Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[scrdest]

Isn't it kinda doing what you're accusing the PM of? Except it's presuming the victim guilty unless found innocent. Optimally, we could presume both are innocent until proven, but people exceedingly rarely accidentally fatally stab someone before having to be taken down by other people on the scene.

Not really, I was just giving some examples. Maybe I should have given more examples, like, 'maybe the kid had a PTSS induced panic attack/flashback (so he was not legally accountable for his actions, because psychiatrically ill)', or 'maybe the kid didn't do it and just got scapegoated', 'maybe etc'.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but my understanding is that it's still a crime, it just means you aren't prosecuted for it because of reasons. And if he got scapegoated or anything like that, then it's still a crime, just not by that particular perpetrator.

[martinuzz]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but my understanding is that it's still a crime, it just means you aren't prosecuted for it because of reasons. And if he got scapegoated or anything like that, then it's still a crime, just not by that particular perpetrator.

AFAIK a death caused by a person who cannot be held accountable because of psychiatric condition is not a crime, but an accident.

And the point is not that there are many outcomes that could be called a crime, the point is that there exist examples where the outcome cannot be called a crime. A person in the highest place of national authority, like the prime minister, should know that and be more careful with what he says. What he did here was showing disrespect for the Trias Politica, and that is not fitting with his examplary societal function.

[Loud Whispers]

AFAIK a death caused by a person who cannot be held accountable because of psychiatric condition is not a crime, but an accident.

No
It just means the punishment is mitigated or wavered in lieu of compulsory psychiatric help and sectioning

And the point is not that there are many outcomes that could be called a crime, the point is that there exist examples where the outcome cannot be called a crime. A person in the highest place of national authority, like the prime minister, should know that and be more careful with what he says. What he did here was showing disrespect for the Trias Politica, and that is not fitting with his examplary societal function.

A 22 year old woman was just stabbed to death, what happened there was no great justice. Just look at Obama stepping in to talk about black Americans getting shot, he is fitting his exemplary societal function by not being a bystander to his own country's injustice.

[scriver]

A 22 year old woman who worked at a refugee center for unaccompanied minors between ages of 14 and 17,  was stabbed to death in Sweden.
A 15 year old refugee from Libanon has been arrested. Police cannot make any statements yet about what happened.
The Swedish prime minister called it a 'terrible crime', and spoke of the fear amongst Swedes that these things will happen again.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-35406072

Dunno, 10 years ago prime ministers would be more careful with statements. They'd say something like 'a terrible tragedy', keeping the possibility open that the kid might have stabbed in self defense, or anger about sexual abuse. Basically the prime minister is breaking the law, because a person is innocent until convicted. He shouldn't call it a crime before a judge has done so.

And before someone calls me a terrorist murderer apologist, the only thing I defend here is the Constitutional State, from threats foreign and domestic.

I think you should read up on Swedish laws before you call the Swedish state minister a criminal for making a somewhat preclusive statement on a crime he likely has access to a whole lot more information about than you do.

Nevermind that what he said is really tame and standard and painting it as "threatening the constitutional state and the principle of innocence" is completely inflating the situation.

[Helgoland]

Yeah - as far as I know, presumption of innocence only applies to the courts. You or I - or the Swedish PM or king or whoever - are perfectly free to voice their opinion that it indeed was a crime.

[martinuzz]

You or I - or the Swedish PM or king or whoever - are perfectly free to voice their opinion that it indeed was a crime.

You and I, yes we are perfectly free to voice that opinion. A prime minister however, is not, for that violates the separation of powers.

[Sergarr]

You or I - or the Swedish PM or king or whoever - are perfectly free to voice their opinion that it indeed was a crime.

You and I, yes we are perfectly free to voice that opinion. A prime minister however, is not, for that violates the separation of powers.

That's only if he tried to assert his statement as having legal powers.

[wobbly]

It's generally bad form. There's a reason the media constantly uses "allegedly". These things can interfere with a clean trial.

[wobbly]

Whoops, double post

[Sergarr]

A "clean trial" would be impossible anyway, there's too much pro-migration banter in Yurop for a clean trial against a member of the Master Immigration Race.

[scrdest]

It's generally bad form. There's a reason the media constantly uses "allegedly". These things can interfere with a clean trial.

Given this is *media* we're talking about, I suspect it's more related to something that begins with 'L' and rhymes with 'lawsuit'.

Things tend to rhyme with themselves.

[scrdest]

Speaking of Denmark and economic migrants, Denmark passes a bill allowing seizure of immigrant assets to cover housing/food costs.

[Baffler]

A 17-year old Danish girl will likely be charged with a crime after using pepper spray to defend herself from sexual assault, according to a local police spokesman.

This is true, but not for the reason that article implies. Pepper spray is illegal for private citizens in Denmark, at least if you're not a policeman. It's illegal or tightly controlled in a lot of European countries, actually. You can pick it up at a lot of convenience stores around here though. Make of that what you will.

Edit: I know it says that in the article, but legalizing pepper spray isn't the point the article is making.

[Antioch]

well duh, pepperspray is illegal in certain parts of Europe.

If defend yourself by shooting an assailant with a gun you don't just get a free pass on gun possession.

I have no idea however why the guy wasn't charged with sexual assault.

[Loud Whispers]

I have no idea however why the guy wasn't charged with sexual assault.

In the same way that foreign ambassadors get diplomatic immunity