Up to Life in Prison for Terrorism Related Offences (1 Viewer)

  • Thread starter Deleted member 5849
  • Start date
Forums New posts
Otis

Otis

Well-Known Member
Tricky one. I put a post up a few weeks back about a daughter and mum planning terrorist attacks, but the mum had started to try and radicalize her daughter when the daughter was 12 and the daughter actively resisted. Think it took about 4 or 5 years of indoctrination before the daughter was converted.

You have to have a bit of sympathy for the daughter in that circumstance don't you?

Think the daughter was 18 or 19 when she started to plan the attacks.
 
chiefdave

chiefdave

Well-Known Member
I'm more concerned that 15 people were able to cut a hole in the fence, get to the plane and chain themselves to it. Doesn't say much for airport security.

Were the people they were trying to stop being deported eventually deported or are they people who should have been allowed to stay in the country?
 
fernandopartridge

fernandopartridge

Well-Known Member
I think this goes a bit beyond protest, they've broken airside at the airport and tied themselves to an aeroplane.

The charge of intentional disruption of services at an aerodrome sounds right to me. That's indeed what they intended to do isn't it?
 
fernandopartridge

fernandopartridge

Well-Known Member
It's not a terror related offence either. Yes a terrorist might have been charged with it in the past but it's coincidence:

1Endangering safety at aerodromes.
(1)It is an offence for any person by means of any device, substance or weapon intentionally to commit at an aerodrome serving international civil aviation any act of violence which—

(a)causes or is likely to cause death or serious personal injury, and

(b)endangers or is likely to endanger the safe operation of the aerodrome or the safety of persons at the aerodrome.

(2)It is also, subject to subsection (4) below, an offence for any person by means of any device, substance or weapon unlawfully and intentionally—

(a)to destroy or seriously to damage—

(i)property used for the provision of any facilities at an aerodrome serving international civil aviation (including any apparatus or equipment so used), or

(ii)any aircraft which is at such an aerodrome but is not in service, or

(b)to disrupt the services of such an aerodrome,

in such a way as to endanger or be likely to endanger the safe operation of the aerodrome or the safety of persons at the aerodrome.

M1Aviation Security Act 1982 apply for the purposes of this section as they apply for the purposes of that Act; and the references in section 38(7) of that Act (other proceedings) to Part I of that Act and to that Act include references to this section.

(7)Proceedings for an offence under this section shall not be instituted—

(a)in England and Wales, except by, or with the consent of, the Attorney General, and

(b)in Northern Ireland, except by, or with the consent of, the Attorney General for Northern Ireland.

(8)As respects Scotland, for the purpose of conferring on the sheriff jurisdiction to entertain proceedings for an offence under this section, any such offence shall, without prejudice to any jurisdiction exercisable apart from this subsection, be deemed to have been committed in any place in Scotland where the offender may for the time being be.

(9)In this section—

  • act of violence means—
M2Person Act 1861 or under section 2 of the M3Explosive Substances Act 1883, and

M4Civil Aviation Act 1982;

  • military service and United Kingdom national have the same meaning as in the M5Aviation Security Act 1982; and
  • unlawfully—
(a)in relation to the commission of an act in the United Kingdom, means so as (apart from this section) to constitute an offence under the law of the part of the United Kingdom in which the act is committed, and

(b)in relation to the commission of an act outside the United Kingdom, means so that the commission of the act would (apart from this section) have been an offence under the law of England and Wales if it had been committed in England and Wales or of Scotland if it had been committed in Scotland.
Click to expand...
 
D

Deleted member 5849

Guest
chiefdave said:
I'm more concerned that 15 people were able to cut a hole in the fence, get to the plane and chain themselves to it. Doesn't say much for airport security.

Were the people they were trying to stop being deported eventually deported or are they people who should have been allowed to stay in the country?
Click to expand...
c. 30 [sorry, lost exact figure and can't be bothered to cross-check precise!] were able to continue with the asylum process, 10 are still in the UK, one has been granted leave to remnain in the UK.

Slightly worrying that, even though that's just one so far, that had this protest not happened, they'd have been flown out the country when, it turned out, their asylum application was valid. How many more *have* gone...?

My main concern is whether such a protest deserves a possible sentence longer than for rape...
 
Grendel

Grendel

Well-Known Member
Deleted member 5849 said:
c. 30 [sorry, lost exact figure and can't be bothered to cross-check precise!] were able to continue with the asylum process, 10 are still in the UK, one has been granted leave to remnain in the UK.

Slightly worrying that, even though that's just one so far, that had this protest not happened, they'd have been flown out the country when, it turned out, their asylum application was valid. How many more *have* gone...?

My main concern is whether such a protest deserves a possible sentence longer than for rape...
Click to expand...

So far then only one has been granted leave to stay?
 
D

Deleted member 5849

Guest
Whether you agree with the cause or not is irrelevant. I should think most people would agree that, even if they agree with the cause, some kind of punishment is appropriate. But this seems extreme...
 
fernandopartridge

fernandopartridge

Well-Known Member
Deleted member 5849 said:
c. 30 [sorry, lost exact figure and can't be bothered to cross-check precise!] were able to continue with the asylum process, 10 are still in the UK, one has been granted leave to remnain in the UK.

Slightly worrying that, even though that's just one so far, that had this protest not happened, they'd have been flown out the country when, it turned out, their asylum application was valid. How many more *have* gone...?

My main concern is whether such a protest deserves a possible sentence longer than for rape...
Click to expand...

Erm, it doesn't. Rape carries a maximum sentence of life.
 
Gazolba

Gazolba

Well-Known Member
And I'm sure a lot of them are mothers and fathers so it's not just them who will suffer the punishment.
I'd settle for a jail sentence of up to 12 months, a large fine and a lifetime ban on flying.
 
Nick

Nick

Administrator
Gazolba said:
And I'm sure a lot of them are mothers and fathers so it's not just them who will suffer the punishment.
I'd settle for a jail sentence of up to 12 months, a large fine and a lifetime ban on flying.
Click to expand...

Surely it's the same as anything if a parent does something? It's irrelevant whether they have kids or not.
 
covcity4life

covcity4life

Well-Known Member
just showing compassion for fellow humans wether u agree with it not. didnt hurt anyone. punishment for breaking law sure but nothing to extreme and this is a non story
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Top