|
Kaislioc posted:A.D.T. v United Kingdom was 2000. The aftereffects of R v Brown and the CPS' questionable conduct in related and unrelated cases remain to this day. Stare into the abyss. quote:Throughout these aborted proceedings, we repeatedly stated that all the performers in question were over the age of 18. Despite this, the prosecution has always maintained that it was a matter for a jury to decide the age of the performers. However, we were able to prove how old the performers were. In spite of this the police and prosecution consistently failed to make further inquiries regarding the source and context of the images.  Why does it take a jury to decide that a person who has sworn to a notary public or other authorized individual under USC Title 2257 and provided suitable identifying documentation to the effect that they are over the age of 18 is in fact over the age of 18, whereas a prosecutor is unable to? What would a dozen people selected by lottery after excluding any lawyer, vicar, etc. provide that a trained lawyer? Juries are all well and good when there is legal ambiguity, but are costly and suffer from having a panel of non-experts be informed without instruction by available specialists. I don't see the ambiguity where you have a notarized affidavit of a known standard of proof, unless the prosecutor is just being a dick on purpose, which it seems like.
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 19:14
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 16:15 |
|
|
Nothing funnier than people condemning nationalism of all stripes in one breath and then supporting the SNP and Scottish Independence the next.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 19:14
|
|
|
Also the "gently caress 9/10ths of the country because it's England and Wales doesn't exist" is kind of annoying tbh.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 19:16
|
|
|
Extreme0 posted:And I'm fairly sure that if England had the same voting habits as Scotland, The UK wouldn't of Brexit. You seem to expect all of England to unite like a hive mind to gently caress you over.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 19:17
|
|
|
Guavanaut posted:
when is a jury trial not for the express intent of being a dick/sowing doubt and ambiguity where there is little or none present?
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 19:18
|
|
|
Jeza posted:Nothing funnier than people condemning nationalism of all stripes in one breath and then supporting the SNP and Scottish Independence the next. I don't think Scottish nationalists condemn civic nationalism. Also think an argument can be made for independence that doesn't rely on any nationalism, though not support for the SNP. But that involves extreme decentralisation, and only as a step to the end of nation states forkboy84 fucked around with this message at 19:22 on Nov 30, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 19:20
|
|
|
Maybe Scottish people voted for the SNP en masse because they were the only party to run on an anti-austerity platform, unlike Scottish labour & lib dems who have yet to learn their lesson Just a thought
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 19:21
|
|
|
forkboy84 posted:I don't think Scottish nationalists condemn civil nationalism. It seems to be becoming increasingly less civil.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 19:21
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:It seems to be becoming increasingly less civil. Woops. That was a dumb typo. MikeCrotch posted:Maybe Scottish people voted for the SNP en masse because they were the only party to run on an anti-austerity platform, unlike Scottish labour & lib dems who have yet to learn their lesson Scottish Greens campaigned on an anti-austerity platform too. More people should have voted for them, they are good eggs.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 19:23
|
|
|
forkboy84 posted:Woops. That was a dumb typo. Less civic, also.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 19:24
|
|
|
The SNP just campaigned on whatever issues would get them elected. If they'd campaigned from the Right, they would have lost plenty of votes to the Conservatives, but by campaigning to the Left of Scottish Labour, they were able to pick up enough votes to almost wipe the board. And there they are, being the milquetoast version of the thing that people voted for. Like Sadiq Khan.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 19:30
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:Less civic, also. OwlFancier posted:Less civic, also. How? I'm far from pro-SNP but I don't see their lurch into more nasty forms of nationalism. Unlike a sizeable minority of the elected representatives of the party I'm a member of, Labour, who seem to be gagging to go after the UKIP vote at this point. Certainly a lurch to (or rather a continuation of) centre right economic positions but I'm not seeing much of a rise in "less civic nationalism" from them. There's been a few fash in Scotland all my life. That's not really changed. There's also been anti-English bigotry but I'm not seeing much of a rise in that either. Knuckle draggers are going to drag their knuckles. I eagerly await someone proving me wrong about there not being a rise in anti-English bigotry. I'd not be stunned if there was. Still don't think it's a significant signifier that civic nationalism is over.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 19:34
|
|
|
