MP Shot at constituency surgery

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

A low opinion is one thing but to be killed is another.

Especially when you consider that Jo Cox was not even an MP when the expenses scandal happened.








I've just discovered that between his arrest and court appearance Thomas Mair's mental health was assessed by 2 doctors both of whom said he was not mentally ill and was perfectly fit psychologically and able to appear in court.

So there is no valid mental ill health angle; only a right-wing terrorist one.

Do you have a link to your discovery?

This thread is hard to digest. IMO whatever was shouted or not, whatever political agenda the murderer had and whatever his mental state they become totally insignificant at present when weighed against the tragic loss that Jo Cox's family are facing. Their life will never be the same again and they will never get over it. Time will only soften the edges.
RIP

Rollo Tomasi wrote:

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

I don't recall much sympathy for the mental health status of the guys who killed Lee Rigby.

You mean the two cannabis addicts who were awarded over £200,000 in legal aid to fight their case.
I don't recall much either.
Any ways, your sympathy would have been enough to sustain them.Bless.

You seem to be aware of the cost of their defence but not the value of it.

I don't recall expressing any sympathy for them as it happens so I have no idea where you got that wild, inaccurate idea from. It is something that you have invented and then attributed to me. Basically it is lie. Yet another one aimed at me. That pair of shits can rot in prison forever as far as I am concerned.

As for the legal aid... I think everybody should have access to a fair trial. That's fundamental to us being a healthy democracy.

If you deny even one person, whoever they are and whatever they are charged with, a fair trial then we might as well give up right now because everybody in the eyes of the law is innocent until proven guilty. Everybody. No exceptions.

The right to a fair trial is enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights to which we were a willing signatory; it is non-negotiable however much it costs.

Quote :

Article 6.

Everyone has the right to recognition everywhere as a person before the law.

Article 7.

All are equal before the law and are entitled without any discrimination to equal protection of the law. All are entitled to equal protection against any discrimination in violation of this Declaration and against any incitement to such discrimination.


Article 9.

No one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest, detention or exile.

Article 10.

Everyone is entitled in full equality to a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal, in the determination of his rights and obligations and of any criminal charge against him.

Article 11.

(1) Everyone charged with a penal offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law in a public trial at which he has had all the guarantees necessary for his defence.
(2) No one shall be held guilty of any penal offence on account of any act or omission which did not constitute a penal offence, under national or international law, at the time when it was committed. Nor shall a heavier penalty be imposed than the one that was applicable at the time the penal offence was committed.

Only way around it would be to abolish democracy as we understand it.

Greenskin wrote:

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

A low opinion is one thing but to be killed is another.

Especially when you consider that Jo Cox was not even an MP when the expenses scandal happened.








I've just discovered that between his arrest and court appearance Thomas Mair's mental health was assessed by 2 doctors both of whom said he was not mentally ill and was perfectly fit psychologically and able to appear in court.

So there is no valid mental ill health angle; only a right-wing terrorist one.

Do you have a link to your discovery?

Quote :

The suspect in custody has been medically examined by two specialist medical practitioners who have determined that he is both fit for detention and fit for interview and detectives will continue to question the suspect during the day.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Will that do?

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

Greenskin wrote:

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

A low opinion is one thing but to be killed is another.

Especially when you consider that Jo Cox was not even an MP when the expenses scandal happened.








I've just discovered that between his arrest and court appearance Thomas Mair's mental health was assessed by 2 doctors both of whom said he was not mentally ill and was perfectly fit psychologically and able to appear in court.

So there is no valid mental ill health angle; only a right-wing terrorist one.

Do you have a link to your discovery?

Quote :

The suspect in custody has been medically examined by two specialist medical practitioners who have determined that he is both fit for detention and fit for interview and detectives will continue to question the suspect during the day.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Will that do?

No it won't.

The two doctors never mention his mental health.

Only that he's fit for questioning and detaining.

Once again your interpretation is found wanting.

If he's fit for questioning and detaining then he is fit for questioning and detaining and that will include an assessment of his mental condition.

Can you seriously even begin to imagine that Plod isn't being especially careful to ensure that every last i is dotted and t crossed on this one?

If he was in court he was fit, according to the two doctors who assessed him, in every way to be there.

Interestingly Nigel Farage just referred to Mair as a terrorist on the Peston's Sunday morning ITV programme. (No I do not have link but I'd imagine you can watch him say it on ITV Player should you so wish.)

