[andrewb]

Originally Posted by garinda

So under that proviso you wouldn't bother sending a terminally ill person to trial in the first place, even if they are suspected terrorists, murderers, rapists, child abusers etc., because they are presumably going to die, and therefore shouldn't face justice in a criminal court?

I thought British justice was meant to be blind? Meaning we are all equal in the eyes of the law, irrespective as to individual circumstance.

Incidentally there's someone in my extended family who was diagnosed with a terminal illness, and told he had six months to live, in 1968.

Happily he's still alive today.

'After months of being at death’s door with prison guards posted at his hospital bedside, Ronnie Biggs has now discovered that five days of freedom can have a remarkable restorative effect.'

'The Great Train Robber was said last night to have made a dramatic recovery from his life-threatening pneumonia.'

Ronnie Biggs finds that freedom makes an old lag feel better - Times Online

Garinda I think you've got the wrong end of the stick. I was merely saying it's a stupid idea to release a known terrorist especially on grounds that he's going to die, what better time to do it again if he knows he's going to die anyway.