Campaigners try to stop Deportation of 50 people to Jamaica. Watch

Andrew97
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 1 week ago
#1
https://news.sky.com/story/calls-to-...maica-11930498


The campaigners lost a high court challenge on Tuesday, the government claim the 50 are criminals whilst campaigners say that some were as young as 13 when they entered the U., with two (who are being deported for drug offences) saying they have no link with the country.

Nottinghamshire East MP Nadia Wittome organised a letter sent to Prime Mnister Boris Johnson has said deportations should be stop until a report into the Windrush scandal is released.

What do we think of this?
Should the people be able to stay in the U.K?
How do you judge it?
0
reply
LoisClayton
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#2
Report 1 week ago
#2
This seems like a complicated issue. I think they should wait until the facts are all straight and the report is released to make a decision
2
reply
imlikeahermit
Badges: 9
Rep:
?
#3
Report 1 week ago
#3
These campaigner snowflakes are utterly pathetic. I am fully behind the government on this one. These people on board this flight are criminals, some for murder. If my memory serves me right, we’ve had this before with the do gooders who end up looking like idiots. Remember that convicted rapist who was being deported who the snowflakes then prevented, by refusing to let the plane take off. Pathetic. Absolutely pathetic.
3
reply
Rakas21
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#4
Report 1 week ago
#4
As has been alluded to these people are resident in the UK, have chosen not to peruse full UK citizenship and have murdered and raped people among other things. They have served their sentence and the UK government is rightfully exercising its right to deport them.

If they had been more interested in giving up Jamaican citizenship and gaining full British citizenship rather than committing crimes then they would be permitted to remain. Ultimately their actions have consequences and this is one.
5
reply
monkeybest
Badges: 5
Rep:
?
#5
Report 1 week ago
#5
Amazing to hear the excuses the liberal lefties are coming out with, oh they lived there whole life here, doing exactly what?! They have no link to Jamaica so thats an excuse to rape and deal drugs here?

Something to do with o2 phone masts also as the basis for appeal? Are you kidding me, its no wonder Trump is so popular in his country he would booted these criminals out ages ago if was his country yet here we are spending taxpayers money to keep them here!

Has this country gone completely mad? Are our judges completely nuts? The public would be shocked to see this. Windrush was a different issue they werent dangerous criminals. Get rid asap
1
reply
ByEeek
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#6
Report 1 week ago
#6
(Original post by imlikeahermit)
These campaigner snowflakes are utterly pathetic. I am fully behind the government on this one. These people on board this flight are criminals, some for murder. If my memory serves me right, we’ve had this before with the do gooders who end up looking like idiots. Remember that convicted rapist who was being deported who the snowflakes then prevented, by refusing to let the plane take off. Pathetic. Absolutely pathetic.
The police are about to knock your door in. Do you have 10 pieces of evidence that prove you have the right to live in this country? I'm not sure I do.

Yet you seem happy for other people to leave.
1
reply
nulli tertius
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#7
Report 1 week ago
#7
(Original post by imlikeahermit)
These campaigner snowflakes are utterly pathetic. I am fully behind the government on this one. These people on board this flight are criminals, some for murder. If my memory serves me right, we’ve had this before with the do gooders who end up looking like idiots. Remember that convicted rapist who was being deported who the snowflakes then prevented, by refusing to let the plane take off. Pathetic. Absolutely pathetic.
You “know” some of the deportees were guilty of murder. However, none were guilty of murder. One was guilty of manslaughter, circumstances unknown.
0
reply
nulli tertius
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#8
Report 1 week ago
#8
Can I offer an alternative viewpoint here. The Government (that doesn’t mean the present Government, the deportation problem started under Blair) is the architect of its own misfortune here.

What it has tried to do over many years is narrow the grounds on which a legal challenge to deportation can be made and what the courts have done is found various means to stop that erosion of judicial oversight.

However, if you look at areas of the criminal law where there haven’t been any attempts to restrict judicial oversight, the courts have been very robust in favour of “law and order”. The classic example, but there are others, is confiscation of criminal property. The judiciary are very unsympathetic to technicalities why criminals shouldn’t lose their ill gotten gains.

