Discussion in 'The Intelligence Cell' started by merchantman, May 14, 2008.
The heart of the site is the forum area, including:
Can this woman really be serious ...
Saimo Chahal, a partner at London-based Bindmans & Partners, believes although Sutcliffe was told he would serve a minimum of 30 years in jail, it was never confirmed.
If they do let him out, and nothing is beyond possibility with this bunch of Baboons in office, then I hope she and Jacqui smith are the first to to be taken with a 6 inch philips cross head.
Slow news day or the BBC trying to divert attention away from this shambles.
is he not in a mental hospital so as soon as the doctors declair him sane thats when his 30 year sentence should start
Feckin scumbag should loose all his human rights!
What are the law firm thinking? Some lawyers have no shame!
For once I agree with our Smith
Let the bugger rot.
Here she is:
She must be as mad as a box of frogs if she wants Sutcliffe out of a cell!
She won the prestigious 2006 Legal Aid Lawyer of the Year for her work in mental health law. The Award was for "repeatedly pushing the boundaries of the law on behalf of those with mental illness
Pushing the boundaries of the law??? WTF, that's the most bent statement ever, the laws there for a reason, not to have its boundaries pushed!
What planet do human rights lawyers live on remember the efforts to get myra hindley released before she snuffed it. When i put my tinfoil hat on i wonder if she really is dead and not walking free with a new identity.
FFS...that woman is so repellent, I actually find myself cheering on Jacqui Smith.
I feel all dirty. And not in a good way.
"Legal Aid Lawyer of The Year?" That answers my next question: who's paying for this sh1t?
While I understand that sexual violance against women is a repellent crime, I would not shed any tears if this woman was raped, beaten to death with a hammer, dismembered and her remains left on various beaches...
Minger - I know it's not the NAAFI but if she weren't such a howler you'd have thought she would have been occuppied with other matters than trying to release a dangerously criminal person who should not be released into society. I don't doubt he is criminally insane, however he is as responsible for his actions as you or I, criminal insanity is not a mitigating circumstance in this case. It's not like he didn't plan to go out and murder those lasses.
Its the weaselly way its been presented, as though it was a technicality and presto, Britain's number one menace is on the streets killing prostitutes again.
It justs confirms my premise that most lawyers are scum, the others are politicians.
It seems, the law is there so that human rights lawyers can make a living out of pushing its boundaries. Mad.
I'm not that mad!!!! Let him rot away i say!
Typically a lawyer,out for one thing only,fame and fortune( eerrr,that's two but you know what I mean)
They haven't got any scruples,will change sides one month from CPS prosecutor to the next month defending "the innocent" and then probably back the next .Depends who is paying what.
The likes of him should have been put down long ago,ensuring the safety of women country wide.
If the cnut does get released,he can fecking well live next door to the dopey cow,she might change her mind then.....
Look on the bright side. Makes it easier for the lynch mob to dangle him by the neck from a lamp post.
Separate names with a comma.