Thought Crime?

[Loosehead]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7242724.stm
The defence claimed they where prosecuted for "Thought Crime", I can see their point, do you think they are extremists or just curious Walter Mitty types?

[sp1814]

It's a big old can of worms.

However, I think the prosecution felt that there was a greater chance of conviction a) because of the current climate and b) because in the eyes of the jury - it wasn't just a simple matter of a single download, but the addition of 'talk' of going abroad to fight.

Big grey area...if they were convicted simply because 'they look like type to become terrorists' then you turn the whole idea of jurisprudence on it's head.

Dodgy.

What if I downloaded a speech by Abu Hamza simply because I wanted to see what he had to say for himself? Could I be done???

[nedflanders]

Whats the difference between what these guys did and downloading child porn? You can be jailed for the latter but as I see it, its the same thing.

[Bewlay Bros]

The thing that annoys me with these child-raping muslims is whenever they are trouble they ALWAYS have an equally foul and odious muslim lawyer.

Why? Are they so insecure about their camel humping faith that they have to have a pig-stinking raghead to insure legal rights?

If as a white man, you were arrested for lets say, disorderly conduct at a Fox Hunt would you care what race, gender or religion your brief is?

Likewise if you were black would you care if your lawyer was a James or a Winston Man when you are arrested for, lets say, stabbing somebody in South London after a crack deal has gone wrong?

The answer is probably no.

Muslim crimes, muslim lawyers. Baby-rapists unite.

[whiffey]

I am not bothered too much, in that I sincerely hope and believe that the security forces will now be keeping a VERY close and covert eye on them day and night.

Posters of the 9/11 bombers on the wall ?

Keep them covered guys.

[sp1214]

Why didn't the police come straight out with it. Instead of all this covert intelligence work why not approach them and ask what they intended to do with all this literature? They would tread more carefully in future.

[andy-hughes]

I entirely agree with the defence here - you canot prosecute someone for what they read, on the basis of what they 'might' do with the information. What next - arresting anyone who buys a copy of 'Dracula' because they might fancy biting the neck of a young maiden? It's a nonsense, and has only harmed the already fragile relationship between young Moslems and the British judiciary - this simply adds to the argument that they are persecuted for no reral reason.

Nedflanders - it is not remotely comparable. In order for child pronography to exist, children must be abused by adults which is a crime - voewing it perpetuates such abuse. That is a world away from any form of political activism which may or may not be viewed simply from an interested onlooker. Who can honestly say they are 'interested' in images of child abuse?

Wardy - I don't think a 'raghead' would be 'pig-stinking' - their faith denies contact with pigs. A 'James or a Winston' man - goodness, you are getting all your racist bases ccvered in one post aren't you! Feel better now?