tinfoilhat Posted October 21, 2018 Share Posted October 21, 2018 Do you have a link for this please? I can't find it. Sorry, that was meant for ECCOnoob's post 16. ---------- Post added 21-10-2018 at 21:50 ---------- Ah, is this it? https://www.nottinghampost.com/news/local-news/prisoner-melanie-shaw-started-four-2113850 Think it raises as many questions as it answers. 3 fires in one day? New prison, 3 months later, but still allowed access to flamable materials? Not allowed to be present (again) at court hearings. Not allowed to defend herself...? ---------- Post added 21-10-2018 at 22:04 ---------- Flipping heck Anna, they can get drugs, mobile phones etc etc etc in prison and you think its beyond imagination she can't get hold of some bog roll and a lighter? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
melthebell Posted October 21, 2018 Share Posted October 21, 2018 Who was in court yesterday? "Nick" https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-45927312 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ECCOnoob Posted October 21, 2018 Share Posted October 21, 2018 (edited) Do you have a link for this please? I can't find it. Sorry, that was meant for ECCOnoob's post 16. ---------- Post added 21-10-2018 at 21:50 ---------- Ah, is this it? https://www.nottinghampost.com/news/local-news/prisoner-melanie-shaw-started-four-2113850 Think it raises as many questions as it answers. 3 fires in one day? New prison, 3 months later, but still allowed access to flamable materials? Not allowed to be present (again) at court hearings. Not allowed to defend herself...? Does not work like that Anna at all. She want not deemed capable to go to a trial. Professionals deemed her not having the physical and or mental attributes to comprehend and go through the process justly which is primary factor in the legal process. Nothing to do with trying to block her access to a court hearing. "Not allowed to defend" is incorrect. Again, it does not work like. The fact that the Defence did not have any evidence is not the same as not being allowed to defend. The law entitles her to legal representation. The law entitles her to any supportive service through the court process as they would to any other Defendant. IF no evidence was presented that likley means that either she refused to engage with it OR in the alternative there was no sufficient grounds and evidence to prove beyond reasonable doubt that she did not commit the offences. That was a jury decision based on the facts presented. Given her past charges it was very likely to go that was whether she actually stood in court or not. Edited October 21, 2018 by ECCOnoob Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anna B Posted October 22, 2018 Share Posted October 22, 2018 (edited) Does not work like that Anna at all. She want not deemed capable to go to a trial. Professionals deemed her not having the physical and or mental attributes to comprehend and go through the process justly which is primary factor in the legal process. Nothing to do with trying to block her access to a court hearing. "Not allowed to defend" is incorrect. Again, it does not work like. The fact that the Defence did not have any evidence is not the same as not being allowed to defend. The law entitles her to legal representation. The law entitles her to any supportive service through the court process as they would to any other Defendant. IF no evidence was presented that likley means that either she refused to engage with it OR in the alternative there was no sufficient grounds and evidence to prove beyond reasonable doubt that she did not commit the offences. That was a jury decision based on the facts presented. Given her past charges it was very likely to go that was whether she actually stood in court or not. If she is mentally ill surely she should be in a mental health facility that provides proper treatment. In past encounters I understand she has been put on video link, but apparently cut off when she began to say things that were considered contraversial. She has now been incarcerated for 4 years without trial for allegedly setting a neighbour's shed on fire, although no records have been filed. All else have apparently been her protests at her treatment in jail. (According to various sources she has been kept in isolation, not been allowed visitors or letters, and been verbally and physically abused.) And also for never having had a fair hearing. This needs looking into publicly at the very least. Edited October 22, 2018 by Anna B Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ridgewalk Posted October 23, 2018 Share Posted October 23, 2018 Does not work like that Anna at all. She want not deemed capable to go to a trial. Professionals deemed her not having the physical and or mental attributes to comprehend and go through the process justly which is primary factor in the legal process. Nothing to do with trying to block her access to a court hearing. "Not allowed to defend" is incorrect. Again, it does not work like. The fact that the Defence did not have any evidence is not the same as not being allowed to defend. The law entitles her to legal representation. The law entitles her