there for me too, and you, and the rest of us, and that is what we must never lose sight of.
Laws make us civilised - not savage terrorists.
andy-hughes, you're repeating yourself. I know what you think, but please stop assuming that my thoughts are anything other than those I’ve conveyed. I didn't compare him to a mad dog, but to a dangerous dog, and I didn't mention shooting him either. A short, sharp, pain-free injection, like those we administer to dangerous dogs, would – in my opinion – and it really is my opinion - cure once and for all the problem that people like him present.
Andy....seems he lost his teeth through his own fault.....that's just tough...he put himself in every situation that's now harming him....he can't be compensated for that...that would be a mockery....
And I disagree with you about our laws making us civilised....they don't make me feel that way....they make me despair more and more by the day.....
If he is so charismatic and is influencing others then seeing him in an isolation cell at all times for the rest of his life wouldn't bother me one bit.....
Isn't allowing him to convert others a danger to your country?
Andy.....he gave up all rights to protection and a place in society when he killed Lee Rigby.....x
Apologies if I am repeating the posts of others......I'm cooking and noodling on AB......can't risk reading everything too...... x
And I disagree with you about our laws making us civilised....they don't make me feel that way....they make me despair more and more by the day.....
If he is so charismatic and is influencing others then seeing him in an isolation cell at all times for the rest of his life wouldn't bother me one bit.....
Isn't allowing him to convert others a danger to your country?
Andy.....he gave up all rights to protection and a place in society when he killed Lee Rigby.....x
Apologies if I am repeating the posts of others......I'm cooking and noodling on AB......can't risk reading everything too...... x
Naomi - // Banging on about his rights doesn't make us civilised - it makes us stupid. //
Personally, I am not 'banging on' about his rights, I am pointing out that in order for any of us to have rights, all of us have rights.
The notion that we can quietly take this man out and shoot / inject / torture, etc. etc. him is all well and good, but only as long as those who advocate are willing to do it, and I honestly believe that most keyboard warriors lack the courage to actually do these things, I do, and make no bones about it.
But secondly, and more importantly, when the erosion of rights that those of you have advocated come back to bite you - for example - someone has decided you are a paedophile and beats you senseless, and now you have no legal redress because you have chosen to abandon those rights - then you will be perfectly OK with that - won't you?
That way lies survivalists - and who wants to live in a society where the self-righteous brothers roam the streets dishing out summary justice according to their over-inflated opinion of high-handed morality which they have awarded themselves?
I'll stick with what we have thanks - it's far from perfect, but the alternative is too horrible to consider for long.
Personally, I am not 'banging on' about his rights, I am pointing out that in order for any of us to have rights, all of us have rights.
The notion that we can quietly take this man out and shoot / inject / torture, etc. etc. him is all well and good, but only as long as those who advocate are willing to do it, and I honestly believe that most keyboard warriors lack the courage to actually do these things, I do, and make no bones about it.
But secondly, and more importantly, when the erosion of rights that those of you have advocated come back to bite you - for example - someone has decided you are a paedophile and beats you senseless, and now you have no legal redress because you have chosen to abandon those rights - then you will be perfectly OK with that - won't you?
That way lies survivalists - and who wants to live in a society where the self-righteous brothers roam the streets dishing out summary justice according to their over-inflated opinion of high-handed morality which they have awarded themselves?
I'll stick with what we have thanks - it's far from perfect, but the alternative is too horrible to consider for long.
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.