♫anna♫
Global Moderator
Aug 18 2017 - Always In Our Hearts
The Federal Reserve Act is the Betrayal of the American Revolution!
e x a l t | s m i t e
karma:
Posts: 11,769
|
Post by ♫anna♫ on Jun 5, 2010 5:48:01 GMT
Jakob von Metzler! 11 Years Old Forever! R.I.P.!I've mentioned this case a number of times in the debates here surrounding proper and improper interrogations techniques! I maintain that the Police Commisioner Daschner acted correctly and morally by motivating this predator to reveal the whereabouts of his kidnapped victim! With this Euro-weenie court ruling an arrested kidnapper is shown to have more rights than the victim, whose life may still be saved! We need conditutional admendments to reduce the rights of these predators and reverse this ridiculous court decision! The predator has even attained celebrity status and published a book in prison. www.monstersandcritics.com/news/europe/news/article_1559926.php/Convicted-child-murderer-has-torture-claim-upheld-at-European-court QUOTE: Convicted child-murderer has torture claim upheld at European court Jun 1, 2010, 11:04 GMT Strasbourg/Berlin - A convicted child-murderer has had his claim that the German government broke human rights laws by threatening to torture him upheld, the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg said Tuesday. Marcus Gaefgen was sentenced to life imprisonment in 2003 for kidnapping and then murdering the then-11-year-old Jakob von Metzler, the son of a well-known Frankfurt banker. Following Gaefgen's arrest in 2002, the then-police commissioner of Frankfurt threatened violence against him unless he told the authorities where the child was, in the belief that von Metzler was still alive. Gaefgen sued the German state in 2005. 'The threat against the suspect was severe enough to be considered as inhumane treatment according to article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights,' the court said in a statement. However the court Tuesday ruled out any re-opening of Gaefgen's trial, saying that due process had been followed. Gaefgen had been tried without using statements from him after the torture threat had been made. At the time of the case, the threat from the former police chief Wolfgang Daschner led to outrage and heated public debate about the potential use of violence by the state. Daschner was later released from his post. The court statement did not advocate compensation from the German state for Gaefgen, but urged Berlin to instigate its own compensation process.
|
|
|
Post by fretslider on Jun 5, 2010 7:02:14 GMT
[/color] [/quote] So that's how a yank gets to be member of the year
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 5, 2010 9:37:41 GMT
At the time the torture threat was made Marcus Gaefgen was a suspect, no more. Had he been found "not guilty", would the Strasbourg decision have been right?
The answer has to be "yes", IMO. So the actions of the police have to be judged in the light of the fact that this guy might have been found innocent.
And if I had been the police chief? Well, I'd probably have tortured the guy, hang the threats.
|
|
|
Post by riotgrrl on Jun 5, 2010 13:08:53 GMT
[/color] [/quote] So that's how a yank gets to be member of the year [/quote] Offensive or what? So I take it we can just call all Americans rednecks or whatever and that's OK too?
|
|
|
Post by fretslider on Jun 5, 2010 13:22:06 GMT
So that's how a yank gets to be member of the year Offensive or what? So I take it we can just call all Americans rednecks or whatever and that's OK too? You are free to take what you will. You obviously take it that all Europeans can be called Euro-weenies. Funny that you only get upset when the direction of travel is reversed.
|
|
|
Post by riotgrrl on Jun 5, 2010 13:42:54 GMT
Offensive or what? So I take it we can just call all Americans rednecks or whatever and that's OK too? You are free to take what you will. You obviously take it that all Europeans can be called Euro-weenies. Funny that you only get upset when the direction of travel is reversed. You what now? I'm objecting to the use of the offensive term 'Euroweenie', not suggesting that all Europeans can be called it. Have you picked me up wrong?
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 5, 2010 13:51:55 GMT
Well, to avoid any confusion, here is a picture of the US Supreme Court justices in deliberation:
|
|
|
Post by iamjumbo on Jun 5, 2010 13:53:37 GMT
Offensive or what? So I take it we can just call all Americans rednecks or whatever and that's OK too? You are free to take what you will. You obviously take it that all Europeans can be called Euro-weenies. Funny that you only get upset when the direction of travel is reversed. no sir. not ALL europeans are euroweenies. there are those who believe in human rights and support the death penalty. it is those who choose to believe that a murderer, rapist, child killer, and such are worth as much as the innocent victim that are rightly called euroweenies
|
|
|
Post by iamjumbo on Jun 5, 2010 13:55:08 GMT
You are free to take what you will. You obviously take it that all Europeans can be called Euro-weenies. Funny that you only get upset when the direction of travel is reversed. You what now? I'm objecting to the use of the offensive term 'Euroweenie', not suggesting that all Europeans can be called it. Have you picked me up wrong? the difference is that the term "euroweenie" is one that is voluntarily earned
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 5, 2010 14:20:04 GMT
I took it that Anna was referring to the court of HR, not Europeans in general, though I'm not sure where the weenie bit comes in. Hence my picture - rather rude now I see it properly.
