ARmy Rumour SErvice

Given the fact that judges tend to just not give a sh1t about what anyone but they tehmselves think of a subject, what do you think?

I am not completely sure that to change this situation would be a good thing. We don't really want 'mob rule' to affect judges descisions, but to be honest some descions are fcuking barking.

IMHO, one rape should have resulted in a one way ticket back to jamaica and a permenent ban on his ever returning to the UK.

To research this one, look up "Absolute Privillage". It's the same privillage granted to MPs when they speak in the house and can't be sued for it. In the same way, when you slag off someone from the dock when under oath, you can't be sued for what you say. There's more to it than this, but you can look it up easily enough, like I say start with, "Absolute Privillage".

How have they been negligent? They don't make judgements on no basis, they are guided by current laws and also unfortunately these include those foisted on us by the ECHR.

Originally Posted by syledis

There was a case ins Scotland recently over a Jamaican rapist who , after his first rape and conviction, was recommended for depertation but 3 judges overruled it. He went
on to commit several more offences before being caught again. My question is:

Can you sue the judges that stopped his deportation after the first offence for negligence as they said that one sexual assault conviction doesnt warrant deportation, or can
they be as negligent as they like wothout comebacks?


BBC News - Serial rapist Chan Wright gets lifelong restriction order

The short answer is no. You can complain to the office for judicial complaints but only about their personal conduct not about their professional ineptitude.

Originally Posted by dingerr

How have they been negligent? They don't make judgements on no basis, they are guided by current laws and also unfortunately these include those foisted on us by the ECHR.

I'm sure that will be a great comfort to the women who were raped because the judges decided to give this sub-human, who already had convictions for rape and drug dealing, a second chance.

In any case, he was not deported because the judges thought it could not be proven he would re-offend(or words to that effect). While I'm no fan of the ECHR, it was not a factor in this case.

Personally, I don't think the judges should be sued. I'd rather they, and the untermensch they were so keen on protecting, were shot in the head and buried in the same mass grave. Now that would be Justice.

In short, no! Judges cannot be sued for the quality (or otherwise) of their decision making.

I have every sympathy with the OP but who would "judge" the judges? Think you'll find it's a tighter closed shop than the General Medical Council and how many unfathomable decisions have they made when a Doctor is called before them?

You would have to research the law of whatever fucking planet most of them are on these days because it would not fall under the legal system of any country on earth!