to any supportive service through the court process as they would to any other Defendant. IF no evidence was presented that likley means that either she refused to engage with it OR in the alternative there was no sufficient grounds and evidence to prove beyond reasonable doubt that she did not commit the offences. That was a jury decision based on the facts presented. Given her past charges it was very likely to go that was whether she actually stood in court or not. I think it’s fairly obvious she’s in the mental health system somewhere, although I don’t know anything about this case. If she’s been involved in fire setting that doesn’t bode well for her future ---------- Post added 23-10-2018 at 10:01 ---------- If she is mentally ill surely she should be in a mental health facility that provides proper treatment. In past encounters I understand she has been put on video link, but apparently cut off when she began to say things that were considered contraversial. She has now been incarcerated for 4 years without trial for allegedly setting a neighbour's shed on fire, although no records have been filed. All else have apparently been her protests at her treatment in jail. (According to various sources she has been kept in isolation, not been allowed visitors or letters, and been verbally and physically abused.) And also for never having had a fair hearing. This needs looking into publicly at the very least. Bizarre as this may sound, she doesn’t have to be mentally ill to be detained under the MHAct, unless the law has changed in recent years. If certain criteria are met then she can be detained. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lil-minx92 Posted October 23, 2018 Share Posted October 23, 2018 All a bit conspiracy theory fake news fishy to me. If she had the power to harm important members of the establishment she would have disappeared by now..possibly in a tragic fire of her own making Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
muddycoffee Posted October 23, 2018 Share Posted October 23, 2018 I don't know anything about this so I thought I'd have a Google. Now my Google-fu isn't exactly black belt but I found nothing outside of crank sites, David icke and people like me asking questions on forums as random as reddit to cycling. Nowt from the mainstream media, literally nothing I could find at all. Now, because of the subject matter, this could be uber secret stuff, it could be a lie or an exaggeration or a thwacking great hoax, on one of those rare occasions where it's dirty cover up by the establishment. It's very very odd. The UK main stream media is just Brexit and news stories about celebrities and TV programmes. You have to go elsewhere to find anything out. It's almost like someone is managing the news. There are plenty of foreign news sources that print in English and some non mainstream to get a feel from some of the other stories. I've seem lots of channels on YouTube that are quite interesting, but many of them are run by people who have a very high opinion of themselves and their ideas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anna B Posted October 23, 2018 Share Posted October 23, 2018 The UK main stream media is just Brexit and news stories about celebrities and TV programmes. You have to go elsewhere to find anything out. It's almost like someone is managing the news. There are plenty of foreign news sources that print in English and some non mainstream to get a feel from some of the other stories. I've seem lots of channels on YouTube that are quite interesting, but many of them are run by people who have a very high opinion of themselves and their ideas. I was interested in this some time ago. Then, you really had to dig for information and sources. I was quite surprised with this recent revival how the story has grown. Loads of stuff about it on internet now, but still hasn't made much impact in the mainstream yet. Heard somewhere that Samantha Morton, (actress who was also brought up in care,) has taken an interest in the case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mickey finn Posted October 23, 2018 Share Posted October 23, 2018 I was interested in this some time ago. Then, you really had to dig for information and sources. I was quite surprised with this recent revival how the story has grown. Loads of stuff about it on internet now, but still hasn't made much impact in the mainstream yet. Heard somewhere that Samantha Morton, (actress who was also brought up in care,) has taken an interest in the case. Not sure I would want her being associated with my case, didn't she fake a near death stroke. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
muddycoffee Posted October 23, 2018 Share Posted October 23, 2018 I was interested in this some time ago. Then, you really had to dig for information and sources. I was quite surprised with this recent revival how the story has grown. Loads of stuff about it on internet now, but still hasn't made much impact in the mainstream yet. . Ask yourself the question, "Why did David Cameron set off the Brexit Referendum before resigning and getting well out of it?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now