Begum Supreme Court Ruling Today

[fender62]

i wonder how this will turn out, the weka judges will erm probably let her return, thus allowing all the others to do the same, moneys no object or public safety only points of law matter.
https://news.sky.com/story/shamima-begum-is-bride-to-find-out-whether-she-can-return-to-the-uk-to-fight-citizenship-decision-12229127

[Jackdaw33]

Basically, in judicial language, the Supreme Court has told her that she can 'Rot in Hell'.

[jim360]

That may be your interpretation of it, but I am sure it is not theirs (and, even if it were, then it would be disgusting if they had let such emotions enter into a legal argument).

She has, as I say, one legal avenue left open to her, and that would presumably be decided, as and when it is ever heard, on the narrow issue of whether the decision left her stateless. The SC Judgement appears to accept as a matter of fact that Begum is not, and holds Bangladeshi citizenship; or, perhaps it was not open to them to make a finding on that matter. Since the Bangladeshi government has also expressed no desire to let her in or grant her citizenship, then perhaps her appeal would be successful.

But, even then, it comes back to our discussion about what David Davis's point was: if Begum ever is let back into the country, it can only be to face justice and certain imprisonment. I don't see how it can, or, more importantly, should, be otherwise.

[Stickybottle]

New Judge
//She gained full criminal responsibility for herself when she became 14 years old…//

Just on a point of order, the age of criminal responsibility in England and Wales is ten.

Between 10-14 is limited and for a jury to decide, that’s why I said full at 14 and that is why the Bulger two were convicted because the jury decided that they were responsible even at that age but it is a grey area. 14 is black and white full responsibility

[New Judge]

It’s certainly not a grey area.

The Common Law principle you mention is known as “doli incapax”. It afforded those aged 10-14 the protection that the prosecution had to prove not only that the young person on trial had committed the offence but that he or she was also aware that their behaviour was seriously wrong. Robert Thompson and Jon Venables, the killers of Jamie Bulger, were afforded its protection at their trial in 1993. The principle was abolished under Section 34 of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998:

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1998/37/section/34