UK Case on Death Penalties Can Be Commuted Through Global Precedent

Two Trinidadian prisoners in the United Kingdom accused of killing three Britons in the Port Spain may not be indicted with the death penalty due to their intellectual levels.

According to the World Health Organisation's guideline that classifies any person with an IQ below 70 as "intellectually disabled", could be considered a case of insanity rather than criminal.

Lester Pitman is convicted of killing BBC Lynette Lithgow 51, Maggie Lee 83 and brother-in-law 

John Cropper 59 in their bathroom from their bungalow property.

The three were found with their hands tied behind their backs. Their throats were slit.

Authorities believe Pitman was to rob the house in 2004 but was forced to murder the three in 2004. 

He was sentenced with death penalty in Trinidad, his original country. In 2013, his case was commuted to 40 years in jail.

A court of appeal hearing declared Pitman to be sentenced properly with the death penalty.

Experts measured Pitman's IQ to be initially at 52 and then at 67, which can use the global precedent on IQs to avoid the death penalty.

Another prisoner, Neil Hernandez, had killed Christine Henry and her six-year old son Philip in Toco in Trinidad in May 2000 with a cutlass used for coconut harvesting. He was to receive the death penalty but had his sentenced commuted to 25 years due to his long wait for the death penalty. 

Experts measured his IQ at 57, which may also exempt him from the death penalty permanently.

Denying Legal Aid To Anyone In the UK Is Illegal. Even Non-UK People

Overseas domestic workers, contractual workers, habitual residents of the UK who head back to their countries every end of the contract.

Each of these individuals have stepped on UK soil. Each one of these individuals are human beings.

While I'm up for UK citizens first, I'm also up for giving fair legal rights to anybody in the United Kingdom.

The Public Law Project (PLP) also reflects my views. It would seem domestic workers, who had reported abuse from their British employers involving hiding Visas and being locked inside the house have increased in the number of incidences.

The Ministry of Justice's rule that only those with an established link to the United Kingdom should have legal aid, is illegal in itself.

The Public Law Project will demonstrate that no minister has the power to enforce discriminatory regulations.

Legal aid is a budget the government sets aside from our tax money, which would help us and non-taxpayers the opportunity to a fair trial and service of justice.

We pride that the UK is a country of fair legal right and trial for everyone. But now, they've cut the legal aid budgets even for the poorest UK citizen and now the non-UK resident.

It would seem justice now just serves money. Not that lawyers are money-grubbing professionals; you need professional fee upkeep. However, a lack of elevating funds to keep the quality and professional services of lawyers intact for everyone denies justice for the lower and lowest society.

So, nothing's really fair in the world. And this post was just your magnifying glass.

Tories' Legal Blunder Over Coal Plant Air Pollution

Politics is probably just about making false promises and idealism gone wrong. For if everything was true, then we wouldn't have to question the UK's legal situation over the coal plant pollution reduction plans.

Last year, the international legal firm ClientEarth had accused the UK government of not exhausting all means to achieve the air quality it promised to reach.

In fact, the government had been dropping requirements for industrial plants to demonstrate they meet air quality laws. So in a way, it's like installing a defeat device, such as what Volkswagen did with their cars.

According to the Environment Agency, it had done everything it could to issue permits properly to industrial plants. The EA said it had only issued permits after proper safety regulations were met and that included the air quality needed for coal plants to produce electricity.

Or, maybe not at all. It's a fact that electricity is priority in the United Kingdom. With renewable energy strategies being put to scrap, the Tory government needs a proper move, even if it means a declining health problem due to environmental troubles.

ClientEarth threatened the UK government of another lawsuit over their air quality regulation and the UK supreme courts said they will back ClientEarth should it happen.

Hoo boy!

NIHRC Accused Of Neglecting Women's Rights Following Relaxation of Abortion Laws

Christian campaigners for the abortion laws said the laws gave enough rights and protection for women. But women still have the right to abort their foetus in case the child could not live a proper life because of its abnormalities. Another right they need is if the child was conceived after rape or any crime of the sort.

In Britain, we have the 1967 Abortion Act. This allows abortions for these types of cases. However, in Ireland, only if the foetus endangers the life or the mental state of the mother can it only be aborted. At any point an abortion is performed illegally, women can be arrested for life.

