Saadia,Monkeytrousers and Peacedove...looking forward greatly to your comments on Abu Hamza's conviction.o

[moondog]

I think these men are vile characters too, but it makes me slightly uneasy that they are going to be tried and tried again until the jury comes up with the right verdict. I don't think there should be re-trials unless new evidence comes to light. It's against a basic principle of justice, imo. The right to be tried for a crime which if you are found not guilty of, you walk away with no stain on your character. If the CPS are allowed to just try you again and again and again for no other reason than that they didn't like the first verdict, that seems to me to be a dangerous legal principle. Transfer that to the case of someone who has upset the local police for some reason (Winston Silcott springs to mind), and I can't see how it can not be considered really dangerous.

I doubt that the CPS would go for a re trial unless they did have something new, for the reasons you give Caligula.

Nanneh can yoy CAT me too? You're not set up to receive any messages.

Well yes, true BP.

By the same token though, I wondered why MN-ers consider it so important to discuss (with great gloating in some cases) the demise of a nutcase like Abu Hamza ? As several posters have rightly said the man is not supported by maninstream Mulsims either here or in other countries.

Why not decry the freedom of nutters like Griffin who also roam our streets, mainly the Isle of Dogs and the East End of London ? As a Londoner I don't particularly wish to live next door to Mr Griffin or any of his supporters either.

I used to live near Kent, a place called Welling. A group of Asians who were gathering in a local library there and the security guard were beaten up by the BNP. I am told the attack left the security guard crippled.

I don't seem to hear much discussion of these issues here, or am I missing something ?

MT - will do.

Nanneh I'm supposed to be just lurking but just wanted to say something. I apologized to you on the other thread because i got the wrong end of the stick early in our argument which fanned the flames that wouldn't necessarily have been fanned otherwise. Doing three things at the same time, etc. Anyway, there was another thread about the BNP trial, you'll see it further down, and i said then that we were expecting a retrial. I think the only reason maybe the thread is not as long is that most people agree that the BNP is an abhorrent organisation, whereas the Islamic cartoon furore had more subtle and difficult points to argue.

If you want to discuss Nick Griffin and the BNP, you can. I'm sure there's been a thread on it. But frankly, there's a limit to how many heated threads one can join. Mumsnet's already taken up far more of my time than I was planning for it to do in the last couple of days.

That's also true Ruty.

ruty - no worries I wasn't really offended because I had seen your other posts on other threads and saw you in a different light on other threads. My apologies also for being overly sarcastic

And lets try to think of Justine on maternity leave..

i'm not always that slow on the uptake!

Caligula - sorry don't wish to extend this thread any further than it has gone, but the BNP leaders walked free because there is a loophole in the law. The CPS do not have to come up with fresh evidence. There is sufficient evidence of their activities and what they have said has been captured on tapes.

The Racial and Religious Hatred Bill, if passed would have helped to tighten up the law somewhat, but unfortunatley it has been defeated.

Nanneh re your questions

1)Yes I do find the far right utterly abhorrent (duh!!!) It may surprise you to know that I am not a shaven hearded Aryan Valkyrie,but there you go,I aint.
The point you make is a valid one however,and after I have finished considering Islamist nutters,I may turn my attention to Mr Griffin et all.

2. Err,I'm not talking about the BNP,or Chernobyl,knitting patterns or East Timor.I'm talking about Abu Hamza.

3. I'm interested in what these people say and have been involved in lenghthy cussions with at least tow of them long before you popped up to be their self appointed handmaiden.

That do you??

"Muslims call for changes in law" BBC.

ruty did you see my apology? I repeat it.

MT anyone can contact me at:

[email protected]

Well in that case Nanneh, I don't think they should be re-tried.

I know that won't be a popular view, but it seems to me to be a principle of justice that the state can't just keep trying someone for the same offence until they get a jury to return the verdict they want. What if they get off a second time? Are we just going to keep on trying them until we get the verdict we want? And should we do this to every defendent who comes up before the beak, or just to the ones we don't like?

Moondog - Thanks for the replies. Fascinating !

Monkey Trousers: I tried to email you by CAT, but got an error message. Obvioulsy I did something wrong !

I have set my profile up to receive messages now.

Would you mind trying to send me a message first ? Thanks.

or better still, email me at:

[email protected]

Caligula - you make a very valid point re. retrials.

However, as you are probably aware the Court of Appeal can now quash an acquittal and order a retrial (this became law in April 2005). So the ban on double jeopardy has been lifted. An important change to the law I think and a very good one too.

mt, I have CATed you.

I think it's a terrible one myself, but that's a whole other thread!

Yes, Caligula, it is a new thread !

But do you not think that say in the case of a murder where someone was acquitted the first time, the CPS should be able to call for a retrial ? New evidence has to be produced of course.

The law is retrospective on this, so people can be retried for crimes committed before April 2005.

nanneh, I can assure you that the disgusting activities of the BNP, and their worrying presence in SE London over the years (an area where I grew up and still live) have attracted plenty of discussion on Mumsnet. Search the archives to see more, and if you search current messages you will see I started a thread on the BNP acquittal the day of the verdict.

Only if there is new evidence though, Nanneh. And even then, I have my reservations, because it gives the police permission not to investigate a case properly and collect their evidence. However, I can see that if a murder was committed 30 years ago where DNA wasn't available, or where the prosecution lawyers have withheld evidence from the defence in an original trial, then there is a justification for a re-trial. But where there is no new evidence submitted, then I cannot see any justication at all - it just seems to me that it's carte blanche for the judiciary to decide to keep on trying people they don't like over and over again until they get the verdict they want. And that's why the double jeapardy rule was introduced in the first place - to stop such abuses.