The Government started on the present path because the CPS weren’t seeking enough discretionary deportation orders at the time of conviction and where they were, courts had insufficient background information to make informed decisions.

If rather than make deportation automatic but it then being up to the deportee to challenge it, one made a deportation hearing in the Crown Court automatic for all foreign prisoners serving long sentences say three months before release date, you would have many more deportations and these deportations would be happening much more quickly before family circumstances changed to possibly invalidate previous decisions.

The reasons are two-fold. There wouldn’t be judicial review of a Crown Court judge’s decision. Rather there would be the same tough rules for an appeal as exist in the rest of criminal law.

Secondly, judicial review allows something that is arguable to be sent back to the decision maker to think again. Where the court is deciding, it is actually making that decision on the evidence that actually exists.

With these Jamaicans, a number will say they are at risk of death if returned to Jamaica. In a judicial review the argument will be about whether the Government has properly considered all the relevant factors and if it has whether the Government has properly considered the balance exercise of the UK public interest and the risk to the deportee. The judge in a judicial review marks the Government’s homework. If it gets a fail, the Government is sent back to do it again.

If there was a deportation hearing and the judge was making the decision to deport the CPS would set out the risks to the public from allowing the criminal to remain; then it would be up to the deportee to prove, not merely claim, he was at risk of death if returned to Jamaica. If he couldn’t do that, he has lost. If he can, the judge weighs up the public interest against the risk to the deportee. Most would be boarding the plane.

It is fallacy to suggest criminal judges are soft. They lock people up for years and they keep the gaols full to their maximum capacity almost all of the time.

What a change like this requires is the abandonment of the fantasy that somehow if the Government gets the rules right, the Government will be able to deport people without the courts becoming involved.
Last edited by nulli tertius; 1 week ago
1
reply
imlikeahermit
Badges: 9
Rep:
?
#9
Report 1 week ago
#9
(Original post by ByEeek)
The police are about to knock your door in. Do you have 10 pieces of evidence that prove you have the right to live in this country? I'm not sure I do.

Yet you seem happy for other people to leave.
I couldn’t give a **** mate. These people are criminals. Get them out of this country. Or are you yet another left wing snowflake who’d rather protect the criminal than the victim? Pathetic.
(Original post by nulli tertius)
You “know” some of the deportees were guilty of murder. However, none were guilty of murder. One was guilty of manslaughter, circumstances unknown.
One knifed a man to death. I’d call that murder.

You two want to give your heads a shake here. Who are you protecting? Criminals or victims? These people are criminals, plain and simple. Absolutely abhorrent views to think these people should stay in this country. Yet again, left wingers way off when it comes to political opinion.

Thank god the leader of the Labour Party didn’t stand up for these criminals, further damaging the party! Oh wait....
Last edited by imlikeahermit; 1 week ago
0
reply
Kitten in boots
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#10
Report 1 week ago
#10
I only wish the outrage towards these individuals was more consistently applied.

There was no serious calls for Rolf Harris, kiddie fiddler and friend of Margaret Thatcher, to be deported.
0
reply
ibyghee
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#11
Report 1 week ago
#11
What matters is the kids, how old were they, and how old are they now.
0
reply
Rakas21
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#12
Report 1 week ago
#12
(Original post by Kitten in boots)
I only wish the outrage towards these individuals was more consistently applied.

There was no serious calls for Rolf Harris, kiddie fiddler and friend of Margaret Thatcher, to be deported.
He presumably gained citizenship although they don’t get deported until after their sentence anyway.
0
reply
nulli tertius
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#13
Report 1 week ago
#13
(Original post by imlikeahermit)

One knifed a man to death. I’d call that murder.
However, the jury which heard the evidence didn't.
0
reply
imlikeahermit
Badges: 9
Rep:
?
#14
Report 1 week ago
#14
(Original post by nulli tertius)
However, the jury which heard the evidence didn't.
Which is mystifying itself! However don’t get me started on our justice system...
0
reply
ThirdPositionist
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#15
Report 6 days ago
#15
(Original post by Andrew97)
https://news.sky.com/story/calls-to-...maica-11930498


The campaigners lost a high court challenge on Tuesday, the government claim the 50 are criminals whilst campaigners say that some were as young as 13 when they entered the U., with two (who are being deported for drug offences) saying they have no link with the country.

