Drug smuggler Akmal Shaikh executed

Mossy Monk · 30-12-2009 3:27pm

Went to China with 4kg of Heroin

FAIL

fitz0 · 30-12-2009 3:40pm

me_right_one wrote: »

And if someone genuinely cant afford a barrister, DIY. Barristers are only people too, they had to learn from scratch, and everyone in the country did the leaving cert! The law is written down for all citizens to see, if I was in that predicament, I'd rouse myself to get a handle on it. You're innocent until proven guilty. Just cos you have a lawyer there wont get you off the hook!

Spoken like someone who has never seen the inside of a courtroom, except maybe on TV. You honestly think that reading up on the law, studying (no matter how hard) for the few months before you stand trial gives you the same chance as even the least qualified barrister? They didn't study for years for the craic, they studied for years because thats what it takes to be a competent barrister with even a basic understanding of the many laws, rules and unspoken understandings that apply in a courtroom. /legal rant.

As for your ideas on legal reform either you're seriously misguided or

Seaneh · 30-12-2009 4:02pm

Stercus Accidit wrote: »

The british government recently agreed to deport an autistic to be tried in the US for hacking into a government database looking for "ufo's"

The difference here is it was the US who demanded it, a country which uses torture none the less, but its the US so its ok.

Now that same british government whines that a drug smuggler is being tried and charged by local laws, where he actually committed a crime, rather than through a computer.

This is high hypocrisy.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/Tag/mckinnon - This is the link about the British "hacker" with mental problems, no british intervention here.

He is not autistic, he has Aspergers, a massively different condition and no excuse for doing something so ****ing stupid.

[/edit]
Not massively different, but not the same either, it's like comparing a flesh wound to having a hole in your chest/
[/edit]

speedboatchase · 30-12-2009 4:03pm

The Guardian wrote the first article I had read about this guy a few days ago and I was amazed to see that the entire article, there was no mention whatsoever of what his crime is, just trying to infantilise him as someone who had no idea what they were doing and should be let go. Obviously the sentence doesn't fit the crime but that's the problem with committing big crimes in other countries, especially China

walshb · 30-12-2009 4:13pm

speedboatchase wrote: »

The Guardian wrote the first article I had read about this guy a few days ago and I was amazed to see that the entire article, there was no mention whatsoever of what his crime is, just trying to infantilise him as someone who had no idea what they were doing and should be let go. Obviously the sentence doesn't fit the crime but that's the problem with committing big crimes in other countries, especially China

In China the sentence DOES fit the crime. This is the problem in the world; we have too many countries trying to lecture and dictate to other countries on how to run their affairs.

RMD · 30-12-2009 4:18pm

me_right_one wrote: »

The line should be drawn thus: If you deal in drugs, you DO deserve to die. If you smuggle drugs, you DO deserve to die. If you are a peadofile, you DO deserve to die. If you use drugs, you deserve LIFE in prison. If you are a sex offender of adults, you deserve LIFE in prison. If you are a murderer, you deserve LIFE in prison. If you have three convictions, you deserve LIFE in prison.

For anything else, it would depend. Stealing, drink-driving, fighting, fraud etc. all deserve a conviction. First one, 1 year in prison. Second, 3 years. Third, 5 years. Fourth, the rest of your natural life. Saying that, you could do something that would warrant a 20 year spell behind bars on your first conviction. I would add a few new crimes too, such as ripping off a country. Mental assesments AND IQ tests would be mandatory for everybody every year, just like an NCT. That would sort that arguement out.

I do feel sorry for the fella though. The chinese are not known for their fairness. I believe he was away with the fairies.

Sorry pal, but that is one of the most idiotic legal systems and madatory IQ tests? You realise the IQ test is a terrible form of demonstrating "intelligence"?

hooradiation · 30-12-2009 4:26pm

me_right_one wrote: »

The line should be drawn thus: If you deal in drugs, you DO deserve to die. If you smuggle drugs, you DO deserve to die. If you are a peadofile, you DO deserve to die. If you use drugs, you deserve LIFE in prison. If you are a sex offender of adults, you deserve LIFE in prison. If you are a murderer, you deserve LIFE in prison. If you have three convictions, you deserve LIFE in prison.

