Why do they always lie?

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by Speedy, Sep 14, 2009.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. Given the overwhelming evidence, the surveilence operations that take place and a whole host of factors that come to light in the court rooms, why is that islamic terrorists always plead 'not guilty', even up until the end?
    Are they actually hoping for some shread of luck to let them off, or do they think that as it's not an Islamic cout they can just lie their faces off?
    There must have been at least 8 high profile cases now where they were all found guilty, but not one of the accused ever changed their plea!
    Cowards, in more ways than one.


    *Or it could just be a lawyers trick to stretch out a nice long trial and earn them a sack full of cash.
     
  2. I believe it is because they are thick as sh*t.




    edited due to typo thing
     
  3. Isn't that only if you lie to another Muslem? I may be wrong here though.
     
  4. I find it strange because if they're "Holy warriors" (or whatever the hell they call themselves) then shouldn't they be proud of the fact and proclaim it to the world? They're more than happy to do so when they're succeeding, but as soon as we get the bu66ers they want to deny it, yet they call it faith. That's not what I call martyrdom, that's cowardice. They only call it martyrdom if they die on their terms. I always thought martyrdom was dying on someone elses terms while yelling your version of truth at them.
     
  5. Because they think they're at war, so they're using up the enemies resources. Think of it a bit like the blokes in StaLag Luft whatever organising a Great Escape. No chance of real escape, plenty of opportunity to waste their host's cash and effort.

    It also keeps them in the news, so that even if they've failed this time, it shows the youth coming after that the fight is worth fighting, and that they're not alone in wanting to kill infidels.

    Also, if the evidence against them is displayed in court, their mates might learn something about how it was gathered, and this helps them to prevent a similar problem next time around. Like the e-mails to Pakistan from the last trial; do you really think they refer to 'skin conditions', meaning surveillance, in their current comms?
     
  6. Because they are following the example set by our esteemed leaders?
     
  7. From a more neutral perspective, I'd guess it's because with sentences like 30 - 40 years there really isn't much bargaining to be had. What would they get, 5 years off? Might as well battle all the way through and take your chance with a jury.
     
  8. Its because if they throw there hand in early doors its the end of the errand so to speak, but by going all the way there is always the option of appeal against conviction, or appeal against sentence, the criminal cases review board or the human rights law. this lot will go on appealing and appealing for ever costing us millions of pounds.
     
  9. So is eating porkie pies!!!!
     
  10. Terrorist organisations, unlike ordinary criminals, have always been able to learn from the evidence presented. Pleading guilty until the last moment forces the procecuting evidence to be so public that the evidence gathering process is almost nullified in future cases, i.e. the same mistake is not made twice!
    Many of those sitting in the public gallery are not there for the entertainment; they are professional observers.
    And even if we had courts in camera we have the problem of defence lawyers and solicitors with sympathy for whatever violent cause is being espoused. In fact that has often been the greatest difficulty for procecutors, never mind the defence which spins out the case for monetary gain.

    There is no doubt that abuse of our once great legal system has caused much heartbreak for the victims of crime of all types.
     
  11. Who knows but the ringleader of the Airline bombers just got sent down for a minimum of 40 years.

    Makes a change from the bog standard 12 years or so. Good drills by the Judge. I hope the tw@ts get a good shoeing every day until 2049.

    Throbbers.
     
  12. Correction to previous post "pleading not guilty"
    My apologies for confusion everyone.
     
  13. Throbbers indeed.
    LINK
     
  14. A lot of people do that in court . When I was 19 I kicked in an amusement arcade window then when I went to court for it I came out with BS that I accidentally fell against it and was " Not guilty " because it was all an accident guv . Little did I know that there were witnesses against me so when I got found guilty I got remanded for a few weeks as well as getting a compensation order and a fine

    If you're facing a life sentence for mass murder you've got nothing to lose by pleading not guilty
     

  15. In addition by pleading Not Guilty they force the prosecution to fully lay out their case. This can take weeks and a great deal can go wrong in the current criminal facing Justice system. The hope is often that the prosecution will make a procedural error along the way and this will get the case thrown out on a technicality before it even reaches half-time. The other trick is to wait right up until the start od the trial and go Guilty on the first day. They get credit for that from the Judge and a lighter sentence FFS. The justice system is broken!

    The Judge in this case has done well by comparison!