Nottinghamshire East MP Nadia Wittome organised a letter sent to Prime Mnister Boris Johnson has said deportations should be stop until a report into the Windrush scandal is released.

What do we think of this?
Should the people be able to stay in the U.K?
How do you judge it?
Deport them, all of them, and punish those who refuse to deport them, theyre traitors.
Last edited by ThirdPositionist; 6 days ago
0
reply
fallen_acorns
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#16
Report 6 days ago
#16
the news coverage of this is pissing me off. My local news is showing a really sympathetic take on one of the men..

hes a father.. he hasn't been back since he was 6.. he doesn't know anyone there.. poor guy.

They drop in.. once, in one tiny sentance, that he has two convictions for dealing class A drugs.

But poor guy, he doesn't deserve this.

---

**** him quite frankly.

1. Hes a drug dealer, who deserves no sympathy at all.
2. Hes had more than 30 years in which he could have applied for British citizenship. It would have been very easy for him to do so, and its not that expensive.

So its his fault.. on two counts. One for never bothering to sort out his citizenship, and two for commiting a really serious crime that ruins peoples lives.

Yet if you read the news.. he is the big victim here.. the drug dealer is who we should feel sorry for.
2
reply
barnetlad
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#17
Report 6 days ago
#17
It seemed to me to be gesture politics, and Jamaicans were probably deliberately chosen. As mentioned above, Rolf Harris could have had his citizenship removed and been deported. No doubtless there are others too, given the proportion of prisoners who are foreign nationals.
1
reply
Napp
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#18
Report 6 days ago
#18
(Original post by fallen_acorns)
the news coverage of this is pissing me off. My local news is showing a really sympathetic take on one of the men..

hes a father.. he hasn't been back since he was 6.. he doesn't know anyone there.. poor guy.

They drop in.. once, in one tiny sentance, that he has two convictions for dealing class A drugs.

But poor guy, he doesn't deserve this.

---

**** him quite frankly.

1. Hes a drug dealer, who deserves no sympathy at all.
2. Hes had more than 30 years in which he could have applied for British citizenship. It would have been very easy for him to do so, and its not that expensive.

So its his fault.. on two counts. One for never bothering to sort out his citizenship, and two for commiting a really serious crime that ruins peoples lives.

Yet if you read the news.. he is the big victim here.. the drug dealer is who we should feel sorry for.
Whilst i dont disagree with your point per-se personally i would draw very disinct differences between the various drug dealers. Someone selling crack/meth/heroine for example should be put on the first plane out whilst somewhat lesser dealers (i.e. those selling the odd bit of dope of a couple of wraps) meh, who cares? It seems more effort than its worth deporting such low level offenders when by and large they arent really causing any real damage.
0
reply
Rakas21
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#19
Report 5 days ago
#19
(Original post by Napp)
Whilst i dont disagree with your point per-se personally i would draw very disinct differences between the various drug dealers. Someone selling crack/meth/heroine for example should be put on the first plane out whilst somewhat lesser dealers (i.e. those selling the odd bit of dope of a couple of wraps) meh, who cares? It seems more effort than its worth deporting such low level offenders when by and large they arent really causing any real damage.
One would suggest that those small dealers are not contributing to society so we may as well take the opportunity presented to us.
1
reply
Napp
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#20
Report 5 days ago
#20
(Original post by Rakas21)
One would suggest that those small dealers are not contributing to society so we may as well take the opportunity presented to us.
Indeed but the other way to look at it is their biggest market is UK nationals and thus the problem really lies somewhat closer to home. After all drug dealing is the most obvious and stark version of the freemarket you could ever wish for.
And at the end of the day, bar certain over strength opiates and such half of these drugs are less harmful than stuff you can buy in the pharmacy.
Case in point being this seems a spectacular waste of tax payer money that could be better spent in booting out rapists and murders and the drug king pins - not low level gimps.
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

People at uni: do initiations (like heavy drinking) put you off joining sports societies?

Yes (364)
67.03%
No (179)
32.97%

Watched Threads

View All