Quizzes & Puzzles1 min ago
Anyone Watching Starmer?
Date of attack July 29, 2024
Says nothing could be said because it could prejudice the case
Why then, could things be said on 29/10/2024?
Answers
No best answer has yet been selected by Clone. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.If he's saying it now then it's not that he has a problem saying it, it's when. He says he didn't want to say it earlier because he didn't want to prejudice the trial. You seem to think it might be another reason. I can't think of another reason, so I'll accept his reason for now - he didn't want to prejudice the trial. Can you imagine the furore if the perpetrator had got off on a technicality ...
After years of burying all information (and even possibly being complicit in him and his "family" even being in the UK) about this murderous immigrant, and then jailing those who objected to the cover ups, Starmer now wants to hide behind the murdered girls memory. Trump has just publicly humiliated him and ommited him from important meetings and intends to marginalise him further. He knows it is his own fault for his previous inadvisable posturing so to deflect our attention and rightful condemnation of him he calls for an enquiry and addresses the Nation. Vomit inducing cant that shames us all. Not him though he has none.
"We were told about the ricin and the terror manual."
Do you mean we had been told he had been charged with those offences? If so, that's something a jury would know at the opening of the trial and there would be nothing prejudicial in announcing it earlier.
I have no brief for Mr Starmer whatsoever or for the odious creature who comitted these atrocities.
However, I have some common ground with his claim that making public a lot of the information that has come to light since his conviction would have prejudiced a trial and possibly seen his acquittal.
If some of the stuff that has emerged had been made known I have a notion that M'Learned Friends would have used it to their full advantage.
We can't always be told everything there is to know when criminal proceedings for serious offences are in progress.
However, what has come to light is that there were serious failings in the efforts to prevent the murderer from committing these offences. Whether they would have succeeded is anybody's guess (my guess is they would not). But the efforts do not appear to have been very thorough.
The deceitful cover up went way beyond anything that may have been conveniently considered a"legal requirement. They lied to us that he was a Welshman with accompanying pictures of him as a "schoolboy". We were even treated to heartwarming pictures of him being in a Dr Who trailer. How in gods name did that happen given the dark hidden history of this Rwandan family? The police, government, law agencies and the enforced legacy media were all complicit in the lies and cover up. The only people punished so far were the rightfully angry people who protested about the deception. They even prevented questions being asked in the joke of a parliament that we now suffer. Wickedness has gained the upper hand in all our previously trusted establishment agencies. Starmer and his wicked cohorts are the facilitators of such evil and the original facilitator was Bliar himself. The very epitomy of deceit who single handed made law and politics one and the same. If we cannot distictly seperate law and legal matters from politics then there can be no democracy. Nor law either.
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.