For anything else, it would depend. Stealing, drink-driving, fighting, fraud etc. all deserve a conviction. First one, 1 year in prison. Second, 3 years. Third, 5 years. Fourth, the rest of your natural life. Saying that, you could do something that would warrant a 20 year spell behind bars on your first conviction. I would add a few new crimes too, such as ripping off a country. Mental assesments AND IQ tests would be mandatory for everybody every year, just like an NCT. That would sort that arguement out.

These are all the worst ideas. Ever.

"Ripping off a country" what populist fucking nonsense

Stercus Accidit · 30-12-2009 4:28pm

Seaneh wrote: »

He is not autistic, he has Aspergers, a massively different condition and no excuse for doing something so ****ing stupid.

[/edit]
Not massively different, but not the same either, it's like comparing a flesh wound to having a hole in your chest/
[/edit]

Aspergers is on the Autistic spectrum.

Besides, that is an actual condition, this latest Akmal Shaikh has no medical history for his 'disorder'.

Do you think hacking for ufo's is worse than drug smuggling? I know at least one of those things ruins lives, the other is pure fantasy land stuff.

Regardless, the british government cant complain if they themselves extradite their own citizens with diagnosed mental disorders to countries that use torture.

ClayDavis · 30-12-2009 4:35pm

me_right_one wrote: »

Well if Iwas wrongly accused of a crime and couldnt afford a solicitor, I'd be BURNING through all the law books and information I could before the court. And if I was blind, I'd do it through Braille:rolleyes:

Haha! Brilliant! I do believe the old phrase is "A man who defends himself before a court has a fool for a client." You seem pretty set in your opinion, I just hope that you end up in this situation some day so you learn the error of your ways. If you manage to learn court procedure, rules of evidence, and then the caselaw and legislation describing the actual offence while being held before trial then I will take my hat off to you.

me_right_one wrote:

And if someone genuinely cant afford a barrister, DIY. Barristers are only people too, they had to learn from scratch, and everyone in the country did the leaving cert! The law is written down for all citizens to see

Firstly, yes barristers do start from scratch. Then they usually spend at least three years doing a law degree (or a different degree then a conversion course), plus a year at Kings Inn and then a year deviling. That's about 5 years of fairly tough work with the benefit of experienced lecturers, tutors and legal professionals to learn from along the way.It's a bit different to reading a manual.
Back O/T, It's pretty obvious from what I've read that the guy definitely had some mental problems. There have been numerous reports from people who knew Akmal when he was homeless in Poland of his mental state. I'm not going to say the guy didn't do anything wrong but China's legal system has a poor history of fairness and balance. You put these two together and drug mule or not, it's a very harsh sentence.

yaaaboy · 30-12-2009 4:35pm

I THINK...if everybody that got caught smuggling drugs was killed (mental illness or not) there would be nobody left to smuggle them

Fair play to china for standing up to their morals.

truecrippler · 30-12-2009 4:42pm

yaaaboy wrote: »

I THINK...if everybody that got caught smuggling drugs was killed (mental illness or not) there would be nobody left to smuggle them

Fair play to china for standing up to their morals.

But what about the people that didn't get caught?:rolleyes:

Chucky the tree · 30-12-2009 4:43pm

yaaaboy wrote: »

I THINK...if everybody that got caught smuggling drugs was killed (mental illness or not) there would be nobody left to smuggle them

Fair play to china for standing up to their morals.

Like how there is no murders in countries that has the death penalty yea? Well done yaaaboy, you'll go far.

OutlawPete · 30-12-2009 4:52pm

me_right_one wrote: »

if I was blind, I'd do it through Braille:rolleyes:

And if you were dumb?

therewillbe · 30-12-2009 4:52pm

They have their laws so they should be respected.All Drug dealers I believe should have the same fate . It is a shame it aint in this country .The Brits are quick in condemming them over this issue , Were are they in relation to a whole bunch of other issues within China.It suits them to keep their mouth shut when trade etc are on the line.

hitlersson666 · 30-12-2009 5:12pm

El Weirdo wrote: »

What an excellent addition to the thread.

