Imprisoned British Muslim students win terror appeal

**lilelvis2000** · 13 February 2008, 20:33

If the evidence was so flimsy how did they get convicted in the first place?

**xoggoth** · 13 February 2008, 21:03

Not entirely sure about this one (without researching all the details and I am of course too lazy). There should be some genuine intent to commit terrorist acts or an indication that they influenced others rather than stoopid yoofs trying to look cool. Hope they watch these lot pretty carefully though.

**Pondlife** · 13 February 2008, 21:39

The conviction of an IT contrator was overturned by the Court of Appeal today after the Lord Chief Justice (and friend of the prime minister) quashed the conviction.

The defendant known only as 'xoggoth' was previously convicted after repeatedly posting on an internet forum encouraging users to rise up and behead the prime minister. He was once quoted as saying;
"Wouldn't it be nice if... Some terrorist manages to blow up Blair and Brown.
In fact it would be really good.
In fact it would excellent.
In fact it would be......
GLORIOUS"

During his trial he was heard to say "stabbity stab stab" when questioned about his thoughts on the former PM Mr Tony BLiar.

More convictions are thought to be overturned on the back of this landmark ruling.

**Troll** · 13 February 2008, 22:12

Originally posted by lilelvis2000 View Post

If the evidence was so flimsy how did they get convicted in the first place?

The evidence wasn't "flimsy" it was enough to convince a jury beyond a reasonable doubt
What is in question is the intent although being of the peace loving persuasion that should have been a given

HTH

**BA to the Stars** · 14 February 2008, 08:51

The defence that they used was the same as Chris Langham, i.e. they were just doing research. Whilst both kiddie porn and terrorism are vile, surely if it is just thoughts

Possibly if someone has a legimate need to access these sites including news broadcasters possibly they should apply for some sort of licence to remove any confusion.

**Troll** · 14 February 2008, 08:55

Originally posted by BA to the Stars View Post

The defence that they used was the same as Chris Langham, i.e. they were just doing research. Whilst both kiddie porn and terrorism are vile, surely if it is just thoughts

Possibly if someone has a legimate need to access these sites including news broadcasters possibly they should apply for some sort of licence to remove any confusion.

It is a specific criminal offence to view /download/store child pornography so the 'just researching' is no defence

**VectraMan** · 14 February 2008, 09:10

Originally posted by Troll View Post

It is a specific criminal offence to view /download/store child pornography so the 'just researching' is no defence

Why shouldn't people be able to research? Okay child pornography is a bit of a difficult issue, but in the case of this so called extremist terrorist literature, who isn't curious about it now? I am: I'd like to read it. I'm sure I'd think it was nonsense written by people with little grip on reality, but I don't want the state making that decision for me.

**51st State** · 14 February 2008, 09:19

Originally posted by VectraMan View Post

Why shouldn't people be able to research? Okay child pornography is a bit of a difficult issue, but in the case of this so called extremist terrorist literature, who isn't curious about it now? I am: I'd like to read it. I'm sure I'd think it was nonsense written by people with little grip on reality, but I don't want the state making that decision for me.

The understatement of the day. If you think there is any possible valid reason for child pornography then you need to see a doctor pal.

There are certain things that the state should, indeed, ban. For the safety of everyone. Terrorist manuals (which is what these feckers were looking at - i.e. how to make a bomb like that used is 7/11) isn't innocent research.

**BA to the Stars** · 14 February 2008, 09:29

Originally posted by Troll View Post

It is a specific criminal offence to view /download/store child pornography so the 'just researching' is no defence

Unless you are a student who just happens to follow a peace loving religion

If they are involved in ANY terrorist activity then all the wishy washy bleeding hearts are just as culpable as is their lawyer

Imprisoned British Muslim students win terror appeal