[Eric]

Originally Posted by jaysay

A burglary suspect with a birthmark on his face will not have to show it in an ID parade, TO PROTECT HIS HUMAN RIGHTS
A witness Tracy Ryan so a man steal £300 in charity donations from a dog sanctuary where she works, but because witness have to be shown 12 photos before they identify a suspect, and they couldn't find 12 photos of people with birthmarks so it could not be use, now everybody on a forthcoming ID parade will have to cover that part of their face, because it would be against the suspects HUMAN RIGHTS, it could only happen in Britain

I don't know if anyone else has noticed, but we are talking here about a burglary "suspect", someone who has not yet had the opportunity to confront his accusers before a judge and a jury of his peers ... in other words, we are looking at someone who is innocent ... I presume that you guys still operate under the "presumption of innocence" like we do. But, on the basis of what evidence, a newspaper article? an item on the news? Jaysay seems to have already decided his guilt And from that, he moves on to an implied condemnation of the government: "it could only happen in Britain" I think that his political prejudice, always close to the surface, has erupted here. We all know that tories tout a "get tough on crime" policy; it's a cheap, albeit and inefective way of dealing with social problems. And it makes good slogans. We are all of us lucky to live as free people in democratic societies; and one of the bases of that freedom is a system of law before which all are equal.