Maybe they should bring back capital punishment for bad grammar/spelling too.:rolleyes:

BTW, if you'd bothered to read the whole thread, you'd see that the video was posted in the first couple of pages.

sorry about that but it does show how mental he is was

hitlersson666 · 30-12-2009 5:15pm

ClayDavis wrote: »

Haha! Brilliant! I do believe the old phrase is "A man who defends himself before a court has a fool for a client." You seem pretty set in your opinion, I just hope that you end up in this situation some day so you learn the error of your ways. If you manage to learn court procedure, rules of evidence, and then the caselaw and legislation describing the actual offence while being held before trial then I will take my hat off to you.Firstly, yes barristers do start from scratch. Then they usually spend at least three years doing a law degree (or a different degree then a conversion course), plus a year at Kings Inn and then a year deviling. That's about 5 years of fairly tough work with the benefit of experienced lecturers, tutors and legal professionals to learn from along the way.It's a bit different to reading a manual.
Back O/T, It's pretty obvious from what I've read that the guy definitely had some mental problems. There have been numerous reports from people who knew Akmal when he was homeless in Poland of his mental state. I'm not going to say the guy didn't do anything wrong but China's legal system has a poor history of fairness and balance. You put these two together and drug mule or not, it's a very harsh sentence.

lol this guy was too busy trying to get world peace duh!!!!!

Evolute · 30-12-2009 5:20pm

I tottally agree with all the people who say he got what was coming.
He smuggled heroin into a country who only recently put out a study saying that most of their youth crime was related to violent video games(before you ask for a link I will find it in a minute)http://www.pcworld.com/article/185490/china_blames_online_games_for_drugs_murder_teen_pregnancy.html.

Yeh its sad if he did actually have Bi-polar disorder then fair enough but they didn't have a shred of evidence to that matter china even said if there was any physical evidence as in some kind of medical assessment to prove the matter they would have had him mentally assessed but they didn't as far as china where concerned he smuggled drugs kill him as it is their law.

If he was tricked which there is no evidence to either he still should have checked his suitcase seening as he obviously didnt pack it himself.
It was a harsh sentence but china is a harsh country and honestly I think it is a matter of principle that they didnt fold to international pressure.

Sheeps · 30-12-2009 5:22pm

Apparently one of the symptoms of bi-polar is smuggling heroin.

Crann na Beatha · 30-12-2009 5:26pm

This post has been deleted.

OutlawPete · 30-12-2009 5:53pm

Iolar wrote: »

He broke the laws in that particular country,people shouldnt expect the same laws from their home country applied to them in other places

I don't people expect it.

If it was a member of your family that was executed like this then it all might look a little different when they are flying his body home.

pickarooney · 30-12-2009 6:13pm

What gets me is that if you had 4 million quid's worth of precious heroin you needed smuggled, would you not look for someone a bit more reliable to do it?

Stercus Accidit · 30-12-2009 6:19pm

OutlawPete wrote: »

I don't people expect it.

If it was a member of your family that was executed like this then it all might look a little different when they are flying his body home.

Doesn't matter where they fly the body, be it to the western world or down the road in China.

The crime was committed in China, and its up to the Chinese justice system what happens to him.

Why the presumption that a westerner should be immune, because we are wealthier?

OutlawPete · 30-12-2009 6:24pm

Stercus Accidit wrote: »

Doesn't matter where they fly the body, be it to the western world or down the road in China.

What are you talking about?

I am not saying where they fly the body is important :rolleyes:

I was trying to make the point the point that if a member of your fmaily was coming home in a body bag then it might just hit home how f**king barbaric it is to murder a human being for dealing drugs.

Mike 1972 · 30-12-2009 6:27pm

me_right_one wrote: »

If you are a peadofile (sic) , you DO deserve to die. .....If you are a murderer, you deserve LIFE in prison.

So killing a child is not as bad as wanting to have sex with them ?:rolleyes:

OutlawPete · 30-12-2009 6:29pm

Mike 1972 wrote: »

So killing a child is not as bad as wanting to have sex with them ?:rolleyes:

Of course not.

Don't you read the Bible?

hitlersson666 · 30-12-2009 6:29pm

this is getting off the record

Stercus Accidit · 30-12-2009 6:36pm

OutlawPete wrote: »

What are you talking about?

I am not saying where they fly the body is important :rolleyes:

I was trying to make the point the point that if a member of your fmaily was coming home in a body bag then it might just hit home how f**king barbaric it is to murder a human being for dealing drugs.

