Things that make you go What the F**k?

Started by The Real Laoislad, November 19, 2007, 05:54:25 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

macdanger2

Quote from: under the bar on October 24, 2019, 02:46:13 PM
Even *if* the lad did accept a few quid to collect the trailer at the docks and open it in the estate to let immigrants/asylum seekers out, it in no way makes him culpable for their deaths. That lies squarely with whoever locked them in the trailer with no means of survival or escape, accident or not.

If true, it would make him part of the people smuggling trade though so he would be partially culpable for their deaths imo

J70

Quote from: under the bar on October 24, 2019, 02:46:13 PM
Even *if* the lad did accept a few quid to collect the trailer at the docks and open it in the estate to let immigrants/asylum seekers out, it in no way makes him culpable for their deaths. That lies squarely with whoever locked them in the trailer with no means of survival or escape, accident or not.

IF he was part of the set-up, then he bears some level of responsibility. Might be a minor portion of the overall blame and charges, but he can't claim innocence, especially if making money on it. How he fares, IF a part of the scam, will undoubtedly come down to how willing he is to talk.

GetOverTheBar

The police have requested a further 24 hours to question. I assume that means it's not looking good for your man here. They would only be seeking that extension if they felt he was in some way more involved than merely being an unlucky haulier.

Tony Baloney

I can't get over the amount of shite below some of the Facebook articles on this. He's innocent, stop harassing him, he has been released without charge etc. I agree that it's poor form to name him but am I being naive in not knowing there were so many stupid people in the wild?!

J70

#5839
On the naming, are suspects arrested in a criminal investigation not ALWAYS named provided they're of adult age or their identification would not victimize a minor?

imtommygunn

You are probably right J70. In general I really don't like it but seems to be the way it's done.

screenexile

Quote from: Tony Baloney on October 24, 2019, 05:23:40 PM
I can't get over the amount of shite below some of the Facebook articles on this. He's innocent, stop harassing him, he has been released without charge etc. I agree that it's poor form to name him but am I being naive in not knowing there were so many stupid people in the wild?!

Yeah the rumour about him being released is strange.

One of the legal heads may know better then me but does the extra 24 hours granted go against him? Surely if his innocence was obvious he would be released in the required time frame.

Who knows the full story but sounds like he's involved in some way.

David McKeown

Quote from: J70 on October 24, 2019, 05:42:16 PM
On the naming, are suspects arrested in a criminal investigation not ALWAYS named provided they're of adult age or their identification would not victimize a minor?

Not always. In Northern Ireland the common practice would be for them not to be named until they had appeared in court. That said Paddy Jackson was named before hand and if I remember correctly unsuccessfully sued over it. I'd need to check that though.

In England the more common way is to name once charged but again it's not uncommon to name before this sometimes. I can see the argument both ways on naming and I am in favour of naming provided it doesn't lead to identification of victims etc.

What strikes me as odd is the number of people on newspaper forums who are criticising the naming in this case and criticising the not naming in other (mainly sex) cases.
2022 Allianz League Prediction Competition Winner

David McKeown

Quote from: screenexile on October 24, 2019, 06:28:08 PM
Quote from: Tony Baloney on October 24, 2019, 05:23:40 PM
I can't get over the amount of shite below some of the Facebook articles on this. He's innocent, stop harassing him, he has been released without charge etc. I agree that it's poor form to name him but am I being naive in not knowing there were so many stupid people in the wild?!

Yeah the rumour about him being released is strange.

One of the legal heads may know better then me but does the extra 24 hours granted go against him? Surely if his innocence was obvious he would be released in the required time frame.

Who knows the full story but sounds like he's involved in some way.

I wouldn't read much into to be honest particularly in England and their very strict custody time frames. I am assuming and I stress assuming local police weren't expecting this and it wasn't intelligence lead so they are literally likely reinterviewing on a piecemeal basis as they get new info gathered.

What I mean is had this happened weeks ago and they were looking more time it would suggest to me something very different. Ie that they had soo much evidence to put that they needed more time to get it all out.
2022 Allianz League Prediction Competition Winner

David McKeown

Quote from: Fionntamhnach on October 24, 2019, 06:33:59 PM
Quote from: under the bar on October 24, 2019, 02:46:13 PM
Even *if* the lad did accept a few quid to collect the trailer at the docks and open it in the estate to let immigrants/asylum seekers out, it in no way makes him culpable for their deaths. That lies squarely with whoever locked them in the trailer with no means of survival or escape, accident or not.

