to think they should charge the Syria girls

[adsy]

If they are indeed with terrorists in Syria then when a small chink of sense comes back to them and they want to come home, I hope they will be charged.

IF - and I don't think one single person on this thread has said they shouldn't be charged if they have committed an offence

AuntieStella excellent points made.

Limited You cannot understand WannaBe's post regarding double standards applied to 15/16 year olds, but go on in your post to prove it perfectly.

You would stand by your dd if she were pregnant, because that is morally right, you would allow her the decision whether to terminate or not because her mind and her body is not yours. Exactly! But you argue these girls are naive and cannot be held responsible for their own actions, that if they have undesirable intents, then it is not their fault. Precisely the double standards WannaBe was illustrating. If your daughter can be grown up enough to make such a life changing decision herself, on her own limited experience of the world, then these girls can be grown up enough to make the decisions that they did. And as your dd would have to do, whatever she chose regarding the pregnancy, they will (and should) have to live with the consequences for the rest of their lives. I am not saying leave them to their dreadful fate btw, but that if they returned, they should be treated as any other UK criminal of that age would.

You also accused me of being Bear Grylls I was answering a post that suggested girls and their families wouldn't want them to return to the UK if they may face prison. So that poster is just as idiotic as me thinking they could escape, but that poster also held your viewpoint, so I don't expect you to bash her.

To clarify, I would think that if someone is still of a returnable state, not already trapped in IS controlled territory, but knew they had been stupid to initially intend to join them, it would still be preferable to be imprisoned as opposed to say "Agghh! I can't go back... so I might as well go on."

Also, to people demanding proof and evidence well you are being a little ridiculous. Even intelligence forces have to go on suspected motives based on what they can gather. These gorls have made contact with known IS sympathisers, travelled the common route to make it to IS areas in Syria, followed pro IS sites and disappeared for a week. If their intentions were good we could have surmised that by now. But we haven't, because their intentions are most likely not good.

If the police came across a man in a car, with binoculars, a shopping list for poisons and a diary of someone's daily life, while parked outside said person's home in the middle of the night, do you think they might arrest this person on the surmise that they intended them harm? Sure as hell they would. Yet no actual crimes have taken place yet... have they?

So why is it so wrong for us to surmise their intentions, and debate on what should happen if they were to return?

Adsy hats off to you for bringing something so controversial under the spotlight.

I do hope these girls are brought home and proper measures are taken to ensure they pose no threats before integrating back into society. But as it has been a week, I doubt my hope makes no sodding difference for them. That is why I cannot feel sympathy.

they certainly have, even making up non-existent things to charge them with.

I can understand people who are sad for these misguided girls, and particularly for their families. They have made a terrible mistake and will have to live with the consequences.

But I am absolutely convinced that we should not send police to chase after them at considerable cost and at no little risk to themselves, to try and bring them back against their wishes.

I am far, far more concerned about yet another batch of innocent villagers who have been carried off against their wishes into slavery or murder. Where is all the anguish about them?

they have been contacting other people linked to isis
are you aware that is against the law under the new anti terrorism legislation? So they have already done something they can and should be charged with.

everyone who joins isis is a terrorist and evil yes.

Anyone who habitually looks at pro isis websites is heading down the route of becoming an evil terrorist.

Anyone who looks at beheadings on youtube even for curiosity needs to have a long hard look at themselves.

A lot of the isis members won't have kidnapped anyone this week. So what is your point exactly? the fact is that people, be it these young girls or their friend that went before them have glammerised what isis are doing and are supportive of it. And isis have kidnapped 90 Christians today - hmm wonder what they'll be doing with them, inviting them round for a little social? no didn't think so. They'll likely be beheaded with the results published on youtube for girls like the ones in this case to go and watch and fantacise about being married to one of them. "what does your husband do for a living?" "well, he beheads people." mmm what a catch.

Also, to people demanding proof and evidence well you are being a little ridiculous.>>>

It's ridiculous to want evidence and proof of a crime before charging children? Happy to be ridiculous in that case then.

I am still waiting for any evidence that people have said these girls are not responsible for their actions or it's not their fault

discussing grooming and issues of targeting vulnerable young people doesn't remove culpability - it is just exploring the deeper issues

I think that's difficult for some people to understand

countess making what things up to charge who with

Anyone who habitually looks at pro isis websites is heading down the route of becoming an evil terrorist

wow so that's lots of police, security forces and journalists out to kill us then

Oh don't be silly ghosty

ghosty you are so deliberately obtuce that it is actually laughable.

