[article] Adventures of a Sinn Fein "Campiagn Team"

cdebru

mycroft wrote:

Recommendations. NOT. LAW. AT. PRESENT.

you have to be taking the piss

it says at present ie life imprisonment

you can read ?????

cdebru

Earthman wrote:

And I answered that...
I mean do you seriously expect anyone not to read a discussion about the SCC's benefit in trying cases to avoid intimidation of both witnesses and juries to be divorced from an obvious comparison of intimidation cases introduced during the discussion?
you denied the comparison yet it was clearly being made-perhaps you initially didnt see what I was see-ing,I'm prepared to accept that.

If mycroft is happy to agree with your version of events then I am but with the caveat that all of this is being clarified too pages after the initial comments and for the life of me, no matter how many times I read this, I wouldnt blame Rockclimber for coming to the conclusion that he seems to have based on what was being said a few pages back and not now.

again you show your lack of understanding of what is being discussed
no wonder you came to the wrong conclusion


the SCC was set up to prevent the intimidation of juries not witnesses

perhaps you would acquire at least a basic knowledge of the subject before jumping to your conclusions

cdebru

cdebru wrote:

again you show your lack of understanding of what is being discussed
no wonder you came to the wrong conclusion


the SCC was set up to prevent the intimidation of juries not witnesses

perhaps you would acquire at least a basic knowledge of the subject before jumping to your conclusions

Eh?
I'm commenting on a comparison I see being made between intimidations.
I've said in my last post that the comparison is being made in a case where theres accusations of witness intimidation, which could easily move on to jury intimidation if it wanted to, they both have the same motivation.
I never said I came to a wrong conclusion, I said the situation was clarified after the fact and rightly so because it wasn't clear.
I've not commented on the specific reasons for the setting up of the SCC,I've given an opinion though on its worth in tandem with and as an integral part of my reply but not a definition.
You could have asked.

cdebru

Earthman wrote:

Eh?
I'm commenting on a comparison I see being made between intimidations.
I've said in my last post that the comparison is being made in a case where theres accusations of witness intimidation, which could easily move on to jury intimidation if it wanted to, they both have the same motivation.
I never said I came to a wrong conclusion, I said the situation was clarified after the fact and rightly so because it wasn't clear.
I've not commented on the specific reasons for the setting up of the SCC,I've given an opinion though on its worth in tandem with and as an integral part of my reply but not a definition.
You could have asked.

is that you rowing back again

I'm getting bored with the rowing,I prefer sailing anyway

cdebru

Earthman wrote:

I'm getting bored with the rowing,I prefer sailing anyway

lol

mycroft

cdebru wrote:

you have to be taking the piss

it says at present ie life imprisonment

you can read ?????

I've look at the article. I've googled several alternatives I'm satisfied that the average sentence for death via involuntary manslaughter is rarely life in prison. One needs to only look at the burlington death to see that.

The average sentence for manslaughter in similar circumstances is 3-5years, I defy you to find a case similar to this where life imprisonment is sentenced.

Furthermore you're focusing on one detail you're ignoring.

1 Mobs of republicans turning up at the trial

2 The family claim of witness intimidation.

3 How exactly to do suggest trial via jury can work when jury intimidation by paramilitaries occurs.

You'll focus on one detail so you can avoid arguing the bigger picture debate.

cdebru

mycroft wrote:

I've look at the article. I've googled several alternatives I'm satisfied that the average sentence for death via involuntary manslaughter is rarely life in prison. One needs to only look at the burlington death to see that.

The average sentence for manslaughter in similar circumstances is 3-5years, I defy you to find a case similar to this where life imprisonment is sentenced.

Furthermore you're focusing on one detail you're ignoring.