If the driver in question did know that he was to do what you had suggested or similar, in having knowledge that the container had a number of people inside it as part of a human trafficking operation, then there is a chance that he could be charged with murder or manslaughter on the basis of Joint Enterprise or Common Purpose.

I would agree on Manslaughter although the Supreme Court made a ruling on that last year called Jogee which might make that more difficult. I don't see how they will ever prove murder given they'd need to prove an intention to kill or cause serious harm.
2022 Allianz League Prediction Competition Winner

under the bar

Quote from: Fionntamhnach on October 24, 2019, 06:33:59 PM
Quote from: under the bar on October 24, 2019, 02:46:13 PM
Even *if* the lad did accept a few quid to collect the trailer at the docks and open it in the estate to let immigrants/asylum seekers out, it in no way makes him culpable for their deaths. That lies squarely with whoever locked them in the trailer with no means of survival or escape, accident or not.

If the driver in question did know that he was to do what you had suggested or similar, in having knowledge that the container had a number of people inside it as part of a human trafficking operation, then there is a chance that he could be charged with murder or manslaughter on the basis of Joint Enterprise or Common Purpose.

How could it be murder or manslaughter on the basis of joint enterprise if they were already dead when he collected the container?

David McKeown

Quote from: under the bar on October 24, 2019, 07:52:03 PM
Quote from: Fionntamhnach on October 24, 2019, 06:33:59 PM
Quote from: under the bar on October 24, 2019, 02:46:13 PM
Even *if* the lad did accept a few quid to collect the trailer at the docks and open it in the estate to let immigrants/asylum seekers out, it in no way makes him culpable for their deaths. That lies squarely with whoever locked them in the trailer with no means of survival or escape, accident or not.

If the driver in question did know that he was to do what you had suggested or similar, in having knowledge that the container had a number of people inside it as part of a human trafficking operation, then there is a chance that he could be charged with murder or manslaughter on the basis of Joint Enterprise or Common Purpose.

How could it be murder or manslaughter on the basis of joint enterprise if they were already dead when he collected the container?

As I say I think murder would be impossible to prove in these circumstances but the timing of their death maybe immaterial to a manslaughter conviction. Joint enterprise would only require people to have been involved in the trafficking and had enough knowledge of it. So say (and I stress this is a completely hypothetical situation and not what I am suggesting or speculating happened) there were three people involved in the trafficking. One who organised it, one who took the money off the people and hid them in the container and a third who knew what was in the container and agreed to pick it up and deliver it somewhere, all three would be guilty on a joint enterprise basis provided all three had sufficient knowledge of what was happening.
2022 Allianz League Prediction Competition Winner

under the bar

Was Morecambe bay 15 years ago?? Jeez seems about 5.  Another in a long line of tragedies that the establishment doesn't give a shit about.

yellowcard

Quote from: under the bar on October 24, 2019, 10:16:34 PM
Was Morecambe bay 15 years ago?? Jeez seems about 5.  Another in a long line of tragedies that the establishment doesn't give a shit about.

Particularly so when it is foreign nationals as its victims. Watch how quickly this tragedy fades from the news.

It's a humanitarian issue and then you hear of the number of drownings which occur regularly as people try to flee war torn and poverty stricken areas that don't even register as news.

under the bar

Quote from: yellowcard on October 24, 2019, 10:27:08 PM
Quote from: under the bar on October 24, 2019, 10:16:34 PM
Was Morecambe bay 15 years ago?? Jeez seems about 5.  Another in a long line of tragedies that the establishment doesn't give a shit about.

Particularly so when it is foreign nationals as its victims. Watch how quickly this tragedy fades from the news.

It's a humanitarian issue and then you hear of the number of drownings which occur regularly as people try to flee war torn and poverty stricken areas that don't even register as news.

Fleeing the wars in Syria and Yemen that the British govt
makes billions from selling weapons of total destruction to that create millions of asylum seekers.