As a result, many Irish women seeking an aboriton travel to the United Kingdom to avoid the law.

According to Belfast Judge Justice Mark Horner, the inability to access an abortion made it a "gross interference with her personal autonomy. Meanwhile, a huge burden is placed on victims when sexual crime has conceived the foetus.

Justice Minister David Ford said the proposed change could remain in Limbo for some time.

Meanwhile, the Christian Institute Lobby Group Head Callum Webster said:

"It is heartening that the majority of MLAs have voted to uphold the sanctity of life today at Stormont.

"There has been a media campaign to undermine the legal protections afforded to our unborn children, but thankfully politicians have resisted that co-ordinated pressure."

Britain Bended The Rules To Make Real Economic Gains... On Yemeni Life

Anybody here remember the Houthi rebels from Yemen?

Warmongers speculated Iran was behind the revolutionaries that sought to oppose Yemen's Sunni rule.

Now, Yemen's government, backed by Sunni Saudi Arabia, sought help from the latter. The result is a widespread assault by Saudi Arabia by air, land and sea.

But that is expected, to be honest.

The only thing that connects Britain to the conflict is that our contractors had sold the weapons Saudi Arabia.

It's not wrong because UK contractors have a license to sell Saudi some weapons. But it's wrong because the government had not yet reviewed the activities of Saudi Arabia.

Clearly, rules are being bent for profit's sake.

Of course, we know it's profit. With Britain's own government tying contracts with defence companies, it's not a farfetched idea that the whole-new IS and international extremism agenda is swinging to their favour.

Ask the stock markets. It's actually happening.

But, sorry to disappoint fellahs, selling to Saudi Arabia may be illegal. Some highly influential people in the Campaign Against The Arms Trade (CAAT) highlighted Saudi Arabia's indisputable record when it comes to human rights violations. If the government will not review and possibly suspend the licenses, we're seeing a big issue that would define the UK's role in its entirety.

The Law Society Condemns UK Small Claims Court Limits Rise

In response to an ever-increasing premium for motorist insurance due to fraudulent soft tissue personal injuries from motor accidents, the UK Chancellor George Osborne proposed to increase the small claims court's limit from £1000 to £5000 and to abolish all soft tissue "minor" personal injuries from personal injury claims.

However, UK's Law Society criticised the Chancellor's proposals. Law Society President Jonathan Smithers said the society "is gravely concerned the proposals will undermine the right of ordinary citizens to receive full and proper compensation" due to the lack of legal advice for personal injury claims below £5000

"Personal injury claims, even lower value claims, can include serious injuries arising from the fault of an employer or other road traffic accidents where legal rights can be very complex and the injuries caused debilitating. A new limit of £5000 will mean personal injuries including facial scarring would be considered as ‘small claims’. This is totally unacceptable," Smithers added.

The Select Transport Committee (STC) also criticised the proposals as it only surveyed insurers rather than victims and insurance holders. The STC iterated the Law Society's criticism and highlighted that victims may not represent themselves properly in the small claims court without proper legal advice.

The high number of UK whiplash personal injuries receiving compensation had forced insurers to charge an extra £90 per motorist insurance premium in the United Kingdom. The industry estimates it loses £2billion from repaying fraudulent claims.

The Short-Sightedness of the UK Investigatory Powers Bill

It's not so surprising that the United Kingdom would say their Investigatory Powers Bill is timely enough for the situation. After extremists attacked Paris and several other heavily-populated cities in other countries, UK tories would say "we told you so" and would push through with their plans to snoop inside the conversations of millions of Britons nationwide.

This is all in an attempt to thwart terrorist communications, which make use of similar networks such as the Internet.

But Internet and tech companies such as Microsoft, Apple, Google, Facebook and others, said the plan would be a big failure because the technology itself locks out the developers from accessing sensitive information stored in their systems.

A Single Backdoor is a Backdoor For Anyone

According to Apple CEO Tim Cook, a single backdoor they create in their Message App and it would be anyone's backdoor to access another person's private files. The Message App currently has no backdoor and relies on end-to-end encryption wherein the receiver of the message is the only one to read the message. Not even their servers can translate the data.

The bad news is that if Internet and tech companies feel the pressure to create these new technologies, they may end up competing in security against government-sanctioned hackers employed in the ranks to enforce the law in full, if necessary.