I'd better behave myself if I ever go to America, lest I end up in front of the beak!
|
|
|
Post by fretslider on Jun 5, 2010 14:30:12 GMT
You are free to take what you will. You obviously take it that all Europeans can be called Euro-weenies. Funny that you only get upset when the direction of travel is reversed. You what now? I'm objecting to the use of the offensive term 'Euroweenie', not suggesting that all Europeans can be called it. Have you picked me up wrong? Seems I have, humble pie is on the menu.
|
|
|
Post by fretslider on Jun 5, 2010 14:31:04 GMT
You what now? I'm objecting to the use of the offensive term 'Euroweenie', not suggesting that all Europeans can be called it. Have you picked me up wrong? the difference is that the term "euroweenie" is one that is voluntarily earned care to explain how you work that out?
|
|
|
Post by Synonym on Jun 5, 2010 16:02:35 GMT
With this Euro-weenie court ruling an arrested kidnapper is shown to have more rights than the victim, whose life may still be saved! How so?
|
|
|
Post by iamjumbo on Jun 5, 2010 16:36:54 GMT
the difference is that the term "euroweenie" is one that is voluntarily earned care to explain how you work that out? certainly. it's quite simple. the term was originally coined to refer to the europeans who think that murderers are equal to real people. those who refuse to support the only moral punishment for murderers, which obviously is the death penalty, do so totally by their own volition. therefore, the decision to be a euroweenie is strctly voluntary
|
|
|
Post by iamjumbo on Jun 5, 2010 16:38:51 GMT
With this Euro-weenie court ruling an arrested kidnapper is shown to have more rights than the victim, whose life may still be saved! How so? how not so? the court specifically stated that the murderer has a right to life, whereas the child does not. nothing hard to understand about that
|
|
|
Post by Synonym on Jun 5, 2010 16:41:15 GMT
Where did it say that?
|
|
|
Post by Ben Lomond on Jun 5, 2010 17:00:00 GMT
In all the too-ing and fro-ing, we in the UK have problems with the court of Human Rights, or at least our own courts actions based on the Human Rights Act. For example, we cannot deport undesirable criminals after they have served their sentence, because to do so might infringe their human rights. We cannot return Al Qaeda members who were actively plotting some outrage in the UK, to Pakistan, because they might suffer torture if returned there; even if it is their land of birth. We are hamstrung by the HRA, and while our new PM (Cameron) promised to repeal the damned thing when he came to office, he seems to be backtracking on that promise.
|
|
|
Post by fretslider on Jun 5, 2010 17:37:42 GMT
care to explain how you work that out? certainly. it's quite simple. the term was originally coined to refer to the europeans who think that murderers are equal to real people. those who refuse to support the only moral punishment for murderers, which obviously is the death penalty, do so totally by their own volition. therefore, the decision to be a euroweenie is strctly voluntary What complete bilge, jumbo; even by your standards. The death penalty is primitive and uncivilised. Its the hall mark of a Yank.
|
|
♫anna♫
Global Moderator
Aug 18 2017 - Always In Our Hearts
The Federal Reserve Act is the Betrayal of the American Revolution!
e x a l t | s m i t e
karma:
Posts: 11,769
|
Post by ♫anna♫ on Jun 5, 2010 18:13:03 GMT
At the time the torture threat was made Marcus Gaefgen was a suspect, no more. Had he been found "not guilty", would the Strasbourg decision have been right? The answer has to be "yes", IMO. So the actions of the police have to be judged in the light of the fact that this guy might have been found innocent. And if I had been the police chief? Well, I'd probably have tortured the guy, hang the threats. Wrong Skylark! The "suspect" had already accepted the ransom money for his victim and purchased a luxury car with it. The police were monitoring every movement he made hoping he'd lead them to his victim! The Frankfurt police were correct in judging the kidnapper guilty!
|
|
|
Post by riotgrrl on Jun 5, 2010 19:34:27 GMT
In all the too-ing and fro-ing, we in the UK have problems with the court of Human Rights, or at least our own courts actions based on the Human Rights Act. For example, we cannot deport undesirable criminals after they have served their sentence, because to do so might infringe their human rights. We cannot return Al Qaeda members who were actively plotting some outrage in the UK, to Pakistan, because they might suffer torture if returned there; even if it is their land of birth. We are hamstrung by the HRA, and while our new PM (Cameron) promised to repeal the damned thing when he came to office, he seems to be backtracking on that promise. Cameron's suggestion that he repeal the HRA was based on Cameron's failure to understand where it came from and how it works. Of course, he can repeal it. Parliament is sovereign. But if he does so all tha that happens is criminals have no address to domestic courts, so instead go to the European court, all on taxpayers money. So, accepting that the Tory promise to repeal the HRA was stupidity in the first place, the debate is about how our courts interpret it.
|
|