1 Mobs of republicans turning up at the trial

2 The family claim of witness intimidation.

3 How exactly to do suggest trial via jury can work when jury intimidation by paramilitaries occurs.

You'll focus on one detail so you can avoid arguing the bigger picture debate.

you dont defy me anything

the maximum sentence for manslaughter is life that is what i stated that is the truth
dont start going on with codswallop about average sentence

the burlington case was tried under irish law not uk law
as regards mobs
you still have not linked to it and the derry journals coverage of the trial does not mention it
link to family claim of witness intimidation please

the way it works when anyone tries to intimidate a jury

mycroft

cdebru wrote:

you dont defy me anything

the maximum sentence for manslaughter is life that is what i stated that is the truth
dont start going on with codswallop about average sentence

No I can and will. Can you cite any example of anyone recieving a similar sentence for a similar charge and recieving a life sentence.

I can't see one. Prove me wrong. You claimed that it was leinent. You demostrate that it was leinent.

as regards mobs
you still have not linked to it and the derry journals coverage of the trial does not mention it
link to family claim of witness intimidation please

I've not included it as its from a Sunday paper, and oh look, it's still sunday. It's not up. When it's up I'll tell you. Otherwise I'll type up the article and e-mail the observers phone number so you can verify it.

the way it works when anyone tries to intimidate a jury

HUH?

What the f*ck are you on about.

Yourself and monument have both said in as many words

Cdebru

"Surely the state can protect jurys"

Monument

"Anonymous Jurys should be used"

We're asking you, how, EXACTLY, would these work. How would you, how could you protect, and ensure anonymity on a jury.

cdebru

mycroft wrote:

No I can and will. Can you cite any example of anyone recieving a similar sentence for a similar charge and recieving a life sentence.


.

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200102/cmhansrd/vo020225/text/20225w58.htm

go to that link it states that 159 men and 6 women were serving life sentences for manslaughter in 2001

now is that enough proof

mycroft

cdebru wrote:

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200102/cmhansrd/vo020225/text/20225w58.htm

go to that link it states that 159 men and 6 women were serving life sentences for manslaughter in 2001

now is that enough proof

162 cases over how many years, and for what? I've asked you to cite any example of anyone getting a life sentence for a similar crime and you've provided total stastics for the people receiving life imprisonment. Vague much

Under section 2 of the Crime (Sentences) Act 1997 offenders convicted of a second serious sexual or violent offence must be sentenced to life imprisonment. These sentences are known as automatic life sentences. There is currently no centrally held data to differentiate between automatic and discretionary life sentence inmates. Mandatory life sentences are passed for murder only.

I asked you for stats comparing similar cases to this and the sentence, you've just provided the total number, thats just a statistic without background material.

Hell YOU JUST PROVED MY POINT!!!!

Theres no background for a life sentence being called, but plenty of evidence for a similar sentence for similar charges across these Isles.

Mandatory life sentences are passed for murder only.

This was a manslaughter case, ergo, not a murder. therefore a mandatory life sentence would be impossible for the judge to order. According to the quote you've just offered to defend your argument. Do you need a napkin, cause I think theres some egg on your face?


And hey focusing on that point at the expense of others you just proved my point, that you are lunging at the one argument you think you can win at the expense of the other, more important arguments.

How could you protect and defend the anonmity of jurys.

cdebru

mycroft wrote:

162 cases over how many years, and for what.




I asked you for stats comparing similar cases to this and the sentence, you've just provided the total number, thats just a statistic without background material.

Hell YOU JUST PROVED MY POINT!!!!



This was a manslaughter case, ergo, not a murder. therefore a mandatory life sentence would be impossible for the judge to order. According to the quote you've just offered to defend your argument. Do you need a napkin, cause I think theres some egg on your face?


And hey focusing on that point at the expense of others you just proved my point, that you are lunging at the one argument you think you can win at the expense of the other, more important arguments.

