Ok so whats all this about then.
Erol Incedal terrorism charges were held in secret, even to the extent that the verdict was withheld. Now it turns out been found guilty of having a document, one that you and I could quite easily find and download by typing into Google "how too make a bomb" - what 10 year old child probably hasn't done that.
Quite how justice has been served here is utterly beyond me, and the idea of secret trials and verdicts in a open democracy simply will not do. Worse, having warped the basic of idea of a fair and public judiciary and hence able to bring all manner of previously undisclosed and secret evidence gathering, the "document" was the best they could come up with. Unbelievable.
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-30078041
|
So now you've put that phrase "how too make a bomb" into a public forum, how long before you disappear?
Damnit, me too.
;>)
|
>> Damnit, me too.
>>
>> ;>)
yup you'll be up in court, no-one will know tho.
|
Similar to the case in Scotland with someone getting sent down for 8 years for having material 'useful to terrorism' or somesuch - evenutally tossed out on appeal.
Very wary of this twisting of the judicial process.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohammed_Atif_Siddique
|
Child Courts sit in secret and it is illegal to report proceedings...
And guess what? The results appear to be a shambles.
The only winners are lawyers..
|
|
Was there any reason or justification given for the secrecy?
|
>> Was there any reason or justification given for the secrecy?
"National Security"
|
And no more?
It can't be details of the document, because that and similar are freely available.
It can't be Blair's address, because its near me and blooming obvious.
I can't see how any confidential sources would have been involved.
So I wonder what information it was that they were worried about.
|
>>
>> So I wonder what information it was that they were worried about.
>>
Were they worried that the law might look an ass? :)
|
It does seem pathetic to send someone down for having elementary, easily-obtained instructions on bomb making. Unless they had taken steps to accumulate at least some significant materials I wouldn't expect the sentence to survive the court of appeal.
One has to remember however that it isn't difficult to make a bomb and there are people who have done it or tried to. Better safe than sorry really, within reason. But the law is clumsy, and in this case it seems a bit snivelling too.
|
>>Were they worried that the law might look an ass? :)
If they were, then I guess they had a point!
|
|
Oh 'eck - I agree with Zero again :-0
|
Secret trials - bathtub tom
