Originally posted by AlchemistSwami
So, he was jailed for violating a court ordered gag order, which he was aware of.
The fact that he used facebook is irrelevant, correct?
Not too bright
Originally posted by TheFlash
What a great example it is of why you shouldn't break the law, eh?
He was not arrested by police or even represented by a lawyer.
Originally posted by gladtobehere
But you guys should worry about those Moslems...
Originally posted by terriblyvexed
reply to post by Sankari
I'm a divorced farther, and I have been to a closed hearing this is wrong.
now for the thread.
My concern is more of how he got the gagging order. He was accused over, and over again, and cleared his grown sons said it was lies, but they kept social services with him to monitor him.
The gagging order was clearly to keep him from letting the pubic know of the wrong doing of the government.
They had no right, and the ex-wife should have faced the courts for multiple lies to child services.
I had this problem out of my ex's mother after two years of having my kids checked for bruises, and taking a weekly pee test while someone watched, I was finally cleared, and told that if she filed again she would face federal charges.
Originally posted by ShadellacZumbrum
reply to post by Cobaltic1978
Secret Court ? No Arrest? No Lawyer?
Hummm ... ..
I guess things are a Little different in the UK. I always thought the Brits were more civil than that.
When did the "Secret Court" come about? I had never heard of it before.
If this is Any sign of things to come I suspect the Summary Executions will soon be implemented.
I am curious to know.. . Does the UK have anything similar to the Patriot Act?
If so, it might be in the language that makes this possible.edit on 2-6-2013 by ShadellacZumbrum because: (no reason given)
The Star Chamber (Latin: Camera stellata) was an English court of law that sat at the royal Palace of Westminster until 1641. It was made up of Privy Councillors, as well as common-law judges and supplemented the activities of the common-law and equity courts in both civil and criminal matters. The court was set up to ensure the fair enforcement of laws against prominent people, those so powerful that ordinary courts could never convict them of their crimes. Court sessions were held in secret, with no indictments, and no witnesses. Evidence was presented in writing. Over time it evolved into a political weapon, a symbol of the misuse and abuse of power by the English monarchy and courts.
In modern usage, legal or administrative bodies with strict, arbitrary rulings and secretive proceedings are sometimes called, metaphorically or poetically, star chambers. This is a pejorative term and intended to cast doubt on the legitimacy of the proceedings. The inherent lack of objectivity of politically motivated charges has led to substantial reforms in English law in most jurisdictions since that time.