How could you protect and defend the anonmity of jurys.

do you have any idea of what your talking about


do you know what mandatory means

it means the judge has no choice that is in murder

in manslaughter it is a disretionary life sentence that means the judge can use his discretion
ie no jail to life in jail and anywhere in between



159 men and 6 women that is 165 that were in prison in 2001
your maths is almost as good as your reading skills


and no i dont need a napkin the egg is most definitely not on my face

you asked for proof that anyone had been sentenced to life on a similar charge i gave it to you 165 people in prison serving life for manslaughter in the UK
listen it is time to be big admit you were wrong
you are digging yourself deeper and deeper give it up

mycroft

cdebru wrote:

do you have any idea of what your talking about

159 men and 6 women that is 165 that were in prison in 2001
your maths is almost as good as your reading skills

you asked for proof that anyone had been sentenced to life on a similar charge i gave it to you 165 people in prison serving life for manslaughter in the UK
listen it is time to be big admit you were wrong
you are digging yourself deeper and deeper give it up

You're still avoiding every other point, because this is the only victory you think you can get.

You don't argue how trials with jurys can work in this country when dealing with terrorist groups.

You don't deal with the intimidation families have felt.

You've yet to cite one single example of a similar person recieving a life sentence for a similar charge. You've merely provided the statistics for the number of people serving life sentences, you've not been able to say, what for, and why?

Thats not a credible defence of the single point you're scrambling to try and gain some semblance of victory out of a thread where the overall point you've been resoundly beaten on.

cdebru

mycroft wrote:

lt.

You've yet to cite one single example of a similar person recieving a life sentence for a similar charge. You've merely provided the statistics for the number of people serving life sentences, you've not been able to say, what for, and why?

.

you asked me to find one i found 165

the table says what they are serving life for manslaughter

now you are trying to suggest i find a similar person does he have to hav ethe same name and build and live in the same house

this is nonesense and your lame attempts to divert your mistake are laughable

you have still not withdrawn your accusation that i was lying
are you prepared to do it now
when you do then i will answer the questions you have put

mycroft

cdebru wrote:

you asked me to find one i found 165

the table says what they are serving life for manslaughter

As you pointed out theres a variety of different kinds of manslaughter. Theres no evidence those 165 are any similar kind of case. Furhtermore those are 165 over a period time thats not set, how many a year and how many are relevant to this case.

now you are trying to suggest i find a similar person does he have to hav ethe same name and build and live in the same house

No its not, I can't find a single example of a single case where under similar circumstances someone got life imprisonment, and neither can you.

this is nonesense and your lame attempts to divert your mistake are laughable

you have still not withdrawn your accusation that i was lying
are you prepared to do it now
when you do then i will answer the questions you have put

Translation. I'm trying to clutch at straws while coating my hands in motor oil.

Fine. I'll argue your points if you argue mine.

I'll try and find the specific legal prescident for the average sentence of a manslaughter case

If you can come up with a real defence for another case of IRA intimidation fo a family

While at the same time, coming up with a working alternative for the SCC using trial by jury, which will defend the rights and right to life of said jury. Simply put. How would you defend and protect a jurys right to life.

cdebru

mycroft wrote:

As you pointed out theres a variety of different kinds of manslaughter. Theres no evidence those 165 are any similar kind of case. Furhtermore those are 165 over a period time thats not set, how many a year and how many are relevant to this case.



No its not, I can't find a single example of a single case where under similar circumstances someone got life imprisonment, and neither can you.





Translation. I'm trying to clutch at straws while coating my hands in motor oil.

Fine. I'll argue your points if you argue mine.

I'll try and find the specific legal prescident for the average sentence of a manslaughter case

If you can come up with a real defence for another case of IRA intimidation fo a family

While at the same time, coming up with a working alternative for the SCC using trial by jury, which will defend the rights and right to life of said jury. Simply put. How would you defend and protect a jurys right to life.

