Four men have been arrested and today each charged with possession of the single firearm found in a car.
BBC News - Four charged after car gun find
This is exactly how Bobby Sandy, Joe McDonnell and two others were arrested in 1976. All four received 14 year sentences.
I am no defender of dissident violence, but the law is undemocratic. Four people should not each be charged with possession of one gun.
What is Sinn Fein's position on this law these days?
It's the intent part that's important. If you and I conspire to shoot someone, and they pull our car over, it doesn't matter if the gun is in my pocket or yours, we both get arrested. It's a joint venture.
Now if 3 of the men swear up and down that the 4th was the real owner and they had no idea he had a gun, barring other evidence against a conspiracy, they'd have a pretty good shot at getting off. But you certainly arrest everyone in the car at the time.
Yawn, get excited over something else will you. 4 gurriers carrying, obvious to all four of them and consensually, a firearm, and you are getting excited when they are charged with the offence? Give me a break will you.
"......... we must sometimes listen to those who, consumed with zeal, have scant judgment or balance. To such ones the modern world is nothing but betrayal and ruin.........We feel bound to disagree with these prophets of doom who are forever forecasting calamity -- as though the world's end were imminent."
The occupying, sectarian crown forces are going soft. Back in the day they'd have just opened up on the car with automatic weapons whilst hoping to catch a few passing civilians and also wiping their bums with a Gerry Adams tea towel. Softies.Originally Posted by tiocfaidh
I can see how if they can prove the conspiracy part based upon other evidence, then they should all be convicted of conspiracy, but if it's as simple as they found a gun and the 4 men are known republicans, then its wrong.
Is there no onus on the prosecution to actually prove who had the gun? If you get pulled over and the police find a half ounce of weed in a car with 4 people in it, I don't think they are all charged. Or if they do they cannot all be convicted. Should there not be additional evidence required that actually shows that someone in particular had the gun? This is the whole point of a democratic system - more evidence than simply being in the vicinity of a crime should be needed to convict someone of involvement with that crime.
This is the thing with Sands and the other three - all four refused to acknowledge the court. The prosecutors had no other evidence than the one gun.
Going back to the four today, it certainly seems possible to me that one or more of the 4 might not have known that the gun was in the car. It is certainly within the realm of possibilty. And a real democracy would acknowledge that. The burden of proving guilt must lie with the prosecution.
I would like to hear PSF's thoughts on this law.
If the four of them were consensually carrying the firearm in the car at the time they were all in it, they are all equally guilty unless there of them "cut the throat" as it is known, of the fourth, and swear the fourth did it without their concent. In any event, it would probably not be accepted as a defence if they were no forced into the act.
"......... we must sometimes listen to those who, consumed with zeal, have scant judgment or balance. To such ones the modern world is nothing but betrayal and ruin.........We feel bound to disagree with these prophets of doom who are forever forecasting calamity -- as though the world's end were imminent."
They have only been CHARGED, not convicted. Wait for the law to take its course before getting excited will you. This thread has all the hallmarks of premature typing.
"......... we must sometimes listen to those who, consumed with zeal, have scant judgment or balance. To such ones the modern world is nothing but betrayal and ruin.........We feel bound to disagree with these prophets of doom who are forever forecasting calamity -- as though the world's end were imminent."
Fair play to Tiocfaidh.
Also there is the point that any Republican opposed to the GFA is being demonized.
Most anti-GFA Republicans dont believe in armed struggle now....But we can never recognize the British presence in Ireland as legitimate (and by the British presence in Ireland I do not mean Ulster protestants...Hopefully I would die for their right to remain in their homeland).
How do you know it's obvious to all 4 of them, and that all 4 consented? How do you not know, for example, that the driver had it under his seat and the other three were unaware?
People need to be protected from being potentially locked up for 10 years or more for the crime of being in the wrong place at the wrong time. BTW, I am NOT saying these four are innocent - but I am saying that they should be presumed innocent until proven guilty. And right now all they have been proven guilty of is being in the wrong place at the wrong time, and maybe choosing their company poorly. Apparently that is all that's needed to be charged with firearms possession in the 6C.
Hopefully times have changed since 1976 and though they can be charged as such still, perhaps they can no longer be convicted with no further evidence. Does anyone know what the law is in that regard?
Well, I see where you stand concerning civil liberties.
Obviously you are correct in that arrest and charging alone is better than that plus conviction. We shall soon see how far we have evolved as society in the last 30 years.
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Reply With Quote