View unanswered posts | View active topics
It is currently Wed Jul 30, 2025 10:10 pm
MP Margaret Moran not fit to stand trial
Author |
Message |
Linux_User
I haven't seen my friends in so long
Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 3:29 pm Posts: 7173
|
 |  |  |  | Fogmeister wrote: I really don't see the issue. She has £80,000 that she shouldn't have. Take it back off her. Simples. Why does she even have the opportunity to defend herself? --- I am here: http://tapatalk.com/map.php?oggdpb |  |  |  |  |
Wow, the principles of British justice have really gone out of the window in this thread haven't they. Innocent until proven guilty? And whatever happened to the compassionate society? She's not fit to stand trial, fair enough. She's not "getting off", the trial will be suspended until she is fit to stand trial. Why would anyone wish to torment a fellow human being by putting them through a process they clearly can't handle?
|
Sat Apr 28, 2012 11:38 am |
|
 |
JJW009
I haven't seen my friends in so long
Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 6:58 pm Posts: 8767 Location: behind the sofa
|
At least she's not accused of kiddy-fiddling. There would be calls from people (including some on 404) to have her horribly mutilated in a truly medieval fashion in order to force a confession before her inevitable death,
_________________jonbwfc's law: "In any forum thread someone will, no matter what the subject, mention Firefly." When you're feeling too silly for x404, youRwired.net
|
Sat Apr 28, 2012 5:47 pm |
|
 |
Fogmeister
I haven't seen my friends in so long
Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 7:35 pm Posts: 6580 Location: Getting there
|
Like others have said, if she can't handle going through the trial she shouldn't have committed the crime in the first place.
|
Sat Apr 28, 2012 7:34 pm |
|
 |
ProfessorF
What's a life?
Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 7:56 pm Posts: 12030
|
EFT. I'll just add that as someone who's suffered with depression to the point of being suicidal, there's no way I'd have been fit to stand trial while I was ill. Now, though, I'm certainly fit enough to answer to any authority about my actions whilst I was ill.
|
Sat Apr 28, 2012 8:05 pm |
|
 |
MrStevenRogers
Spends far too much time on here
Joined: Fri Apr 24, 2009 9:44 pm Posts: 4860
|
but you could use the past to effect the future outcome of a case, which could not be judged at the time, and in doing so result in a no trial funny how only the few can out stride justice when the many have to face justice regardless, ho hum ...
_________________ Hope this helps . . . Steve ...
Nothing known travels faster than light, except bad news ... HP Pavilion 24" AiO. Ryzen7u. 32GB/1TB M2. Windows 11 Home ...
Last edited by MrStevenRogers on Sat Apr 28, 2012 9:13 pm, edited 1 time in total.
|
Sat Apr 28, 2012 9:10 pm |
|
 |
rustybucket
I haven't seen my friends in so long
Joined: Thu Jun 18, 2009 5:10 pm Posts: 5836
|
Exactly right, Jon. And as for this: If someone isn't fit to stand trial, the law says that the trial cannot proceed until such time as they are fit to undergo due and fair process. The principle of justice you state requires that we don't suspend legal principles just because someone happens to be an MP. It's perfectly simple - she isn't fit to stand trial so she doesn't stand trial. Utterly irrelevant is the fact that she's disliked by unthinking, swivel-eyed parrots of a formerly Fascist-supporting, idiocy-mongering hate-rag like the Daily Heil.
_________________Jim
|
Sat Apr 28, 2012 9:12 pm |
|
 |
jonbwfc
What's a life?
Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 7:26 pm Posts: 17040
|

This is logically silly for at least two reasons 1) People don't do crimes expecting to be caught. They do crimes because they think they will get away with them. 2) How the hell is anyone who hasn't been through a trial before supposed to know whether they will or won't be able to deal with one beforehand? 3) What you're actually requiring is 'if you won't be able to handle the trial at some indeterminate point in the future, don't do the crime'. Find me one person who can answer that question with any certainty. You're setting a standard which is simply impossible in the real world to meet, and would result in all sorts of people who are patently more in need of medical and/or psychiatric help ending up in the dock. Is that really what you want? People who are literally not in control of their actions being tried in court? The only important question is this and it's very simple - ' Is she medially and psychologically fit to stand trial?' if the answer is 'yes' you send her to court. If the answer is 'no', you don't. You wait until the answer is 'yes'. That's how you run a proper justice system. As oppose to some sort of bizarre system we abandoned when we gave up the ducking stool. Jon
|
Sat Apr 28, 2012 9:14 pm |
|
 |
MrStevenRogers
Spends far too much time on here
Joined: Fri Apr 24, 2009 9:44 pm Posts: 4860
|
sadly this only seems to effect a few chosen people, unlike the rest of us mere morals remember we are all in this together ...