manslaughter covers a wide area but only the most serious would deserve a life sentence
i think it is safe to presume that the 165 were serious cases of manslaughter
ie voluntary manslaughter
ie very close to murder

i would presume you would also agree that this case would/could be in that category ie very close to murder perhaps the only part of a murder conviction it is lacking is intent to kill beyond a reasonable doubt
however if you stick a knife in someones chest there would definitely be intent to at least cause greivous bodily harm


the part we dont know is what were the extenuating circumstances that led the judge to only give 3years

ie who brought the knive
was there provocation
was the defendant in fear of his own live
etc


however none of this gets us away from the fact that you accused me of lying when i said the maximum sentence for manslaughter was life

do you accept that you were wrong

yes or no

then we can get back to the topic

finding the average sentence even if it is possible is irrelevant i said that the maximum sentence was life
you called me a liar

have the decency to admit you were wrong
or are you not big enough to admit you were wrong

mycroft

cdebru wrote:

manslaughter covers a wide area but only the most serious would deserve a life sentence
i think it is safe to presume that the 165 were serious cases of manslaughter
ie voluntary manslaughter
ie very close to murder

i would presume you would also agree that this case would/could be in that category ie very close to murder perhaps the only part of a murder conviction it is lacking is intent to kill beyond a reasonable doubt
however if you stick a knife in someones chest there would definitely be intent to at least cause greivous bodily harm

So in short you don't know, are just assuming. So you don't know you're just making an assumption. Which means you don't know so don't dare persume at me.

the part we dont know is what were the extenuating circumstances that led the judge to only give 3years

ie who brought the knive
was there provocation
was the defendant in fear of his own live
etc

Which is the point i've been making and you've been evoking about stab wounds to the heart and how can the jury have been intimidated.

Sorry but this is classic republican rebuttal refute everything and then give ground inch by inch as you are exposed.

however none of this gets us away from the fact that you accused me of lying when i said the maximum sentence for manslaughter was life

do you accept that you were wrong

yes or no

No I don't you've yet to cite a specific example of a similar case where a life sentence was handed down, and the only evidence you've provided is a document which talks about law reform.

then we can get back to the topic

finding the average sentence even if it is possible is irrelevant i said that the maximum sentence was life
you called me a liar

have the decency to admit you were wrong
or are you not big enough to admit you were wrong

Yeah cdebru, I think a republican apologist saying "have the decency to admit you were wrong" when quibbling over a minor detail of a argument, while avoiding the central point of the discussion says it all about the republican ethos at the moment.

cdebru

mycroft wrote:

Yeah cdebru, I think a republican apologist saying "have the decency to admit you were wrong" when quibbling over a minor detail of a argument, while avoiding the central point of the discussion says it all about the republican ethos at the moment.

iam not an apologist i have nothing to apologise for you on the other hand have something to apologise for
it is not a minor detail you accused me of lying
which is untrue and as bonkey explained already to you against the rules of this forum

mycroft wrote:

1. A judge can not impose a sentence for life imprisonment in all man slaughter charges. Life imprisonment for manslaughter cannot be given for death by misadventure, so, y'know, STOP LYING.

now i explained everything you said there was wrong
your silly statement about death by misadventure
your silly statement that a judge cannot impose a life sentence for all manslaughter convictions in the UK

now have you got the balls to say you were wrong

sorry for you definitely seems to be the hardest word

bonkey

cdebru wrote:

which is untrue and as bonkey explained already to you against the rules of this forum

Let me get one thing straight.

Both of you are within a hair's breath of picking up permanent bans from this forum, if for no other reason than the fact that both of you have demonstrated almost beyond question that you are unable to listen to a moderator telling you to stop bickering.

I'll try one last time.

You are both acting unacceptably. You are both being told to stow it. And the next one of you who brings my intervention in as trying to back up their criticism of the other as you just did will be out on their ear as soon as I see the post.

Jesus ****ing Christ but the childishness going on in this forum is growing beyond belief.

jc

cdebru

mycroft wrote:

No I don't you've yet to cite a specific example of a similar case where a life sentence was handed down, and the only evidence you've provided is a document which talks about law reform.
.

i dont have to cite a specific example of a similar case i said the maximum sentence for manslaughter is life

that is a fact

you are just trying to wriggle away from the fact that you owe me an apology

i have provided numerous links that state manslaughter carries a maximum sentence of life

but here are some more
http://www.masons.com/php/page.php?page_id=imprisonme1594
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/cru/documents/life-sent-05.htm

http://web.ukonline.co.uk/ruth.buddell/chapter3.htm

Sponge Bob

Yo! Cdebru.

