Jump to content
Fancy running a forum? Sheffield Forum is for sale! Learn more

Lee Rigby's killers trial

Recommended Posts

See link the trial has started today, I saw a bit on BBC news just read what they did to this poor guy, then all the bleeding hearts that come on here tell me they don't deserve the death penalty.

 

If anyone ever did it is these 2 pieces of inhuman flotsam.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hang em high, Hang em long, Hang em till they start to pong!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
We don't have the death penalty.

 

I didn't say kill them, I said they deserved the death penalty, if in any doubt read what they did to this poor lad

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
We don't have the death penalty.

 

Well thats a slight knock to an otherwise damn fine plan :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I didn't say kill them, I said they deserved the death penalty, if in any doubt read what they did to this poor lad

 

I read what you wrote, but we don't have the death penalty as a sentencing option.

 

For a start the trial hasn't finished, who knows what will come out of it. There could be a claim for 'diminished responsibility'.

 

Let's see what the judge has to say.

 

Hopefully, if found guilty of the charges, they'll be locked up until they die.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I read what you wrote, but we don't have the death penalty as a sentencing option.

 

For a start the trial hasn't finished, who knows what will come out of it. There could be a claim for 'diminished responsibility'.

 

Let's see what the judge has to say.

 

Hopefully, if found guilty, they'll be locked up until they die.

 

The trial hasn't finished, they ran him over with a car, dragged his body into the street so everyone could see, then hacked him to death almost decapitating him.....................It's open and bloody shut.

 

They should introduce the DP in this case

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's odd that they plead not guilty. Apart from the fact there's so much evidence that they did it, this kind of terrorist will often plead guilty because they believe in what they did.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's odd that they plead not guilty. Apart from the fact there's so much evidence that they did it, this kind of terrorist will often plead guilty because they believe in what they did.

 

A guilty plea will mean a shorter trial...perhaps they want their 15 minutes of fame?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The trial hasn't finished, they ran him over with a car, dragged his body into the street so everyone could see, then hacked him to death almost decapitating him.....................It's open and bloody shut.

 

They should introduce the DP in this case

 

You know full well that there has to be due process in the justice system regardless of the circumstances of the crime. With that process you have the right to attend court and hear every scrap of evidence given to the jury and draw your own conclusions at the end.

 

I'd like to think that if the accused had done it for some twisted principal they would have pleaded guilty and been locked up until they die.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's odd that they plead not guilty. Apart from the fact there's so much evidence that they did it, this kind of terrorist will often plead guilty because they believe in what they did.

 

They are pleading not guilty to murder, which is a crime. They are not pleading not guilty to killing someone, which is not a crime.

 

To be consider murder, a killing must be considered unlawful. It is lawful to kill someone who is attacking you. An obvious example of this would be that the heroes of Bomber Command were not murderers as the killing they did was considered lawful as it was in defence of their homeland.

 

The Islamic view is that people are bound together by religious belief rather than nationhood. Which is no less logical than the western idea of nationhood if you think about it.

 

I Imagine that their defence against murder will be based on the fact that their people are under attack and they targeted a serving soldier to protect their people.

 

It will be up to the jury to decide whether this is a valid defence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.