It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Counter-terrorism officials are said to be "dismayed" by the outcome of a trial in which eight men were accused of a plot to blow up transatlantic planes.
Originally posted by ninthaxis
The high profile cases such as these end up getting really expensive lawyers wishing to make a name for themselves. The "average joe" who gets put away for a long time for "minor" offenses has to pay for representation, often winding up with a public defender who has nothing at stake in a long sentence for the accused. While it may be laughable the sentence imposed on these people, they were put in front of a jury. Leads me to believe the case wasn't as strong as the government thought, and it may have been hoping that the jury would just jump on the terrorism bandwagon, and convict on all counts because the government says these people were guilty.
Originally posted by Death_Kron
In my oppinion, if you could prove beyond all doubt that these people are guilty then they shouldn't even be appointed a lawyer to defend them!
Originally posted by earthman4
You must commit the crime before you can be punished for it. You can't punish people for planning a crime. I know these guys were bad but all they did was make some bombs, not kill anyone.
Originally posted by earthman4
You must commit the crime before you can be punished for it. You can't punish people for planning a crime.
Originally posted by Death_Kron
Hey Guys,
Was wondering whats all your oppinions on this:
Counter-terrorism officials are said to be "dismayed" by the outcome of a trial in which eight men were accused of a plot to blow up transatlantic planes.
Link: news.bbc.co.uk...
Surely with the amount of evidence that they have our government could of come down alot harder on these terrorists.
What annoys me is the government is quick to jump and clamp down on minor offenders and imposes lengthy sentences however people commiting crimes of the worst nature seemingly get an easy ride?
[edit on 9/9/08 by Death_Kron]
[edit on 9/9/08 by Death_Kron]
Erm what? 'Conspiracy to murder' springs to mind, as I'm sure there are others.
If the US hadn't waded in, we could have caught them at the last stages red-handed. Now we could have these nutcases free in the UK to plan other stuff.
Rashid Rauf, a dual citizen of Britain and Pakistan, was arrested in Bhawalpur, Pakistan in connection with the transatlantic aircraft plot in August 2006, a day before some arrests were made in Britain.
The Pakistani Interior Minister, Aftab Ahmed Khan Sherpao, claimed he was an al-Qaeda operative with links in Afghanistan. He was also said to be one of the ringleaders of the alleged plot.
In December 2006 the anti-terrorism court in Rawalpindi found no evidence that he had been involved in terrorist activities, and his charges were downgraded to forgery and possession of explosives.
One of Rauf's brothers, Tayib Rauf, was among those arrested in Britain, although he was later released without charges.
Rauf mysteriously escaped from jail in December 2007 and has not been recaptured. Authorities say that he escaped after freeing himself from handcuffs.
Originally posted by primamateria
Think about it! A high value potential terrorist in a UK jail escapes because he got out of his handcuffs? And they never found him?
December 13: The terrorism charges on Rauf Rashid are dropped. The Pakistani court recognize there is no evidence that he is involved in terrorism. The British government has stated this makes no difference to their proceedings against the other suspects whom they hold.[9]
December 14 2007: Rashid Rauf mysteriously escaped from jail. Authorities say that he escaped after freeing himself from handcuffs. The two police officials on the duty are currently under arrest by Islamabad police. The police have also tightened security at public transport routes and especially in Rauf's native town, Mirpur.
Originally posted by earthman4
You must commit the crime before you can be punished for it. You can't punish people for planning a crime. I know these guys were bad but all they did was make some bombs, not kill anyone.
Originally posted by ninthaxis
Originally posted by Death_Kron
In my oppinion, if you could prove beyond all doubt that these people are guilty then they shouldn't even be appointed a lawyer to defend them!
This is a lawyers job, to prove one way or the other.
Originally posted by Death_Kron
No, A Lawyers job it to convince a court that someone is either guilty or not guilty. Not to prove it mate.