Even lefty John Cleese realized this, and it caused an uproar when he told the truth.
John Cleese criticised for saying London is 'no longer an English city'
Posted on 01/24/2020 9:44:59 PM PST by Cronos
I bet every other juror was named Mohammed too.
Put a bullet in his head.
Put a bullet in his head.
Great Britain is lost. It is civilized no more.
Embrace diversity.
“The handyman – who was previously known as Rodney Reid”
Richard “The shoe bomber” Reid’s brother?
Even lefty John Cleese realized this, and it caused an uproar when he told the truth.
John Cleese criticised for saying London is 'no longer an English city'
John Cleese was part of the Monty Python gang that made a fortune ridiculing, lambasting, and vilifying traditional British culture and sensibilities. He was more responsible than most for giving voice to the self-hating British left. I wonder at what point he decided he didn’t like the new Britain that he had created for his countrymen. There has to be a special place in hell for traitorous SOBs like him,
And this country has an awful lot of POSs just like him.
Well, I guess it is just sucks to be the UK
“Mrs Justice Carr ruled...”
All I needed to know. We have forgotten the wisdom of our ancestors.
Ah the joy of diversity and the murder of UK citizens while the perps are protected by the government you elected. Its here in the US already
And here I thought US “justice” was oft crazy. The death wish of the West continueth.
Why the judge? It was the jury, not the judge, who found him not guilty of the more serious crime. The judge had no choice but to accept the verdict. As it was, he got the maximum sentence for the offence on which he was convicted.
Sure looks like attempted murder, regardless of his past history.
Back in 2001, John Cleese confessed that he hadn’t had a good idea in 25 years. I figured “Fawlty Towers” was the last good idea he was thinking of.
And the UN is behind them in declaring the world should have open borders to make their invasion...I mean “migration” so much easier.
I have no sympathy for Jamoaks like that, I hope that COP gave him the full charge and left it there.
Because
Mrs Justice Carr ruled his past offending was inadmissible due to the passage of time, despite jurors asking if he had previous convictions.
Even still, seeing as the rapist was about to assault the PO with a deadly weapon, it certainly would seems that murder was attempted, but perhaps more is required to determine intent to kill.
Yes, I see that. It may not be well known across the pond that evidence of past convictions has only been admissible in a criminal trial since the 2003 Criminal Justice Act. Before that, the principle had been that a jury could only hear evidence directly related to the offence under trial, and that anything else was prejudicial. Even now, it’s admissible only under certain conditions and at the discretion of the judge. Whether or not the judge in this case got it wrong is a matter of, ah, judgement which I think it’s very difficult to make on the basis of selective press reports and without seeing a full transcript.
The change to partial admissibility remains very controversial in legal circles, with claims of a number of consequent unsafe acquittals as well as unsafe convictions.
However, in politics what a conservative allegedly did 40 years ago counts as if he did it 40 days ago.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.