Legal Question

Does anyone know why our Courts have given the Justice Secretary the power to pardon someone convicted under another countrys legal system?

I just saw that on the news and thought the same.

Uncle Liam wrote: Does anyone know why our Courts have given the Justice Secretary the power to pardon someone convicted under another countrys legal system?

Because that was only johnny foreigner's court, not a real Brtish one?

I don't suppose it is a legal question at all; just an opportunity to take a bit of a dig at something you don't agree with or, got forbid, a city you don't like.

You're a bright lad, bright enough to understand the actual legal arguments if you want to. Whether or not you agree with them is another thing.

If Shields is released, it will put a lot of strain on future international transferring of prisoners.

It would be lovely if the sole aim of courts around the world was to see justice done, to keep bad people off the streets and to protect the innocent. I've been through the courts once already this year and I'll be doing it all over again next year and I can tell you that this is far from being the case. The courts are full of people serving their own aims and lining their own pockets. The people who come before them, innocent or guilty, are just tokens in the game.

Court BIG.Divorce or something MORE serious but LESS costly.I have ALWAYS been found GUILTY.Beggars belief!

Loads more serious, Mick

Diamond 383 wrote: Loads more serious, Mick

If you need ANY advice mate..... Oh and i have friends in LOW places

Lower than me?

Diamond 383 wrote: Lower than me?

Never That's why we get ON.

The thing is, I dont understand. Every article I've read doesnt explain it.

If this were the other way around, there would be an outcry. What if the German courts just gave a pardon to that guy who came over here and murdered someone in Nottingham? There would be an outcry.

I find it absolutely shocking that the English Legal System feels it can just override the Bulgarian Court System, especially considering its also a member of the EU.

Shocking.

Diamond 383 wrote: Loads more serious, Mick

I DID tell you to wipe the fuckin hard drive before you left the machine into PCworld now didn't I?

Silly lad.

Uncle Liam wrote: The thing is, I dont understand. Every article I've read doesnt explain it.

If this were the other way around, there would be an outcry. What if the German courts just gave a pardon to that guy who came over here and murdered someone in Nottingham? There would be an outcry.

I find it absolutely shocking that the English Legal System feels it can just override the Bulgarian Court System, especially considering its also a member of the EU.

Shocking.

Well we've been helping those bell-ends accross the Atlantic do the same for years.

Actually if the situation you describe arose, there would be calls for war I'd imagine.

But this is different....they're not proper people, they're all foreign and strange, they don't even speak English.....I mean how dodgy is THAT?

Shields was transferred to the UK so that he could serve his sentence close to his family. This is fairly common for all types of offence committed abroad. This effectively moves him into the jurisdiction of the British legal system. Shield's team are asking the Home Secretary to consider evidence that was not brought before the Belgian court and pardon him. Today's ruling confirms that the Home Secretary has the power to issue such a pardon without another trial, here or in Belgium.

It's interesting to see that Straw's lawyers were arguing against this decision, which brings me back to my earlier point. Straw is now in a terrible position - he's fucked either way. Let Shield's out for Christmas and strain relations with other countries, or keep him in there and suffer a big backlash at home.

So he wasn't arguing for what he thought was right, he was just acting in his own best interests.

Because a confesion was signed by the person who ACTUALLY assaulted the barman. Fair enough it was withdrawn when the guy realised that he had just written his own jail sentence.

The question you should be asking is how an INNOCENT man can lose 4-5 years of his life for a crime he did not commit.... where, I ask, is the legality in that?

Diamond 383 wrote: Shields was transferred to the UK so that he could serve his sentence close to his family. This is fairly common for all types of offence committed abroad. This effectively moves him into the jurisdiction of the British legal system. Shield's team are asking the Home Secretary to consider evidence that was not brought before the Belgian court and pardon him. Today's ruling confirms that the Home Secretary has the power to issue such a pardon without another trial, here or in Belgium.

It's interesting to see that Straw's lawyers were arguing against this decision, which brings me back to my earlier point. Straw is now in a terrible position - he's fucked either way. Let Shield's out for Christmas and strain relations with other countries, or keep him in there and suffer a big backlash at home.

So he wasn't arguing for what he thought was right, he was just acting in his own best interests.

Hang on. This means that Shields case is decided by two seperate legal systems (I could just about understand if it was dealt with at a European Court). If new evidence has been found, then the only way to deal with it is a new trial. And seeing as the offence took place in Bulgaria then the new trial should take place in Bulgaria under Bulgarian law.

Wasnt new evidence the reason why Barry George got a new trial? Why wasnt he just given a pardon?

The coverage and treatment of this case has been an utter disgrace. Precisely ZERO respect has been paid to the victim, their family, and the Bulgarian Legal System. Michael Shields says he's innocent, and yet people are just supposed to believe him.

Campaigners for Barry George tried for years to get a RE TRIAL. Yet campaigners for Michael Shields just want a unconditional pardon? Why? Is there no interest in clearing his name?

If Jack Straw wants to do something, he should keep Shields in Prison, where (as a convicted criminal) he belongs. Why not lobby the Bulgarians for a re trial?

A disgraceful day in English Legal History.

recycle wrote: ...when the guy realised that he had just written his own jail sentence.

He must have had some shit-hot legal advice to come up with that, eh?