What I'm talking about is that it is irrelevant that a loved one would be flown anywhere, this guy committed a crime in a country and was sentenced according to their legal system.

Emotions don't come into it, far more chinese citizens have suffered under chinese law than this one sob story.

A human rights protester was recently jailed for life, this moron was a drugs mule, I won't shed a tear for him.

What is your point, that he should not have been executed? Why not? You may not agree with the law but it was applied universally, and china isn't the only country that executes drug smugglers.

You can be against the death penalty, but emotions don't come into it one bit, I am more sorry for families living under tyranny than this guys family.

ejmaztec · 30-12-2009 6:46pm

In China, they execute people who fiddle the books, or are negligent in producing dodgy baby food etc., so why would a drug trafficker be exempt?

The guy also had his British nationality against him, given that the British were pretty much responsible for shipping vast quantities of opium into China during the days of the Empire, and creating the demand in the first place. I'm sure this history helped him on his way.

OutlawPete · 30-12-2009 6:55pm

Stercus Accidit wrote: »

What I'm talking about is that it is irrelevant that a loved one would be flown anywhere ..

I never said there was relevance in him being flown anywhere.

Can you not grasp the fact that I was making the point that a person's views might change when it is THEIR loved one that has been executed and is been zipped up in a body bag.

Stercus Accidit wrote: »

this guy committed a crime in a country and was sentenced according to their legal system.

I am well aware of the facts of the case thanks very much.

Stercus Accidit wrote: »

Emotions don't come into it,

They do when it is your family member.

Stercus Accidit wrote: »

far more chinese citizens have suffered under chinese law than this one sob story.

And they didn't cry? They didn't feel that it was unjust?

Your goddamn right they did and if your knew anything about what it is really like in China you wouldn't make such a stupid argument.

Stercus Accidit wrote: »

A human rights protester was recently jailed for life, this moron was a drugs mule, I won't shed a tear for him..

Can't you emapthise with both??

Why do you presume that because people are saying this guy got a raw deal that they are somehow oblivious to other cases of China's savage justice system?

We are not!

Stercus Accidit wrote: »

What is your point, .

It's obvious.

Stercus Accidit wrote: »

that he should not have been executed?

Yes.

Stercus Accidit wrote: »

Why not?.

Becuase it is Barbaric to murder another human being under the guise of justice.

But to murder a man for the crime that this man was supposed to have commited is beyond words.

That country's goverment is sick to the core when it comes to justice and hman rights.

Stercus Accidit wrote: »

You may not agree with the law but it was applied universally, and china isn't the only country that executes drug smugglers.

SO WHAT!!

That doesn't make it right or humane.

Stercus Accidit wrote: »

I am more sorry for families living under tyranny than this guys family.

I am sorry for them ALL!!!

They are not mutually exclusive you know :rolleyes:

Sir Gallagher · 30-12-2009 7:08pm

I was reading an article on the Daily Mail site there and stumbled across this,

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1239051/LEO-McKINSTRY-Sorry-join-liberal-wailing-heroin-traffickers-deserve-die.html

absolutely terrible journalism, you just have to laugh because if you didn't it would drive you round the bend.

Black Magic · 30-12-2009 7:50pm

Why?

Sir Gallagher · 30-12-2009 7:58pm

Black Magic wrote: »

Why?

Because the article is a typically misinformed, ignorant and reactionary peice of shit.

Black Magic · 30-12-2009 8:04pm

Sir Gallagher wrote: »

Because the article is a typically misinformed, ignorant and reactionary peice of shit.

Daily Mail Tabloid Journalism.

El Weirdo · 30-12-2009 8:07pm

Black Magic wrote: »

Why?

This morning, barring an unlikely last-minute reprieve, convicted drug smuggler Akmal Shaikh was executed by firing squad, having been found guilty of trying to bring 4kg of heroin into China.

Well he was killed by lethal injection for a start. And that's just the first sentence.

Mike 1972 · 30-12-2009 8:27pm

Sir Gallagher wrote: »

Because the article is a typically misinformed, ignorant and reactionary peice of shit.

Perhaps the "why" was why as in why the fup were you reading the Daily Mail ?

walshb · 30-12-2009 8:29pm

What is so wrong with the Daily Mail? I read it and find it a great read, with many many different stories and articles. As for their website, brilliant! Where do you get your perfect story and perfect information?

