Ibrahim Halawa acquited(mod warning in op-Heed it)

suicide_circus

First Up wrote: »

OK, I'll bite. What do you think it means?

If means that there was enough political pressure to get him off

murpho999

weldoninhio wrote: »

No it doesn't.

Ha yes, of course it does.

Just because you've made your mind up does not mean you're right.

weldoninhio

First Up wrote: »

OK, I'll bite. What do you think it means?

It means that there was not enough evidence to convict, or the state did not want to pursue the evidence available.

For example, I could murder someone today, and leave no evidence. I may be seen in the area and arrested and put on trial. Due to the lack of evidence, i could be found not guilty. That wouldn't make me innocent, it would make me not guilty. Courts do not prove innocence. Its a fairly basic concept. OJ Simpson would be a real life example. He's not guilty of murdering his wife and her lover, but most people can see that he did.

weldoninhio

murpho999 wrote: »

Ha yes, of course it does.

Just because you've made your mind up does not mean you're right.

No court, anywhere, finds people innocent.

RustyNut

Guilty even when acquitted, the bigotry is strong in some.

Beechwoodspark

First Up wrote: »

It is far from irrelevant. You asked another poster if they were concerned at the Halawa family's "alleged links" with the MB. That sounds like you consider the MB to be nothing but a collection of bad eggs. ln another post you recommended Mark Humphreys as a source.

A history graduate ought to be more adept at collecting, analysing and presenting information.

Thank you for your little lecture. I have noted your concerns. Many thanks.

givyjoe

weldoninhio wrote: »

No court, anywhere, finds people innocent.

Right, so you just mean legal technicalities then. Or do you believe he is guilty, just not guilty enough for them to take him to trial and convict?

RustyNut

weldoninhio wrote: »

No court, anywhere, finds people innocent.

Innocence is assumed until guilt is proven which it wasn't in this case. Therefore he is innocent.

weldoninhio

givyjoe wrote: »

Right, so you just mean legal technicalities then. Or do you believe he is guilty, just not guilty enough for them to take him to trial and convict?

Its not a technicality. It is a fact. Courts do not find people innocent. Doesn't matter what charge, doesn't matter what defendant, doesn't matter what judge.

bonaparte2

I hope he suffered no ill effects from the hungerstrikes bad diet and mistreatment

givyjoe

weldoninhio wrote: »

Its not a technicality. It is a fact. Courts do not find people innocent. Doesn't matter what charge, doesn't matter what defendant, doesn't matter what judge.

Right, so if someone is acquitted on charges.. tell me.. do they then have a criminal record?

murpho999

weldoninhio wrote: »

No court, anywhere, finds people innocent.

Stop being an arse. Not guilty is the same as innocent.

17larsson

Great news to hear. I'm delighted for the family, they will enjoy their weekend

First Up

weldoninhio wrote:

For example, I could murder someone today, and leave no evidence. I may be seen in the area and arrested and put on trial. Due to the lack of evidence, i could be found not guilty. That wouldn't make me innocent, it would make me not guilty. Courts do not prove innocence. Its a fairly basic concept. OJ Simpson would be a real life example. He's not guilty of murdering his wife and her lover, but most people can see that he did.

So in the case of young Halawa, what can you see that he did that the Egyptian court couldn't?

weldoninhio

weldoninhio wrote: »

Its not a technicality. It is a fact. Courts do not find people innocent. Doesn't matter what charge, doesn't matter what defendant, doesn't matter what judge.

Ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat.

First Up

Beechwoodspark wrote:

Thank you for your little lecture. I have noted your concerns. Many thanks.

I'm not the least concerned, but you should be.

weldoninhio

bonaparte2 wrote: »

I hope he suffered no ill effects from the hungerstrikes bad diet and mistreatment

Don't forget his disformed hand which was shot and not allowed receive treatment and his heart condition.

weldoninhio

givyjoe wrote: »

Right, so if someone is acquitted on charges.. tell me.. do they then have a criminal record?

If I assault or murder someone and am found not guilty, am I innocent??

weldoninhio

First Up wrote: »

So in the case of young Halawa, what can you see that he did that the Egyptian court couldn't?

I can see that they found him NOT GUILTY. Nowhere in the courts notes does it say he is innocent.

Beechwoodspark

First Up wrote: »

I'm not the least concerned, but you should be.

Why should I be concerned oh great one?

Dr Brown

I wonder how much tax payer money has been wasted on Halawa at this stage ?

It wouldn't surprise me if its over a million.


A few years ago just one bogus asylum seeker cost the state over a million euro.

With the use of the government jet to bring Irish officials over to egypt this case could cost the tax payer even more.


http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/1m-legal-bill-after-pamela-and-girls-finally-deported-26753400.html

Easy Rod

weldoninhio wrote: »

Its not a technicality. It is a fact. Courts do not find people innocent. Doesn't matter what charge, doesn't matter what defendant, doesn't matter what judge.

So your default position must be that is everyone is guilty of everything then?

RustyNut

weldoninhio wrote: »

If I assault or murder someone and am found not guilty, am I innocent??

In the eyes of the law yes you are.

givyjoe

weldoninhio wrote: »

I can see that they found him NOT GUILTY. Nowhere in the courts notes does it say he is innocent.

He was acquitted of all proposed charges, there was no trial. Would you mind telling us exactly what offense you believe (or preferably have evidence of) he is guilty of?

If he is not guilty and not innocent, care to educate us on what he is?

To put this into context, if you were on arrested on suspicion of an offence, the authorities have x period of time to gather their evidence and file charges with the DPP and bring to trial. So what is that usually, 24, 48 hours? This chap was held without charge for FOUR YEARS. You should really be more concerned with this fact, rather than pointlessly trying to paint this lad as some kind of terrorist.

Beechwoodspark

Dr Brown wrote: »

I wonder how much tax payer money has been wasted on Halawa at this stage ?

It wouldn't surprise me if its over a million.


A few years ago just one bogus asylum seeker cost the state over a million euro.

With the use of the government jet to bring Irish officials over to egypt this case could cost the tax payer even more.


http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/1m-legal-bill-after-pamela-and-girls-finally-deported-26753400.html

Coveney listed all of the effort earlier. Former taoisigh, multiple ambassadors and diplomats, he estimated 20,000 work hours were put into it and he said it was an unprecedented effort overall

Dr Brown

Beechwoodspark wrote: »

Coveney listed all of the effort earlier. Former taoisigh, multiple ambassadors and diplomats, he estimated 20,000 work hours were put into it and he said it was an unprecedented effort overall

So it sounds like the bill to free Halawa could run into millions:eek:

First Up

Beechwoodspark wrote:

Why should I be concerned oh great one?

I'm not here to offer career guidance.

Beechwoodspark

Dr Brown wrote: »

So it sounds like the bill to free Halawa could run into millions:eek:

I'd say that we are looking at multimillions at this stage.

weldoninhio

Easy Rod wrote: »

So your default position must be that is everyone is guilty of everything then?

No, that is not my default position. I merely corrected a poster who thought that a court found people innocent.

murpho999

weldoninhio wrote: »

No, that is not my default position. I merely corrected a poster who thought that a court found people innocent.

You are wrong.

A court finds people guilty or not guilty.

Not guilty is the exact same as innocent.

You are just being pedantic for the sake of argument with no real valid point to make.