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Banging that race drum again? (is that what Drakes drum was?) the race issue doesn't cross most peoples minds, ever, you seem to live, eat, sleep immigration and racism. Even though you aren't affected by it personally you are enraged by anybody that dares to mention that they are. Hypocritical, I'll informed, boring and insulting you deserve everything you get.

Unbelievable.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

I bet the pilot supported Britain first as well.

"Medical issues will not form part of the defence for the man accused of murdering the Labour MP Jo Cox."

"Cairns Nelson, defending, confirmed that the defendant had been assessed by doctors and that medical evidence would not form part of the defence."

"The Birstall man’s case is being handled under the “terrorism protocol” as part of a terror list before Mr Justice Saunders."

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Not that there was ever any doubt.

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

"Medical issues will not form part of the defence for the man accused of murdering the Labour MP Jo Cox."

"Cairns Nelson, defending, confirmed that the defendant had been assessed by doctors and that medical evidence would not form part of the defence."

"The Birstall man’s case is being handled under the “terrorism protocol” as part of a terror list before Mr Justice Saunders."

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Not that there was ever any doubt.

You don't believe that someone who does such a thing has mental issues?

Les Miserable wrote:

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

"Medical issues will not form part of the defence for the man accused of murdering the Labour MP Jo Cox."

"Cairns Nelson, defending, confirmed that the defendant had been assessed by doctors and that medical evidence would not form part of the defence."

"The Birstall man’s case is being handled under the “terrorism protocol” as part of a terror list before Mr Justice Saunders."

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Not that there was ever any doubt.

You don't believe that someone who does such a thing has mental issues?

No. Not necessarily.

And in this case medical opinion, of doctors who have clinically examined him rather than somebody looking to excuse his actions, has decided that he is perfectly fit for trial under terrorist legislation.

It couldn't be simpler.

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

Les Miserable wrote:

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

"Medical issues will not form part of the defence for the man accused of murdering the Labour MP Jo Cox."

"Cairns Nelson, defending, confirmed that the defendant had been assessed by doctors and that medical evidence would not form part of the defence."

"The Birstall man’s case is being handled under the “terrorism protocol” as part of a terror list before Mr Justice Saunders."

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Not that there was ever any doubt.

You don't believe that someone who does such a thing has mental issues?

No. Not necessarily.

And in this case medical opinion, of doctors who have clinically examined him rather than somebody looking to excuse his actions, has decided that he is perfectly fit for trial under terrorist legislation.

It couldn't be simpler.

I'm not interested in all the legal jargon.

If you honestly believe that a somebody who brutally stabs and shoots a defenceless, harmless, young woman has no mental issues then perhaps you need to visit a doctor.

So you would excuse all terrorists and every terrorist act on mental health grounds?

No, I'm not excusing anything, but to label people who commit such acts as mentally stable is flawed imo.

Les Miserable wrote:

No, I'm not excusing anything, but to label people who commit such acts as mentally stable is flawed imo.

Even though his defence counsel agrees that he is sound of mind?

Yeah, even though.

I'd agree that you can be criminally responsible AND have mental health issues. Diminished responsibility is about whether you understand what you are doing and have the ability to control yourself. So a sociopath might understand what they were doing was wrong, and be able to control themselves, but it would be impossible to say that the way that their brain worked was 'normal'.

My uneducated guess would be that most people who murder someone in a premeditated fashion would have something wrong with them - but that doesn't mean that aren't in control of their actions, and shouldn't be held responsible.

Thomas Mair's reading material complete with Nazi memorabillia atop the bookcase.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

I guess that answers the "where's the evidence he was a fascist" questions.

Lord Melbury wrote:

Suspected killer named as Thomas Mair on Breitbart, may have had “mental health problems”, in receipt of “psychotherapy and medication” it also says.

Breitbart.

I'd never heard of it back then.

It's an "alt-right" website (and we all now know what that is code for). That's a whole can of worms right there.

Rollo Tomasi wrote:

Lord Biro wrote:

Sounds like the attacker could be a fascist right winger. So much hate in this whole referendum thing.
Britain First mentioned, but who knows in this world of political mayhem where the truth just doesn't exist.

You really have turned into an odious character.

We, and most certainly you, know absolutely nothing yet as to the motives behind this tragic event.

Stop and think before you throw your accusations about.

Lord Biro's statement supported in every way by evidence presented to the court.

Did it really need three separate posts to make your point?