Regarde Aduck posted:We know the English voting public are mostly scum. But the nationalistic drive to abandon Labour for the SNP DID have repercussions that need to be recognized. Unionists had plenty of time to develop a hopeful and progressive case, but they decided to spend time (and plenty of money) making videos about Scotland literally drifting into the sea instead. The UK is dysfunctional, a new social, economic and constitutional settlement is needed. Nobody is articulating these ideas.There is an intellectual vacuum among those seeking federalism and further devolution, even worse when you consider there used to be significant and pluralistic movement associated with these goals. I feel like I've been explaining this for years now, but most unionists seem more invested in their own cringing brand of British nationalism than they are in making difficult admissions or any kind of progress. The idea that, just maybe, some of the SNP's "manufactured" grievance might be legitimate is too uncomfortable to countenance. The SNP hegemony rests largely on the intransigence of their opponents. There were numerous opportunities to call their bluff, during the framing of the IndyRef questions, during the Smith process, during the framing of the EU referendum vote, during the entire independence campaign and the messaging afterwards. At every instance the interests of people in Scotland (to the extent that Scottish people share common "interests", as reflected by the results of the EU referendum and consistent polling on devolution, not as reflected by SNP press releases) were subordinated to the interests of a particular and narrow brand of English conservatism. The SNP's "national lock" on the Brexit looks a lot less ridiculous now, particularly given many of the same people who dismissed it as undemocratic or opportunistic are now demanding a second referendum on the terms of Brexit.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 19:35
|
|
|
As a party I don't suppose they're changing much but they've always been rather indifferent to what particular flavour of nationalism you subscribe to as long as you vote for them. As nationalism becomes the flavour of the month I don't expect they'll do anything to combat the shift across the board from "civic" nationalism to just plain old "my country is the best and gently caress the rest of you".
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 19:37
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:As nationalism becomes the flavour of the month I don't expect they'll do anything to combat the shift across the board from "civic" nationalism to just plain old "my country is the best and gently caress the rest of you". Hint: it's always been this.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 19:38
|
|
|
Pissflaps posted:Hint: it's always been this. No, plenty of people ITT supported them for civic reasons, and while I think it's naive to do so because it will inevitably lead to plain jingoism it is not correct to say that people started from that position.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 19:41
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:No, plenty of people ITT supported them for civic reasons, and while I think it's naive to do so because it will inevitably lead to plain jingoism it is not correct to say that people started from that position. The SNP sell it as 'civic' to make the nationalism seem palatable. I think that's bobbins.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 19:43
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:As a party I don't suppose they're changing much but they've always been rather indifferent to what particular flavour of nationalism you subscribe to as long as you vote for them. I'm not sure that's right. indifferent to economic policy certainly but I'm highly sceptical about the idea that they are going to change at least 30 years of policy on a whim. Probably longer but I CBA to check. Paging Coohoolin. I'm sure this would be a thing in a positive Indy Scotland but for now the far right up here are largely focused on British nationalism & view Scottish nationalism as treasonous in that way that the fash do. I super don't like that I'm being forced to defend the SNP here. Saying nothing of the Scottish Greens who are the 2nd biggest pro-indy party.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 19:43
|
|
|
The SNP sell whatever will get them elected, they're naked populists squatting in the allegedly center left position on the political axis with their primary motivation being independence for ideological reasons.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 19:44
|
|
|
Jeza posted:Nothing funnier than people condemning nationalism of all stripes in one breath and then supporting the SNP and Scottish Independence the next. Nothing funnier than people claiming to be left-wing in one breath and then supporting English Imperialism the next.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 19:47
|
|
|
Saith posted:Nothing funnier than people claiming to be left-wing in one breath and then supporting English Imperialism the next. Yeah Scotland is definitely a victim of imperialism.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 19:50
|
|
|
Pissflaps posted:Yeah Scotland is definitely a victim of imperialism. It has been both a victim & a perpetrator of imperialism. This is hardly a difficult concept, even for you.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 19:51
|
|
|