_________________ Hope this helps . . . Steve ...
Nothing known travels faster than light, except bad news ... HP Pavilion 24" AiO. Ryzen7u. 32GB/1TB M2. Windows 11 Home ...
|
Sat Apr 28, 2012 9:16 pm |
|
 |
MrStevenRogers
Spends far too much time on here
Joined: Fri Apr 24, 2009 9:44 pm Posts: 4860
|

 |  |  |  | jonbwfc wrote: This is logically silly for at least two reasons 1) People don't do crimes expecting to be caught. They do crimes because they think they will get away with them. 2) How the hell is anyone who hasn't been through a trial before supposed to know whether they will or won't be able to deal with one beforehand? 3) What you're actually requiring is 'if you won't be able to handle the trial at some indeterminate point in the future, don't do the crime'. Find me one person who can answer that question with any certainty. You're setting a standard which is simply impossible in the real world to meet, and would result in all sorts of people who are patently more in need of medical and/or psychiatric help ending up in the dock. Is that really what you want? People who are literally not in control of their actions being tried in court? The only important question is this and it's very simple - ' Is she medially and psychologically fit to stand trial?' if the answer is 'yes' you send her to court. If the answer is 'no', you don't. You wait until the answer is 'yes'. That's how you run a proper justice system. As oppose to some sort of bizarre system we abandoned when we gave up the ducking stool. Jon |  |  |  |  |
if you are unable to do the time for the crime don't do the crime and when the crime is uncovered and you are found out, live with it especially when in a position that is in regard to putting in place laws that have to be upheld, ho hum ...
_________________ Hope this helps . . . Steve ...
Nothing known travels faster than light, except bad news ... HP Pavilion 24" AiO. Ryzen7u. 32GB/1TB M2. Windows 11 Home ...
|
Sat Apr 28, 2012 9:29 pm |
|
 |
ProfessorF
What's a life?
Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 7:56 pm Posts: 12030
|
I don't think anyone is disputing that she should be put on trial, the only matter is when. Or are we suggesting that there should be no such thing as 'unfit for trial'? Because that's not a good road to travel at all.
|
Sat Apr 28, 2012 9:34 pm |
|
 |
MrStevenRogers
Spends far too much time on here
Joined: Fri Apr 24, 2009 9:44 pm Posts: 4860
|
i think she has taken good advice and acting lessons if she wishes to top herself i hope she obliges, saves the cost of a court case ...
_________________ Hope this helps . . . Steve ...
Nothing known travels faster than light, except bad news ... HP Pavilion 24" AiO. Ryzen7u. 32GB/1TB M2. Windows 11 Home ...
|
Sat Apr 28, 2012 9:38 pm |
|
 |
rustybucket
I haven't seen my friends in so long
Joined: Thu Jun 18, 2009 5:10 pm Posts: 5836
|
Really? The probability of British former-MPs being judged not fit to stand trial is significantly lower than that of the UK general population? Do you have any data to back up your assertion? Or are you simply making it up because the story involves someone from a class of people you happen to irrationally hate? So your implication is that either: - Mrs. Moran, as a Labour MP, contradicted a soundbite given by a Conservative/LibDem government not elected until after she stood down as an MP
- The coalition Conservative / LibDem goverment is somehow interested in protecting a disgraced former Labour MP.
Erm... 
_________________Jim
|
Sat Apr 28, 2012 9:42 pm |
|
 |
MrStevenRogers
Spends far too much time on here
Joined: Fri Apr 24, 2009 9:44 pm Posts: 4860
|
_________________ Hope this helps . . . Steve ...
Nothing known travels faster than light, except bad news ... HP Pavilion 24" AiO. Ryzen7u. 32GB/1TB M2. Windows 11 Home ...
|
Sat Apr 28, 2012 9:54 pm |
|
 |
rustybucket
I haven't seen my friends in so long
Joined: Thu Jun 18, 2009 5:10 pm Posts: 5836
|
So, just to clarify, you have no data or facts and are just spouting drivel based on fantasy. So, just to clarify, you have no data or facts and are just spouting drivel based on prejudice and irrational hatred. So, just to clarify, you have no data or facts and are just spouting drivel based on an arbitrary and purely binary value system in which anyone who you don't like is either ‘management’ or a ‘lackey’ So, just to clarify, you have no data or facts and are just spouting drivel based on resentment of a nefarious, arbitrary, mystical and imaginary ‘they’.
_________________Jim
|
Sat Apr 28, 2012 10:15 pm |
|
 |
lumbthelesser
Occasionally has a life
Joined: Fri May 21, 2010 11:38 pm Posts: 442 Location: Manchester
|
+1 to pretty much everything Rustybucket has said on here.
_________________ According to a recent poll, over 70% of Americans don't believe Trump's hair was born in the USA.
|
Sat Apr 28, 2012 10:27 pm |
|
|
Who is online |
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 11 guests |
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum
|
|