Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘proof’

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).

(more…)

Read Full Post »

Justice wins, this time

I was pleased to hear this afternoon that Salima Malik has won her appeal, and that the Crown Prosecution Service is not going to re-try her.

Salima Malik is the so-called “Lyrical Terrorist” who was sentenced in December following her conviction for possessing material which could be thought to provide assistance to terrorists. She had been acquitted of the more serious crime of actually wanting to use those materials.

(more…)

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.

(more…)

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.

(more…)

Read Full Post »

For various reasons, I’ve been thinking about rape lately; about the specifics of what rape is, what needs to be proved in order to obtain a conviction, and how other parts of the law have had to be tortured in order to make up for law-makers’ (both judges and legislators) blind spots about what rape and sex are.

There are a couple of things that really bug me. One is related to our culture’s obsession with penis-in-vagina (PIV) sex, and how that’s the only sex which is really sex. In some ways, that should come first, but I’m going to leave it until later. Twisty’s recent post and a couple of cases I’ve been reading lately have really got me thinking about consent, so I need to have a bit of a rant about it.

First, I’ve got to admit that what I’m about to say has a fairly strong basis in Amanda’s comments about real consent. But that comes a bit later.

Cut for possible triggers…

(more…)

Read Full Post »

%d bloggers like this: