Archive for the ‘evidence’ Category

Demonisation (from answers.com – the OED definition was too literal): “to represent as diabolically evil”.

Lauredhel has written this morning about some of the public discussion about the Churchill arsonist – specifically, about the way everyone is attributing his arsonist behaviour to the fact he was once jilted by a woman.

I agree with her on that, but I don’t think that all the public discourse is about trying to find someone else to blame (and I don’t think Lauredhel is saying that it is).


Read Full Post »

So, in the UK, a young woman has today been sentenced following her conviction a month ago for owning terrorist manuals.

After the jury delivered its verdict in November, the judge said:

You have been, in many respects, a complete enigma to me.

Well. Quite.

A middle-aged man finds a young woman an enigma? What a surprise!

Well, apparently it was a surprise to the media, who felt the need to report that quote again and again and again, not just when she was convicted, but now, at the time of sentencing.


Read Full Post »

I’m really excited about Justice Adams’ judgment in the Ul-Haque case, delivered a week ago.

The essence of the judgment is that certain interviews of the defendant, conducted by ASIO and the Australian Federal Police, were inadmissible in the trial of the defendant under s 102.5(1) of the Commonwealth Criminal Code. (That section prohibits training with a terrorist organisation.) The DPP has abandoned the trial as a result of the decision.


Read Full Post »

%d bloggers like this: