Flagrant miscarriages of justice, and extremely ill-conceived law in the area of sexual crime is regularly discussed here. The case of our host, JK, is a classic example but there are many others that seem to be obvious and easy targets for a civil liberties organisation like Liberty. Given many of the glaring errors and gaping holes in some of the cases of concern, as well as some of the worrying legal issues, Liberty might be successful in challenging this sector of the state's activities. And yet, they don't seem in the slightest bit interested. Any ideas why?

I love JK's song Shami Chakrabati and I gave the Dastards loads of shows in London to help promote the song ( Check it out in Vile Pervert)

But I agree.

Liberty does not seem to care about the flagrant abuses in the UK Justice System which effect the Twin pillars of the Big Brother society namely

TERRORISM and
PAEDOPHILES

I think the reason being that they think the amount of Spin and PR being invested by the NWO into these two control mechanisms is too much for them to take on.

They are happier working around the edges of Human Rights instead of taking head on the two areas where the biggest abuses of Human Rights are taking place.

If you are a MUSLIM or a TEACHER in the UK in 2010 then LIBERTY has deserted you totally.

Shami should hang her head in shame - and JK should write a follow up exposing LIBERTY for their lack of action.

This is what the vulnerable people of the UK want :

1. No terror suspect locked up without charge for more than 48 hours unless it is computer encyrption related with an immanent threat.

2. No raids on Muslims without real evidence.

3. No Police trawling investigations against teachers or vicars especially for historic cases without either DNA or hard evidence against them.

4. Anon status for all terrorists and all sex offence suspects unless convicted due to the "emotive" status of these cases. They cant have a fair trial if they are reported in the press.

5. Similar Fact evidence to be banned like it was before. Each case to be heard individually and on its merits. This will stop mulpiple charges against Terror and Sex suspects. Each differing charge or each trawled complainant should not have to rely on someone else. They should have their own hard primary evidence.

6. Hearsay and just stories are not enough to arrest let alone charge in any case where the sentence is over 2 years except Child Porn where it has to be acceptable to take Computers when this alleged.

7. If child porn is alleged and Computers are confiscated and the person is found innocent then they should not be charged. This ultimately is proof that the allegations about them are untrue. If the Police decide to go on fishing expeditions then they have to accept that this should be the case if they get it wrong.

8. Sentences for Terror offences and Sexual Offences should be restored to what they were BEFORE 1997. New Labour have made it worse to have sex with a 14 year old than murder a 14 year old. This is not right. The sentences must be changed back to where they were - they had lasted for 50 years and were effective. Now they are just barbaric since 1997.

9. Sex Suspects and Terror suspects should be treated with the same evidential care as the CPS and Police have treated the suspects in the TOMLINSON and DE MENEZES cases. Equality before the law for EVERYONE - and surely that should be the aim for LIBERTY. Equality for everyone - in other words if they cant change things in these two cases at least they can change everything else to match this level of proof for EVERYONE - not just the Police.


We need action SHAMI ? are you willing to stand up for MUSLIMS - TEACHERS and PRIESTS and FOREIGNERS in the UK ? or have you been bought out by the NWO ?

Once again, BR we are in solid agreement. The state gets away with eroding legal rights and safeguards for terrorists and child abusers because these things are (rightly) unpopular. Trouble is, widening the goalposts doesn't make it more likely that the state will catch the really bad guys. It DOES make it more likely that more innocent people will be caught up in the carelessly cast net.

Anyone who opposes the loosening of these laws and procedures is villified as a supporter or terrorists and child abusers. It's the classic false dichotomy argument: you don't hate children do you? Well then how could you possibly object to making those accused of child abuse prove their innocence?

Of course, the state has always wanted these extra powers for itself, and introducing them in these two categories of crime is the easiest access point for the thin end of the wedge. When the insidious innovations spread to other areas of law, the same arguments get trotted out. You don't support greedy bankers do you? Well then how can you object to doing away with trial by jury in fraud cases? And anyway we've already had these measures in place for years and they worked so well on terrorists and paedophiles...

I wonder how much longer people will put up with this? When they're arrested for speeding because they own a car that will do 120mph?

SJB wrote:
Liberty might be successful in challenging this sector of the state's activities. And yet, they don't seem in the slightest bit interested. Any ideas why?

I know - from personal experience - that Liberty help a number of people with advice research etc, and sometimes actually bring cases.

In my case - which I don't want to go into - they recommended an outside firm of lawyers and put me in contact with them.

Liberty have a very small staff, and an extremely large workload !!!!

Want more action ?

Then donate some cash !!!!

SJB wrote:
Flagrant miscarriages of justice, and extremely ill-conceived law in the area of sexual crime is regularly discussed here. The case of our host, JK, is a classic example but there are many others that seem to be obvious and easy targets for a civil liberties organisation like Liberty. Given many of the glaring errors and gaping holes in some of the cases of concern, as well as some of the worrying legal issues, Liberty might be successful in challenging this sector of the state's activities. And yet, they don't seem in the slightest bit interested. Any ideas why?

we are careering in to a new style of fascism and people are oblivious to it...not just oblivious..they are actually voting for policies and politicans who are their worst enemies.

Bertram Russell said it over 60 years ago...Russia would become like the West and the West would become like the USSR in time..except it's fascism.

Corporations and the media rule...(a simple defintion of fascism)..politicians follow both where once they led.

Get used to it.

Shami is a member (or at least was) of the British-American Project, which is a junior "Bilderberg" of "young leaders" from various occupations evenly split between the UK and the USA. She cares as much about freedom as Alex Ferguson does about Arsenal.