I believe that police etc who have to look at disturbing websites (and this includes terrorism, child pornography, etc) in the course of their job( have internal support available to help them to process the things they might see on those websites.

I don't believe you are really that stupid that you think that police and journalists looking at pro isis websites is the same or even considered the same as girls who have made active contact with terrorists and who have left the country to terrorist areas.

Countess so you have no belief that anyone should be charged for their intent to commit a crime? Also, evidence and proof is gathered on a surmised basis all the time. Just because a man has dna of a girl under his finger nails and was seen on cctv right around the corner after she was raped is not absolutely damning and final in the fact that it was he who raped her. But it sure as hell counts as evidence that he is her rapist.

The same way that these girls' surmised intent is to be heading off to join IS, because all the circumstantial knowledge points that way. I know in the UK we are supposedly innocent until proven guilty, so there is no need to prove we are innocent until someone can say otherwise, but if that is 100% the way it works, why are suspects and people being charged but not yet convicted held in custody or on remand?

By that logic, have you concrete proof that these girls are doing anything other than going to join IS?

This video is amazing. I think that the copic christians who have made this video are courageous people. I am not sure that I could be capable for forgiving ISIS if they beheaded my relatives.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-31589091

Forgiveness is why we are prepared to go after these girls and try and reintegrate them into our society. Yes, forgiving is bloodly hard.

I feel that someone who looks at pro isis websites needs help. (Possibly help should be given by force.) I feel that internet providers should do more to block the web pages of ISIS.

I suppose though that these girls are bright enough to know how to use TOR. (An app that allows you to browse anomolously and access really extreme websites that are not found on google. I believe that google already delists child pornography, drugs and possible extremist websites)

not obtuse no - sarcastic because it's a daft statement

I have no proof of anything accept they got on a plane to Turkey and had been tweeting ISIS sympathisers

that all anyone here knows as the facts

yes it's highly likely they intend to go to Syria but there is no proof they have

So ghosty what do you think they've done then?
Also bearing in mind that tweeting ISIS sympathisers is illegal.
As pointed out, there is an avalanche of circumstantial evidence that they want to jin ISIS.

ghosty are you going to feel a bit silly when we get the proof that they are indeed in Syria and not in Bodrum enjoying the dolmades?

splodges you are having a different argument. DNA etc is evidence, therefore you can charge someone. No evidence, no charge, its the basis of the legal system.

Charge people for their intent to commit a crime? What is this, minority report? If I'm thinking about killing you, is that intent to commit a crime? You can't charge me for thinking about it. Wanting to do things is not a crime.

Plotting, associating etc etc all may or may not be crimes depending on legislation. However they still require evidence of whatever crime you are charging. You need evidence of plotting, evidence of memebership etc.

Is this really controversial, that we don't charge people without some evidence theyt have done something?

well, Jimmy Savile was never proven to have done anything wrong, was he? Assumptions were only made after he died, so perhaps he was innocent after all, there was no concrete evidence... ???? no thought not.

There is evidence that these girls have had contact with pro isis websites and with isis recruiters. The authorities have confirmed as much.

On the whole we should operate on an innocent until proven guilty in court policy. But sometimes due to circumstances there are grey areas whereby we know someone to be guilty because of evidence, but because of circumstance they cannot be proven as such.

Jimmy Savile is dead thus he can never be tried for his crimes. We know him to be guilty though, and I wouldn't imagine that anyone would try to dispute that fact (well people have tried but the evidence seems overwhelming).

At some point when these girls are not found or they don't return to the UK or we see them on youtube or a news report about isis brides people will accept that they did in fact leave to join isis. some may still sympathise with them, but on the whole I think that people will accept that they are just another band of radical terrorists. it won't need a conviction to prove that.

Not really Adsy because if you actually read my post I haven't said that - but I have that that the FACTS are they 1. Looked at pro Isis websites, 2. Tweeted pro ISIS accounts, 3) got a plane to Turkey

if you read my posts I also say it's highly likely they have gone to Syria

so no I wont feel silly thanks !

Foxy you even had me going for a minute with your reply.

Yet another terrible example. We're talking about charging people. Do you often try dead people in the UK? Saville was never charged and legally has never been found guilty of a crime.
But what the fucking fuck has they got to do with people arguing that you can charge LIVE people with a crime on no evidence?

countess see tigg's point above