Sorry Miss Beggum / Mrs Riedijk

[Zigenare]

At 15? If you can honestly say that a 15 year old middle class white girl from the home counties who happened to fall in the thrall of some online Islamist groomer would have been treated in entirely the same way as Ms Begum then fair enough.

I did read something recently that suggested that this will ultimately end up in the international court of human rights, where she will almost certainly win (not leaving a citizen stateless is a well established right). So the years of cruelty are entirely performative, and for the benefit of the Daily mail peanut gallery (and a few on here).

So you're playing the "race card" - not a good look.

[mattster]

So you're playing the "race card" - not a good look.

Oh come on. You don't think race and/or culture has a bearing here?

[mattster]

Bollox. She knew what she was doing even after turning 18. Had ISIS won, she would be happily living among them.

I'm not suggesting that she is innocent, but the fact is she was a child in the eyes of the law when she made her decision and in any case removal of her citizenship is unlawful and amoral regardless of guilt or age.

[malvolio]

I'm not suggesting that she is innocent, but the fact is she was a child in the eyes of the law when she made her decision and in any case removal of her citizenship is unlawful and amoral regardless of guilt or age.

Except when she had grown up (rather forcibly, admittedly) she still refused to repent her position and is now of an age when the defence of "being underage" no longer applies. You may remember her refusing to condemn those who beheaded people in front of her...

As for your earlier point, her general background is no different from any other middle class well educated young girl, irrespective of colour. So comparisons to a white peer are hardly relevant.

Yes it may end up in some international court in years to come. That will make the lawyers yet richer (after all they are getting paid out of legal aid funds - i.e. you and me) but won't actually progress her case any further. The UK could well argue that we removed her citizenship but we did not make her stateless since she had viable alternatives at the time.

[Zigenare]

Oh come on. You don't think race and/or culture has a bearing here?

I think you're expending a lot of effort trying to justify her actions.

[mattster]

I think you're expending a lot of effort trying to justify her actions.

It is possible to think that sombody has been hard done by without having to justify their actions.

[vetran]

I'm not suggesting that she is innocent, but the fact is she was a child in the eyes of the law when she made her decision and in any case removal of her citizenship is unlawful and amoral regardless of guilt or age.

Actually as far as criminal responsibility she wasn't. She was 5 years past that.
She was old enough to understand right from wrong and presumably what would happen if she joined a terrorist organisation.

https://learning.nspcc.org.uk/child-...)%20Act%202019).

What she couldn't do at 15 is rent a car, buy alcohol, take out a mortgage or get married.

She could still go to prison for being involved in murder.

[SueEllen]

Actually as far as criminal responsibility she wasn't. She was 5 years past that.
She was old enough to understand right from wrong and presumably what would happen if she joined a terrorist organisation.

https://learning.nspcc.org.uk/child-...)%20Act%202019).

What she couldn't do at 15 is rent a car, buy alcohol, take out a mortgage or get married.

She could still go to prison for being involved in murder.

As we know from the sentencing of one of the horrible cases in the last month, if she stood trial and was found guilty any sentencing l would take in consideration her age and her suspected maturity at the time she committed her offences. So being 15 means she would be assessed and sentenced differently from a 13 year old and a 17 year old let alone an adult.

[SueEllen]

Yes it may end up in some international court in years to come. That will make the lawyers yet richer (after all they are getting paid out of legal aid funds - i.e. you and me) but won't actually progress her case any further. The UK could well argue that we removed her citizenship but we did not make her stateless since she had viable alternatives at the time.

Bangladesh stated at the time she wasn't one of their citizens.

So what other viable alternatives did she have?

[vetran]

As we know from the sentencing of one of the horrible cases in the last month, if she stood trial and was found guilty any sentencing l would take in consideration her age and her suspected maturity at the time she committed her offences. So being 15 means she would be assessed and sentenced differently from a 13 year old and a 17 year old let alone an adult.

But to suggest at 15 she wasn't responsible for her apparently criminal actions seems a little naive.