forkboy84 posted:I'm not sure that's right. indifferent to economic policy certainly but I'm highly sceptical about the idea that they are going to change at least 30 years of policy on a whim. Probably longer but I CBA to check. Paging Coohoolin. I'm sure this would be a thing in a positive Indy Scotland but for now the far right up here are largely focused on British nationalism & view Scottish nationalism as treasonous in that way that the fash do. They don't have to change anything, they just have to continue being happy to get votes from anyone, they won't try to alienate rabid xenophobic Scottish nationalists as long as they vote for them, and cultivating nationalism for "sensible" reasons is how all nationalist parties do it. Even the tories do it under the guise of guaranteeing that proper British people who pay for things get the first benefit of them, and that Britain deserves sovereignty over its own affairs without the meddlesome EU getting in the way. They advertise it that way and rake in votes from people who are simply national supremacists and that indifference to xenophobes will simply create more of them. Civic nationalism may hypothetically be possible but in practice it simply ends in reinforcing all forms of nationalism, and as people become dissatisfied with the moderate parties trying to win votes from everywhere, they will trend towards ideologies which promise more radical change and take more extreme views, which would be full on national supremacists.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 19:52
|
|
|
Guavanaut posted:
As Rumpole is always keen to point out, juries are finders of fact in common law jurisdictions, and are absolutely not allowed to make any findings of law, at least in England and Wales. The age of someone is a finding of fact, not of law. To reuse a post I've literally just made elsewhere on a vaguely-related subject, it sucks but I don't think anybody wants to hear JUSTICEBOT HAS DETERMINED THIS TO BE ILLEGAL.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 19:53
|
|
|
Pissflaps posted:Nobody has said this. You're making it up. I'm not making up that if England had the same voting habits as Scotland. The rise of the SNP wouldn't of reached to such a scale, Labour would still be in government and Corbyn wouldn't of gotten elected leader twice. All you need to have an Labour Government back then is A. to have England vote in enough seats for Labour that they don't need Scotland & Wales to form government but that hasn't been the case for a while. So they expect Scotland & Wales to vote majorly for them to add up their votes they failed to get enough of in England which they did back in 2010. But England didn't vote Labour enough that even Scotland & Wales votes didn't matter in the long run and that sparked off the poo poo storm which has led to this point and since England has the most seats of all the countries of the UK by a lot, it's not a wonder why England is to blame for the mess it has started by majorly voting for the Cuntservatives. This isn't rocket science. If England didn't vote for the conservatives more then labour, then this would be a moot point. OwlFancier posted:Also the "gently caress 9/10ths of the country because it's England and Wales doesn't exist" is kind of annoying tbh. Not sure why you give a poo poo about people talking poo poo about your own country honestly since you too despise people in it. Dabir posted:You seem to expect all of England to unite like a hive mind to gently caress you over. They don't need to be a hivemind since they vote the conservatives the most anyways. OwlFancier posted:It seems to be becoming increasingly less civil. If only. OwlFancier posted:Less civic, also. The power of civic nationalism. Turn one foreign national as a new national and use it against the nationality they hate the most, even if it's their own.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 19:56
|
|
|
HJB posted:Crime Severity Score measures 'relative harm' of crimes Why are Buggery (3,344) and "Gross indecency between males" (752) on there? ...Should I tell my boyfriend date night now comes with a high score?
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 19:56
|
|
|
I always found the dogwhistle 'Westminster' bogeyman for all of scotlands ills to be fairly distasteful.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 19:59
|
|
|
Extreme0 posted:Not sure why you give a poo poo about people talking poo poo about your own country honestly since you too despise people in it. Because the reduction of the vast majority of the UK population to "england" is stupid. The UK as a whole is wildly varied in terms of politics and demographics, trying to slap national labels onto parts of it and using it as a meaningful separator is absurd and serves to divide natural allies. Nationalism, as always, is poison, and this is a good example of why. I am not unified with someone because we both live in "england" and you are not separated from me because you live in "scotland". The people I despise are not well identified by their nationality, and to be honest I have more sympathy for most people in the UK than anything. OwlFancier fucked around with this message at 20:02 on Nov 30, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 19:59
|
|
|
Lunar Suite posted:Why are Buggery (3,344) and "Gross indecency between males" (752) on there? ...Should I tell my boyfriend date night now comes with a high score? How far back does the dataset go? They were still in use in the 60's and 70's I think?
