Rigby killer sues....

[ger147]

Wrong, been investigated and no offence committed, he then can, which he's done to bring a civil lawsuit for damages and burden of proof is different. He's after money basically, no individual woukd get done as criminal case is closed, he's going after the prison/government.
We the tax payers are funding it, but it's his right and something by your arguments it looks like you support his right!

If he wants to bring a civil case then I have no problem with that, he is entitled to raise an action if he chooses.

But if he does choose to do so, he should pay the costs himself.

 

[Deleted member 15344]

Seriously Phil, these targets we are bombing in Syria/Iraq, what if there are civilian workers forced to work in these oilfields by isis as those workers probably have the skills, because it's a conflict you are happy we kill these innocent people, whose protecting their rights or do we dismiss their deaths by saying in the long run, we could save more?

Excuse me but when have I ever said I am happy to kill innocent people ?!?

You are stepping over the line right there.

 

[Deleted member 16999]

Excuse me but when have I ever said I am happy to kill innocent people ?!?

You are stepping over the line right there.

No I'm not, I'm trying to find out were people have rights to be judged fairly and protected and in what circumstances we possibky turn a blind eye?

 

[Deleted member 15344]

Civil/crime shoukd be treated the same way, there is a different burden of proof and are not treated the same.

Do you read the whole thing or pick bits out and then make judgments based on those bits ?!

Crime/civil etc should all be treated in the same way in regards a decision made on the evidence.

 

[Deleted member 16999]

If he wants to bring a civil case then I have no problem with that, he is entitled to raise an action if he chooses.

But if he does choose to do so, he should pay the costs himself.

Me neither, except we the tax payer are funding this one!!

 

[Deleted member 15344]

No I'm not, I'm trying to find out were people have rights to be judged fairly and protected and in what circumstances we possibky turn a blind eye?

I'm done

 

[Deleted member 16999]

Do you read the whole thing or pick bits out and then make judgments based on those bits ?!

Crime/civil etc should all be treated in the same way in regards a decision made on the evidence.

He lost teeth, investigation took place, no crime, no one charged. Civil action is about money, we are paying his legal bill, we will fund the case, we will pay compensation if he wins.
In my opinion it's wrong, but in our system he's allowed because he has rights. I'm sorry but to me he should've lost those rights when found guilty.

 

[Deleted member 16999]

When you bring up and an acceptable situation and one where you aren't trying to suggest I'm saying something but to suggest I'm happy innocent people get killed is way over the line as you did is shocking tbh

I'm done

So when you can't have a sensible debate and answer the question, you turn away, I'd call that a cop out.

 

[hovis]

So when you can't have a sensible debate and answer the question, you turn away, I'd call that a cop out.

Dont encourage him fgs

 

[Ethan]

Although I disagree with the Syria bombing, the moral authority to do something like that comes from having a society where the law is blind and even scumbags get a fair trial and a good defence. Can't have it both ways.

 

[Deleted member 16999]

Although I disagree with the Syria bombing, the moral authority to do something like that comes from having a society where the law is blind and even scumbags get a fair trial and a good defence. Can't have it both ways.

No issue with a fair trial, it's the publicly funded civil case against the Prison Service and possible payout that sticks in my throat.

 

[user2010]

I'm done

Yeah, Right! If only......

 

[Kellfire]

+1 for LiverpoolPhil here.

Everyone, no matter what the ALLEDGED crime, deserves a fair trial, no matter how certain it appears that they're guilty.

I've highlighted two important words there...

Some of you should watch Bridge of Spies that is out at the moment - a film based (albeit loosely at times) on a US lawyer who represented a Soviet Spy, much to his own vilification from the general public.

 

[MegaSteve]

If I understood correctly, from the radio yesterday, the public purse is not contributing anything to the cost of Adebolajo's claim...


What riles me is that he, or his representatives, are using [abusing] a system he does not recognise...
He didn't attend his own appeal because of this very reason...

 

[User62651]

+2 for Liverpool Phil.
The day you hand justice to the mob or make on the spot decisions about alleged criminality without studying evidence and letting accused people have a fair hearing, there is no civilised society left. When those infamous child abduction cases like Soham were ongoing maybe 10 or 15 years ago innocent professional people came under attack as the enraged mob out for justice couldn't tell the difference between a paedophile and a paedeatrician. That's why we leave justice to those intelligent enough, trained and experienced in applying the law of the land i.e. Courts or Police, no matter how frustrated that can leave us at times or how unjust it might feel at the time. The Law is never going to be perfect but it has to be upheld.
Unrelated but glad to see the South African courts realised Pistorius's original case was wrongly judged and revisited it, calling a murder charge. That restored some faith in justice for me anyway.

 

[JCW]

If it been me i knock more then his teeth out , Nuff said , move on

 

[Fish]

There's a simple remedy to save the taxpayers coffers in specific cases of mass murder by terrorism, police killers, child killers and other heinous crimes, and that's bring back the death penalty, no claims, job done..

 

[Deleted member 15344]

There's a simple remedy to save the taxpayers coffers in specific cases of mass murder by terrorism, police killers, child killers and other heinous crimes, and that's bring back the death penalty, no claims, job done..

And what happens if someone who was found guilty of said crime is found innocent 10 years later

Been enough cases over the years where convictions have been found to be incorrect - the Guildford Bombers were all found to be innocent 20 years later

 

[Fish]

And what happens if someone who was found guilty of said crime is found innocent 10 years later

Been enough cases over the years where convictions have been found to be incorrect - the Guildford Bombers were all found to be innocent 20 years later

There are plenty of no brainers that should be put straight to bed, I don't wish to discuss the example you've given, well because..

 

[Hobbit]

As the law stands, he is fully entitled to sue. The law is right, there must a recourse to test the system if a failing is perceived. In his particular case, he hasn't got a leg to stand on. A pity there isn't an opportunity for the law to counter-sue for a frivolous case.