The Irish seem to always have an uppity attitude and problem with British tabloids, funny, we can't see to stop bloody buying them.

ejmaztec · 30-12-2009 8:29pm

Even the Daily Mail would be executed in China, despite it suffering a mental illness.

Mike 1972 · 30-12-2009 8:34pm

walshb wrote: »

The Irish seem to always have an uppity attitude and problem with British tabloids.

Nope Tabloids in general

ejmaztec wrote: »

Even the Daily Mail would be executed in China.

You know suddenly this death penelty thing might have some upsides after all

ejmaztec wrote: »

despite it suffering a mental illness.

Rightly or wrongly fascism is not generally recognised as a mental ilness

OutlawPete · 30-12-2009 8:37pm

walshb wrote: »

What is so wrong with the Daily Mail? .

Well, for a start - they pay people like Jan Moir, Anne Robinson and Richard Littlejohn to write the biggest load of tripe each week.

OutlawPete · 30-12-2009 8:41pm

Sir Gallagher wrote: »

I was reading an article on the Daily Mail site there and stumbled across this,

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1239051/LEO-McKINSTRY-Sorry-join-liberal-wailing-heroin-traffickers-deserve-die.html

absolutely terrible journalism, you just have to laugh because if you didn't it would drive you round the bend.

Thanks for posting this.

Don't usually make a sepearte post to thank someone for posting something but lately I have been noticing much more that when people that go to the bother of sharing information they find, then get ignored and yet some smart ar*e comment will get thanked off the thread.

Can't stand when people go to the trouble of reading a posted article and then don't thank the post.

Ridley · 30-12-2009 8:44pm

walshb wrote: »

What is so wrong with the Daily Mail? I read it and find it a great read, with many many different stories and articles.

It's generally regarded as a (British) conservative middle-class sensationalist manipulator of moral panics.

Sheeps · 30-12-2009 8:45pm

walshb wrote: »

What is so wrong with the Daily Mail? I read it and find it a great read, with many many different stories and articles. As for their website, brilliant! Where do you get your perfect story and perfect information?

The Irish seem to always have an uppity attitude and problem with British tabloids, funny, we can't see to stop bloody buying them.

Is this post meant to be ironic or something?

walshb · 30-12-2009 8:45pm

Ridley wrote: »

It's generally regarded as a (British) conservative middle-class sensationalist manipulator of moral panics.

Wow, it's amazing then how they sell so well here!

Sheeps · 30-12-2009 8:48pm

walshb wrote: »

Wow, it's amazing then how they sell so well here!

You'd be very naive to think that the number of sales of news papers has some correlation with the quality of the journalism of that newspaper.

Guy:Incognito · 30-12-2009 8:49pm

My name is URL wrote: »

I don't agree with the death penalty whatsoever.. but I do think they were right not to undermine their own laws just because of outside pressure

I dont agree with spending millions of taxpayers money every year keeping serious criminal in glorified hotels, then releasing them to go straight back to being criminals.

walshb · 30-12-2009 8:50pm

Sheeps wrote: »

You'd be very naive to think that the number of sales of news papers has some correlation with the quality of the journalism of that newspaper.

And you would have to be very naive to think that ones view of quality is not subjective

Sheeps · 30-12-2009 8:52pm

walshb wrote: »

And you would have to be very naive to think that ones view of quality is not subjective

Well, if your idea of quality is sensational bullshit, then I guess it's each to their own.

Ridley · 30-12-2009 8:53pm

walshb wrote: »

Wow, it's amazing then how they sell so well here!

http://whythatsdelightful.wordpress.com/2009/04/14/if-you-have-jaws-you-may-want-to-place-them-on-the-floor/

walshb · 30-12-2009 8:54pm

Sheeps wrote: »

Well, if your idea of quality is sensational bullshit, then I guess it's each to their own.

May I ask what you would call quality?

Not all their articles are sensationalist. I find some very good articles
too, very informative, diverse and in-depth

hopalong85 · 30-12-2009 9:03pm

walshb wrote: »

May I ask what you would call quality?

Not all their articles are sensationalist. I find some very good articles
too, very informative, diverse and in-depth

lmao!:D

Drug smuggler Akmal Shaikh executed

Comments