|
Unfortunately the various governments since the war seem intent on ruining this country.
I watched the TV program about the recent riots where the owner of the burned down furniture shop met some of the (black) rioters.
You realise some of these black rioters are going to be trouble all their life, with involvement with drugs, guns and gangs.
So sad that this country is being dragged down to the level of a Los Angeles inner city suburb.
I guess it is too late to do anything about it now.
|
It’s part of the problem to which this question refers. AOG:
http://www.theanswerb.../Question1085797.html
And it needs urgent attention.
|
|
"You realise some of these black rioters are going to be trouble all their life, with involvement with drugs, guns and gangs."
Because white people would never get involved with drugs, guns or gangs would they?
|
|
Question Author
Yes a vicious and savage attack on a poor defenceless girl, how on earth they were let of free of any charges, is beyond all reasoning, what is happening to this country?
But in this drug case it should be the Crown Prosecution Service, who should bear the criticism and not the police.
|
|
-- answer removed --
|
|
she should have been punished same way as they would everyone, disgusting system we have here!!! rioters terrified the government, and they were incapable of coping with the riots, and they are always too busy cross charging their expenses like normal rather than fix the problems in society/country etc.
|
|
From the CPS, "A prosecution is usual when a case involves the possession of a Class A drug".
A Caution for possession of two types class A controlled drugs, described as 'a large quanity', is wrong and uncommon. A 'large quantity' of different types of drugs would normally result in prosecution for possession with intent to supply.
The leading case on sentencing is R v Aramah. The minimum sentence for possession of Class A with intent should be 3 years. But see R v Singh, which raised the minimum guideline to 5 years.
|
|
Question Author
redhelen
Pity you do not condemn drug pushers who destroy many lives.
Rather condemn me for not even mentioning 'BLACK' rioters eh?
|
|
I totally agree with the first answer from VHG. The country has gone way down hill since the end of world war 2, When the flood gates were first opened to immigrants.
Yes, White English are responsible for a lot of the drug a violent crime, but its totally out of proportion. We all know the VAST majority of drug offences are Eastern Europeans, Asians, and Blacks. The VAST majority of street crime with violence is young blacks. When ever you hear of news of yet another stabbing you can almost guarantee the culprit is a young black.
But no one in a position to do anything about it has the guts to say it how it is. That is why this woman has been let off, because the CPS is scared of being labelled racist. And we all know its only us white English who could possibly be racist!!!!
|
|
Question Author
thejudderman
Got it in one, most know what the problems are, especially the politicians, the police, and the media, the trouble is they are all too scared to bring the issues out into the open, and it can only make matters worse to leave them bubbling under the surface.
|
|
Her being 'let off' palls into insignificance when you think that the police office who shot Mark Duggan, who was unarmed, will be 'let off' too.
|
|
"Her being 'let off' palls into insignificance when you think that the police office who shot Mark Duggan, who was unarmed, will be 'let off' too"
SandyRoe,
Mark Duggan was typical of the young blacks Ive mentioned. Live by the sword, die by the sword!
He was in to drugs, and violent crime.
I will definately NEVER loose sleep over someone like that being shot dead by the police..... In fact the more they shoot the less there'll be on the streets!! And incase your thinking it (which im sure you are) it has NOTHING to do with his colour!!
|
|
Cop out by the CPS
|
|
The drugs were found at the house she shared with Duggan. I am sure her defence would be that the drugs were Duggan's and not hers. Since Duggan is dead, the possibility of getting a conviction would have been extremely slim. The decission not to prosecute her is sensible. To have proceded would have been a dreadful waste of money.
|
|
And this is the family that are claiming they've been harrassed by the Police for years? If they're dealing in Class A drugs, firearms and all the criminality that goes with such activities then I WANT the Police to continue to 'harrass' them!
|
|
Gromit, if her defence would have been, or was, that the drugs were Duggan's then she could not qualify in law to receive a Caution.
|
|
She probably would have gotten off with it by claiming she didn't know they were there anyway. also that may have been the case.
|
|
Doesn't a caution invite you to admit guilt knowing that that's the end of the matter?
|
|
The standard of evidence required for a Caution is the same standard required to prosecute, but the offence has to be fully admitted by the accused.
Cautions are normally only used for first time offenders who are accused of minor or low-level crime.
|
|
Exdc
The fact that they went with the caution may indicate their chances of proving the drugs were hers and not Duggens was difficult. In all probability that was also the truth.
|