Lets get this back on topic. I have been asked to go canvassing (actually providing logistical support) in Mayo in the Udarás elections next weekend and need a favour. Can you tell me where to get the following essential election worker gear.

1. Boiler suits
2. Balaclave
3. Stun Guns
4. CS gas
5. Pepper spray

I dont want to feel naked if I meet Sinn Féin or the Greens on the hustings . The only square thing about me is me keks .

TIA

cdebru

Sponge Bob wrote:

Yo! Cdebru.

Lets get this back on topic. I have been asked to go canvassing (actually providing logistical support) in Mayo in the Udarás elections next weekend and need a favour. Can you tell me where to get the following essential election worker gear.

1. Boiler suits
2. Balaclave
3. Stun Guns
4. CS gas
5. Pepper spray

I dont want to feel naked if I meet Sinn Féin or the Greens on the hustings . The only square thing about me is me keks .

TIA

lol

you could try aeongus o' snodaigh he might be able to put you in touch with someone

Cork

Sponge Bob wrote:

Yo! Cdebru.

Lets get this back on topic. I have been asked to go canvassing (actually providing logistical support) in Mayo in the Udarás elections next weekend and need a favour. Can you tell me where to get the following essential election worker gear.

1. Boiler suits
2. Balaclave
3. Stun Guns
4. CS gas
5. Pepper spray

I dont want to feel naked if I meet Sinn Féin or the Greens on the hustings . The only square thing about me is me keks .

TIA

Joking aside - explanations were never given with regards to the above.

These items are not items commonly associated with canvassing for democratic politics.

But then not all democratic partys don't have private armys.

poneill

cdebru wrote:

you could try aeongus o' snodaigh he might be able to put you in touch with someone

He put himself , or at least his nose, in touch with someone recently .

cdebru

poneill wrote:

He put himself , or at least his nose, in touch with someone recently .

lucky for the joyrider all them boys are in portlaoise

true

cdebru wrote:

lucky for the joyrider all them boys are in portlaoise

The implication being that the joyrider would otherwise have ended up like that poor man murdered in Short Strand, Belfast in late January ?

What charming people Sinn Fein are. Nothing changes. Weasel words from Adams mean nothing.

AmenToThat

Sponge Bob wrote:

Yo! Cdebru.

Lets get this back on topic. I have been asked to go canvassing (actually providing logistical support) in Mayo in the Udarás elections next weekend and need a favour. Can you tell me where to get the following essential election worker gear.

1. Boiler suits
2. Balaclave
3. Stun Guns
4. CS gas
5. Pepper spray

I dont want to feel naked if I meet Sinn Féin or the Greens on the hustings . The only square thing about me is me keks .

TIA

May I suggest you target the under 12's (the voters and leaders of the future) as I feel your style of humour is best suited to that age group.
Seems to be quiet popular here as well btw......................

true

Its a lot better for people to target people with humour, than to target them with
baseball bats, Stun Guns, CS gas , semtex, . Pepper spray or AK47's , dont you think?

foxybrowne

does anyone see this: the right blow the top over violence at home, but don't mind violence abroad, the left concentrate more on violence abroad and are less harsh on violence at home.

PS. while the media goes crazy about everyday, and (sadly) often ignored violence at home, Michael "too fascist for the Blueshirts" McDowell, the man who whipped it all up, is waltzing his hardcore Criminal Justice Bill through the Dail.
And we just ignore it.

true

foxybrowne wrote:

does anyone see this: , the left concentrate more on violence abroad and are less harsh on violence at home.

.

Like being less harsh on the RAfia , as shown in the Short Strand murder ?