Crimbobimbobippitybo t1_jcux92u wrote
The whole Windrush Scandal was a shameful moment in our history, but this guy has to be the least sympathetic human in the entire story.
samuelgato t1_jcvd9zm wrote
He served two years in prison for a crime he didn't commit. Surely that is deserving of some sympathy.
jimicus t1_jcxgdq9 wrote
He also served nineteen years in prison for a crime he did commit.
Culverin t1_jcxikoz wrote
Then justice was served.
and then over served?
[deleted] t1_jcvgvqn wrote
[removed]
samuelgato t1_jcvh9bu wrote
And he served the sentence that was handed down. After completing his sentence he was imprisoned for two years on false charges.
[deleted] t1_jcvhe5n wrote
[removed]
samuelgato t1_jcvhjp8 wrote
And still wrongfully imprisoned
[deleted] t1_jcvhwo6 wrote
[removed]
samuelgato t1_jcvi254 wrote
And also a victim of injustice
Head-Ad4690 t1_jcwqd8f wrote
Rights are worthless if you only give them to sympathetic people.
tothemax44 t1_jcvgb53 wrote
Even a bad man can have a righteous cause.
dirty_cuban t1_jcvv4b0 wrote
Which is why it’s important to give everyone access to a robust defense at trial.
tothemax44 t1_jdwqj0y wrote
Ironically, I learned this is law school.
TocTheElder t1_jcuxi7t wrote
That's a long way of saying "I don't believe in rehabilitation or spent convictions."
EDIT: I've never seen someone who is right resort to blocking people. Seems like an easy way to shut down conversation without having to justify your position.
>The whole Windrush Scandal was a shameful moment in our history, but this guy has to be the least sympathetic human in the entire story.
But, therefore what?
[deleted] t1_jcuynvr wrote
[removed]
jimicus t1_jcxh70t wrote
Legally, there's no such thing as a spent conviction as far as this chap's concerned. He committed murder.
However - big "however" - most killers aren't as dangerous to society at large as you'd believe.
More often than not, it's a spur-of-the-moment, "oh my god what have I done?" thing which they never repeat when they get out.
The unrepentant serial killers of this world are relatively rare.
IsoNeko t1_jcxl3zr wrote
This wasn't a spur of the moment, it was a robbery turned murder with a gun. I of course don't need to explain the difficulties in getting a firearm in the UK, but it's clear this wasn't just something that 'happened'.
He then snuck into the back of a fast food place, took a hostage while robbing them of money/jewellery, and then shot a guy in the head twice.
Reformed or not, 19+2 years in prison is still 19+2+x more years than the murdered man had.
literorrery t1_jcv2p0b wrote
I block right-wing trolls all the time. Some positions shouldn't be put up for debate.
theboredforeigner t1_jcx074h wrote
“Criminals are always criminals, even if they serve their time” is a very right-wing position which is often accompanied by racism and other equally bigoted fuckery.
[deleted] t1_jcxoejq wrote
[deleted]
[deleted] t1_jcvdar3 wrote
[deleted]
SuteSnute t1_jcvmwgt wrote
Blocking people on Reddit is literally fascism? You clowns get more and more absurd with your reaches by the day.
Crimbobimbobippitybo t1_jcuxnqi wrote
No, if that's what I meant then I would have said that; don't try to justify your straw man by pretending you're reading between the lines.
Edit: > But, therefore what?
But therefore he's the least sympathetic victim of the Windrush scandal. If you need more help understanding, I'd start with this.
TocTheElder t1_jcuzf4g wrote
Why would this guy need to be sympathetic? He is British, convicted murderer or not. Do you think we should be deporting British citizens because they were convicted of a crime? Because that's worked out so well in the past... You trying to throw caveats in there to justify his deportation is just fucking bizarre.
Bangarangadanahang t1_jcv62j4 wrote
>Do you think we should be deporting British citizens because they were convicted of a crime? Because that's worked out so well in the past...
Well we got Australia that way and I quite like the Australians generally. So not all bad I guess.
Crimbobimbobippitybo t1_jcuzixc wrote
I didn't try to justify his deportation, you're just so desperate for a fight or some worthless clout that you're pretending I did.
Wyrmalla t1_jcv76ol wrote
The article makes this man out to be a model prisoner, and states the hardships he went through in his time he was stuck in Jamaica. Nothing in the article is a flag justifies you saying this man is the "least sympathetic human in the entire story".
The other poster's relevant then as it seems the only basis you have for criticising this man is that he served a sentence on a murder charge. That poster then is justified in saying that your criticism runs contrary to concepts like rehabilitation.
Or is there some other reason you think this man is somehow the bad guy in this story?
Crimbobimbobippitybo t1_jcv7gtg wrote
> Or is there some other reason you think this man is somehow the bad guy in this story?
I think being a murderer and having a resulting bit of ill fortune which was corrected makes him less sympathetic than others affected by the Windrush scandal.
Edit: The good old seagull... shit all over the place and then fly away block and run. You won't be missed.
Wyrmalla t1_jcv8ndl wrote
Right, so you confirm what the poster said - that your criticism is based on his previous conviction. That isn't them creating a strawman, its them just repeating what you said back to you and then you getting annoyed.
TocTheElder t1_jczht7v wrote
>I think being a murderer and having a resulting bit of ill fortune which was corrected makes him less sympathetic than others affected by the Windrush scandal.
So exactly what I said, then?
jujubean67 t1_jcxdsde wrote
Who the fuck cares if he is sympathetic or not. He is a citizen and has rights, which were violated. Can't tell if you're just dumb or if this "sympathetic" talk is just another dogwhistle.
Shadowfiredance t1_jcy07la wrote
Def dogwhistle.
[deleted] t1_jcww0qx wrote
[removed]
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments