How much longer are we to put up with this?

[anotheoldgit]

http://www.express.co...ht-to-stay-in-Britain

Once again these two criminals used ­Article 8 of the Human Rights Act, which entitles everyone to a family life.

/// The first Raja Mohammed Anwar Khan climbed behind the wheel of a car after taking heroin and killed another motorist, a father-of-two. /// (Who incidentally are now deprived of a full family life).

/// He was jailed for six-and-a-half years in 2008, which was reduced to five years on appeal. He has now overturned a ­deportation order issued at the end of his sentence after a judge ruled he should be allowed to stay in Britain with his wife and children. Khan had travelled to Pakistan to marry his wife and stayed there for several years ­before they both returned to Britain, but his father said last week he is now estranged from his family. ///

/// The other Rohan Winfield raped a young woman after leaving his wife, with whom he has three children, but claimed his broken marriage was ­evidence he had a family life.///

Both are no longer in a relationship with their wives, so how can they be deprived of a family life, apart from that wasn't they also deprived of a 'family life' while in prison?

Having said that perhaps every jailed prisoner could use Article 8 of the Human Rights Act, as a 'get out of jail free' card?

[jno]

children are family

[rov1100]

It is plainly obvious that when judges sit on cases like this they only hear one side of the story. Maybe its about time they looked at the overall picture of all the other people affected.

[ummmm]

It's about the children....not the spouses.

[ummmm]

And cats....apparently...lol

[anotheoldgit]

jno & ummmm

I see you didn't comment on the victims children, once again supporting the villains of the piece it seems.

[bazwillrun]

Deportation order should be made with no right to appeal.

They dont like it..then tough schittt, get out and stay out

[ummmm]

Not supporting the Villains at all. I'm actually surprised the rapists children were taken in consideration. Surely social services would stop him seeing them anyway.

[jackthehat]

What a preposterous statement, even for you, AOG!

How, in a sane and reasonable mind, can NOT giving mention to one set of circumstances be seen as giving support to the other side?!?

Ah.....yes.....I seem to have answered my own question, there....

[rojash]

"I see you didn't comment on the victims children, once again supporting the villains of the piece it seems."

I see you are doing that thing of yours where you twist the words of others.

Your question was "so how can they be deprived of a family life" and the short answer is "It's about the children....not the spouses."

That doesn't necessarily mean that jno or ummmm are supporting the villains. They are simply answering your question and explaining the thinking behind the judges' verdicts.

[ichkeria]

He had served his sentence - reduced on appeal, it would seem. Having (rightly or wrongly) been released, then I'd suggest that the victims' interests no longer come into it.
And, as others have said, it is about the children anyway.
Finally, the HRA may need reviewing (it is currently under review) but it should not been thrown out because of issues like this.

[jno]

aog, you asked: "Both are no longer in a relationship with their wives, so how can they be deprived of a family life"

ummmm and I both answered your question.

[Gromit]

By explaining a decision which you have failled to understand, or deliberately misconstrue the meaning, does not mean they are supporting anyone. They are simply honestly answering a question and do not deserve wild accusations.

[rojash]

^ is there an echo on here?

[TTG]

Clegg won't allow the hr laws to be changed. He is protecting laws that give rights to scum like this. Unbelievable.