Which Country's Approach Towards Terrorists Is More Productive, the US or UK

The US and UK have seperate approaches towards prosecution of terrorists. In the U.S., we allow for prosecutors to plea bargain, allowing lighter sentences in return for intelligence and testimony. In the UK, there is no such a flexibility, and a terrorist charged with a crime that carries a lifetime prison sentence must be prosecuted towards that sentence. The UK approach is more principled, but its lack of flexibility is problematic.

_____________________________________________________

This from the Daily Mail:

The war on terror is being hindered by restrictive British law which has created a "dark hole of intelligence", the director of the FBI has claimed.

Robert Mueller, America's top counter-terrorist official, said in an exclusive interview that he sometimes felt "frustration" at MI5 and Scotland Yard's inability to obtain critical information from suspects.

He blamed Britain's banning of plea-bargaining – which, in America, means suspects can receive much lighter sentences in return for revealing everything they know about other members of their cell and their international links.

"If you talk to our British counterparts, it's clear that people questioned about the training camps and the individuals who run the training camps have not been co-operating," said Mr Mueller, 63.

"The information they must have would bear directly on the threat situation in the UK and the situation in Pakistan, which right now is the key to thwarting successful attacks.

"All of us would like a clearer view of what's happening in Pakistan and so that's a frustration."

Mr Mueller, made FBI chief a week before the 9/11 attacks, spoke after talking about counter-terrorism in London last week to an audience including MI5 chief Jonathan Evans and Metropolitan Police Commissioner Sir Ian Blair.

His comments are a clear attempt to influence debate in Britain, where the Government is trying to extend the period that terrorist suspects can be held without charge from 28 to 42 days.

But plea-bargaining would mean that would be unnecessary, said Mr Mueller, adding that he had "no problem" with the US limit of two days before a terror suspect had to be charged.

Under the American plea-bargaining system, suspects are bound by a rigid contract, so that if it later emerges that they have not given up all their relevant knowledge, their deal is void.

Mr Mueller said that although leads opened up by plea-bargains in America had proven vital in preventing attacks and obtaining convictions in Britain, terrorists arrested and convicted in the UK were keeping invaluable secrets to themselves in their prison cells. . . .

Mr Mueller said he expected "a majority" of terrorist suspects in America to co-operate, making plea-bargaining one of his most useful weapons.

He added that the mere knowledge that such deals could be done tended to disrupt cells' ability to function because members were more reluctant to trust each other.

Read the entire article.

Read More...

Summary only...

Crime & (No) Punishment Across the Pond

The Labour government is having an ever growing problem with crime and punishment across the pond. The problem is the former is growing, the latter is ever decreasing - all with predictable results. One would not know that though listening to Labour. Indeed, statistically speaking, fighting crime has been a great success under Labour. I am not trying to suggest in any way that Labour would cynically manipulate the system to make the statistics say what they want. At any rate, with all that in mind, this today from the UK’s Daily Times:

Crown prosecutors are dropping tens of thousands of criminal cases each year despite having enough evidence to bring offenders to court.

Last year they halted proceedings against more than 25,000 offenders, including thugs, vandals and shoplifters, because it was not in the "public interest" to continue.

Officials admit the vast majority of cases are stopped because prosecutors are "snowed under".

A Crown Prosecution Service source said: "We are chronically underfunded and have an increasing backlog of cases.

. . . Stopping trials in the "public interest" still counts as an offence "brought to justice", helping courts hit Government targets.

Critics said the figures raised troubling questions and were another example of Labour's demolition of Britain's criminal justice system.

. . . Figures obtained by The Mail on Sunday under the Freedom of Information Act reveal the CPS dropped 25,821 cases last year on "public interest" grounds. In each case there was enough evidence to charge the criminal, but prosecutors later decided a trial would not be appropriate.

Robin Murray, of the Criminal Law Solicitors Association, claimed CPS lawyers receive bonuses for cases won, creating a disincentive to prosecute marginal trials.
He said: "CPS lawyers suffer salary implications if their statistics are unsuccessful compared with other lawyers."

The practice of dropping court cases has coincided with a dramatic increase in "soft justice" measures, including Asbos, cautions and on-the-spot fines.

Last month, a Court of Appeal judge claimed the huge growth in "soft justice" measures was bringing the law into disrepute.

Lord Justice Leveson said the use of fixed-penalty notices had become a "farce".
He cited one case where an offender had racked up £960 of fines in notices for theft, shoplifting and being drunk and disorderly.

He claimed there was no real prospect of the fines ever being paid.

Figures last month showed just 49 per cent of offences brought to justice resulted in a conviction in court, compared with 68 per cent in 2002-03.

Mr Murray said: "The Government is cutting costs at the expense of justice. "The police are acting as judge and jury. Courts up and down the country are empty."
Peter Goodger, 45, criticised the CPS for allowing the thugs who left him fighting for his life to walk free from court.

The father of four was set upon by three men who stamped on his head in a vicious assault.

The case was brought to court but the Crown prosecutor decided not to continue with the case when a witness who identified the men involved became "tied up in knots" by defence lawyers.

"I thought there was more forensic evidence, so I was surprised when they threw in the towel," said Mr Goodger.

. . . "If it was to do with improving their figures, then it's very wrong."

Read the article here. And as you ponder that, you can see some the effects in the trenches of ‘Ruralshire’ from a police inspector’s view:

Here in Ruralshire, we are recovering from the shock of the latest behaviour reinforcing sentences handed down by Ruraltown Magistrates.

A £70 fine for belting an officer round the head during a domestic incident, a six month suspended sentence for three residential burglary offences (ten previous convictions for burglary) and a discharge for an affray in the street which caused one young child who witnesses the fight to literally collapse with fear.

Once again, I am exhausted and deeply depressed about the continual, planned and almost smug way in which the Courts spit on the decency of the rest of us in these situations.

The criminal underclass are not clever. But even they can understand "cause & effect". They are waging violent random hate campaigns against the world. To encourage this by making it ‘consequence free’ is dangerous.

If criminals are officially ignored in this way, expecting the Police to reduce criminal activity is the final fantasy.

After all; out here on the perimeter - there are no stars.

Read the post here.

Read More...

Summary only...