‘After he was taken to Hammersmith Police station, a police sergeant asked him: “When you leave custody, you’re not going to hurt yourself are you?”‘
Eer so he was arrested after trying to commit a terror attack – even admitting to trying at the scene – and was then released from custody shortly afterwards? Am I reading that correctly?
thecheeseboiger on
Can someone explain this part to me… I am baffled:
“The prosecution told the jury that Albadri’s case was likely to be that he was not intending to commit any acts of terrorism at the embassy and that he had a good reason to have the knives with him which was “wholly unrelated to his actions that day.”
What good reason is there to have a knife? Why is this not terrorism?
MoffTanner on
Sounds like the prosecutor picked up.the wrong brief and thought he was serving as defence!
Glad he’s going to be staying with us for the next 60 odd years at our expense.
Dedsnotdead on
From the article “A couple of hours earlier he had messaged his mother “I chose the path of martyrdom”, the prosecution said.”
Bake him away Toys!
JB_UK on
> Albadri first arrived in the UK by small boat from France on 5 August 2021, but by November 2023 he had left the country, the prosecution said.
> He re-entered the UK on 12 April last year, again by small boat. He was given temporary accommodation at the Crowne Plaza hotel in Basingstoke, Hampshire.
> In a draft email, that the prosecution said was recovered from this phone, he said he was a “human rights activist” who had been arrested in Kuwait. He said his life and his family’s lives were being threatened.
The British state is just terminally naive. What this almost certainly translates as is that he is an Islamist member of a banned organisation.
But if he can make a case that prison conditions in Kuwait are inhumane we are legally prohibited from deporting him regardless of what he has done, under the expanded case law of the ECHR.
Our legal system is universalist and in these cases under the absolute right against non refoulement makes no judgement over whether the man hates Britain, or is a terrorist.
5 commenti
‘After he was taken to Hammersmith Police station, a police sergeant asked him: “When you leave custody, you’re not going to hurt yourself are you?”‘
Eer so he was arrested after trying to commit a terror attack – even admitting to trying at the scene – and was then released from custody shortly afterwards? Am I reading that correctly?
Can someone explain this part to me… I am baffled:
“The prosecution told the jury that Albadri’s case was likely to be that he was not intending to commit any acts of terrorism at the embassy and that he had a good reason to have the knives with him which was “wholly unrelated to his actions that day.”
What good reason is there to have a knife? Why is this not terrorism?
Sounds like the prosecutor picked up.the wrong brief and thought he was serving as defence!
Glad he’s going to be staying with us for the next 60 odd years at our expense.
From the article “A couple of hours earlier he had messaged his mother “I chose the path of martyrdom”, the prosecution said.”
Bake him away Toys!
> Albadri first arrived in the UK by small boat from France on 5 August 2021, but by November 2023 he had left the country, the prosecution said.
> He re-entered the UK on 12 April last year, again by small boat. He was given temporary accommodation at the Crowne Plaza hotel in Basingstoke, Hampshire.
> In a draft email, that the prosecution said was recovered from this phone, he said he was a “human rights activist” who had been arrested in Kuwait. He said his life and his family’s lives were being threatened.
The British state is just terminally naive. What this almost certainly translates as is that he is an Islamist member of a banned organisation.
But if he can make a case that prison conditions in Kuwait are inhumane we are legally prohibited from deporting him regardless of what he has done, under the expanded case law of the ECHR.
Our legal system is universalist and in these cases under the absolute right against non refoulement makes no judgement over whether the man hates Britain, or is a terrorist.