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 20:02
|
|
|
goddamnedtwisto posted:As Rumpole is always keen to point out, juries are finders of fact in common law jurisdictions, and are absolutely not allowed to make any findings of law, at least in England and Wales. The age of someone is a finding of fact, not of law. To reuse a post I've literally just made elsewhere on a vaguely-related subject, it sucks but I don't think anybody wants to hear JUSTICEBOT HAS DETERMINED THIS TO BE ILLEGAL. I wouldn't say Title 2257 proves someone's age beyond a shadow of a doubt, someone could lie, a notary could be lax, but the standards are publicly available to view, and I'd say proves someone's age beyond the the balance of probabilities. If someone is more likely than not over 18, they cannot be beyond reasonable doubt under 18, so I'm still confused what facts the prosecutor thought a jury might find in this case (beyond "he's a gay! look at him!" of course). Lunar Suite posted:Why are Buggery (3,344) and "Gross indecency between males" (752) on there? ...Should I tell my boyfriend date night now comes with a high score?
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 20:06
|
|
|
If points stack you might have a fun game in trying to beat your previous high score.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 20:10
|
|
|
serious gaylord posted:I always found the dogwhistle 'Westminster' bogeyman for all of scotlands ills to be fairly distasteful. And so it was decreed for now and all time: Scottish people who criticise the UK Government are the real racists.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 20:20
|
|
|
Is Brexit going to happen? If yes: my partner is an Australian with British citizenship. Will something change for her studying in Germany?
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 20:20
|
|
|
Honj Steak posted:Is Brexit going to happen? If yes: That would be up to Germany but she is at risk of no longer having EU travel rights.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 20:24
|
|
|
baronvonsabre posted:And so it was decreed for now and all time: Scottish people who criticise the UK Government are the real racists. Nationalism is propped up by racism. Never forget that.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 20:24
|
|
|
serious gaylord posted:Nationalism is propped up by racism. Never forget that. Sorry, I haven't got any free time to spend pondering that. I disagreed publicly with the UK government's economic policies and their treatment of immigrants and now I have to go join the local branch of the KKK. That's how this works right?
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 20:28
|
|
|
No, but if you want to pretend that 'westminster' isn't used as a dogwhistle for English by a proportion of scottish nationalists then you can go right ahead.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 20:29
|
|
|
Guavanaut posted:Surely as there is both a material and ethical cost to a jury trial the prosecution should be calculating that pushing one is in the public interest, both in the seriousness of the crime and the chance of conviction? It's not the prosecution's choice as to whether or not a trial goes to jury. Well I suppose technically it is because they could choose to prosecute for a lesser offence that doesn't carry a right to trial by jury, but otherwise it's defendant's choice or mandatory jury trial. And, as to your second point... you're a bit all over the place. Balance of probabilities is a civil thing, not a criminal thing, and it's up to the prosecution to prove to the jury beyond a reasonable doubt that the person is under the age of consent. They may be able to do that by presenting expert evidence (although that's controversial as gently caress) and have done so in the past, but the point is still it's up to the jury to weigh the respective evidence presented, exactly as it is with all other facts in a jury case, and you've already identified several circumstances where there are two similarly-compelling but mutually exclusive facts presented (person is of-age, person is not of-age but there is inaccurate paperwork saying they are). That's *exactly* what jury trials are for.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 20:29
|
|
|
baronvonsabre posted:And so it was decreed for now and all time: Scottish people who criticise the UK Government are the real racists.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 20:36
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 16:15 |
|
|
serious gaylord posted:No, but if you want to pretend that 'westminster' isn't used as a dogwhistle for English by a proportion of scottish nationalists then you can go right ahead. No, I can't anymore, you've opened my eyes. I finally see the truth. Thank you my friend, thank you. Truly, you are the one this thread needs, to shine a light on the motives of others and explain the true meaning behind movements the world over. In decades, nay ,centuries to come, people will preach the gospel of serious gaylord, and the central tenant that binds it all together, carved into stone for people to prostate themselves before, basking in the glory of your insight, flagellating themselves in front of your everlasting message to us all: If a Scottish person criticises the UK government, it is because they are racist!
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 20:37
|
|