MrSmith Posted April 27, 2013 Share Posted April 27, 2013 He was wrongly arrested doing something that he is allowed to do, are you seriously trying to argue that his next door neighbour has the right not to be wrongly arrested for something? No he wasn't, he was arrested for indecent exposure, he was sent to court but found not guilty, very different to wrongful arrest, anyway this as gone way off topic and I proved the points I made so let’s get back on topic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ronthenekred Posted April 27, 2013 Share Posted April 27, 2013 He was wrongly arrested doing something that he is allowed to do, are you seriously trying to argue that his next door neighbour has the right not to be wrongly arrested for something? :hihi::hihi: You do now it's smithy you're having a debate with..don't you? ---------- Post added 27-04-2013 at 20:56 ---------- No he wasn't, he was arrested for incessant exposure, he was sent to court but found not guilty, very different to wrongful arrest, anyway this as gone way off topic and I proved the points I made so let’s get back on topic. No..let's stick with it huh..you've proved nothing other than make a bigger fool of yourself...if that's at all possible. And it's very relevant...it's about rights. Oh, and the DM. He wasn't found not guilty because of wrongful arrest he was found to be not guilty because he did not expose intentionally. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSmith Posted April 28, 2013 Share Posted April 28, 2013 He wasn't found not guilty because of wrongful arrest he was found to be not guilty because he did not expose intentionally. I didn't claim he was wrongfully arrested or that he was found not guilty because of wrongful arrest, you really should learn to read. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JFKvsNixon Posted April 28, 2013 Share Posted April 28, 2013 I didn't claim he was wrongfully arrested or that he was found not guilty because of wrongful arrest, you really should learn to read. Maybe you should learn to read as well, because you were the fire person to use the phrase wrongful arrest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSmith Posted April 28, 2013 Share Posted April 28, 2013 Maybe you should learn to read as well, because you were the fire person to use the phrase wrongful arrest. No I wasn't. That would be you. He was wrongly arrested doing something that he is allowed to do, are you seriously trying to argue that his next door neighbour has the right not to be wrongly arrested for something? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rupert_Baehr Posted April 28, 2013 Share Posted April 28, 2013 If your passport says that's where you come from - then that's where they can send you back to. (Or so it should be.) There is no 'God Given' or other 'right' to a passport. A passport is a privileged travel document granted to the holder (who is not the owner, the passport is the property of the issuing authority.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JFKvsNixon Posted April 28, 2013 Share Posted April 28, 2013 No I wasn't. That would be you. Umm, read the part you highlighted again. I never used the phrase wrongful arrest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSmith Posted April 28, 2013 Share Posted April 28, 2013 Umm, read the part you highlighted again. I never used the phrase wrongful arrest. They both mean the same thing, and no matter how you wrote it, you was still incorrect in your assertion. wrongly without justice or fairness wrong·ful Not fair, just, or legal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rupert_Baehr Posted April 28, 2013 Share Posted April 28, 2013 Do you really care? Bacon, Eggs and Pork sausages for breakfast from today until eternity. It's going to get boring. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johncocker Posted April 29, 2013 Share Posted April 29, 2013 No. That isn't one of your human rights. What specifically out of what I said is "garbage"? you just answered your own question if security is not one of his human rights take away is his police bodyguard then:loopy: I think you will find that outside of the tight little club of human rights lawyers coining it at the taxpayers expense and the usual crowd who see any enemy of the West as someone to be admired, most Britons, and that includes Muslim Britons who are probably horrified at Mr. Beard, want him gone, out and never to return. The fact that someone may have been shouted at during interrogation is of little concern. He patently has little concern for any of us or our way of life so why reciprocate? The human rights act has been hijacked by greedy lawyers and people like you with axes to grind. ---------- Post added 29-04-2013 at 05:43 ---------- I have no problem with him being treated within the law Johnny. If there is a case he should answer it. ---------- Post added 27-04-2013 at 15:10 ---------- He doesn't make me feel insecure. He is far less dangerous under the scrutiny he receives here than he could be elsewhere. this thread gets more farcical as it go's on:: send him back to jordan then!!!1He's wanted in Jordan for "conspiracy to carry out terror attacks, and subsequently in 2000 to a further 15 years for his involvement in a plot to bomb tourists attending Millennium celebrations in Jordan." Is that serious enough for you? your arrogant attitude that Jordanians are not capable of giving him a fair trial is almost colonial in outlook They have given numerous assurances they won't torture him, but what goods a promise from those savages ay?not good enough for your Patronising, racist attitude Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.