It’s very tempting to be emotional over terrible crimes like rape. Every case is different. The Jamaican had been beaten and abused himself as a child. That’s no excuse, of course.
He served 7 years, wrote a letter of apology to the victim, and attended a victim awareness course. Reoffending rapes are 4%, so unlikely to reoffend.
Convicted rapist avoids deportation to Jamaica because he is bisexual
Rapist avoids deportation because he fears persecution for his sexuality in Jamaicawww.standard.co.uk
Judges look at the facts, not emotions, even though we don’t like their decisions, and journalists like to play on our emotions especially the tabloids.
The SNP are bribing the electorate with a Scottish WFA worth £100 in preparation for the Scots election next year.
And that is exactly why I am pleased that Starmer seemingly isn't interested in the polling at all. It doesn't matter right now. The country is a shambles, Europe is the weakest it has been since the end of World War 2 and a maniac is about to be sworn in as US President for a second time, hellbent on disrupting the global economy. What the UK needs right now isn't someone pandering to the public (Johnson), a rabbit in the headlights (Sunak) or a domestic terrorist (Truss). It needs someone to get on with doing the work and to hell with what happens in the 2029 General Election.
Of course it diminishes his rights as a human being. He has lost the right to walk the streets, for example. We can think about how much of his human rights he should lose, but if we try to argue that he should not lose any, then we are arguing that criminals should never be sent to jail.Yeah I don't really have an answer
That case is difficult. He's committed, and is serving time for, a horrendous crime. Does that crime remove or diminish his rights as a human being? The judges think not and not being anything close to an expert in any legal matters I can't argue. I know personally I think rapists are right down there with the lowest of the low. But I'm not a judge.
Yes, I meant "does his crime mean that he should be sent back to a place where he would be persecuted"
Yep. All that.
Absolutely this.
Yes. He’s a rapist. Send him back.
I don’t know if you’re being flippant or ironic, but this is how I actually feel. One forgoes personal liberties when they commit heinous crimes. This individual is Jamaican, he is their responsibility.
Absolutely 100% agree, was really underlining alongside my other post from yesterday on focusing on the short term as opposed to the longer term actions, and that for all the hysteria (both in the press and in various threads on here) about how everything is crashing down and it's all Reeves / Starmer to blame that actually all that got wiped out in a single morning, which suggests there was not, in fact, the mass panic many were trying to claim
Don't get me wrong - I agree.
Starmer’s revolting betrayal will never be forgiven
This Labour Government is acting against the British national interest. It cares more about ‘human rights’ than about its own citizenstelegraph.co.uk
