Extradition to Equatorial Guinea

[Nomad]

Im familiar with this group. I agree with Jester. Thats the life theyve chosen and if they get caught why would anyone fight for them ?

[K.Snyder]

I have a huge problem with peoples all fighting for the same cause yet only a handful of the incompetents get "...their hides nailed to the wall". There's something strenuously wrong with such an ideology otherwise the system "you've" set up is grounds for incompetence.

Where is the line drawn from human instinct and rightful crime prevention and retribution? That is the question.

[spot]

Originally Posted by K.Snyder

I have a huge problem with peoples all fighting for the same cause yet only a handful of the incompetents get "...their hides nailed to the wall". There's something strenuously wrong with such an ideology otherwise the system "you've" set up is grounds for incompetence.

Where is the line drawn from human instinct and rightful crime prevention and retribution? That is the question.

And what is the judicial system of Equatorial Guinea to do in order to right this? They have the officer on the ground in jail. They can't prosecute the financiers because the financiers aren't yet in their jurisdiction. The same goes for the investors in the scheme and the managers who brought all of the resources together. This isn't a question of ideology, it's a question of power. Nobody is being incompetent, some people are protected by their nationalities and their own governments.

At least justice is being discussed and the criminals are being held up to the scrutiny of the general public.

[K.Snyder]

Originally Posted by spot

And what is the judicial system of Equatorial Guinea to do in order to right this? They have the officer on the ground in jail. They can't prosecute the financiers because the financiers aren't yet in their jurisdiction. The same goes for the investors in the scheme and the managers who brought all of the resources together. This isn't a question of ideology, it's a question of power. Nobody is being incompetent, some people are protected by their nationalities and their own governments.

At least justice is being discussed and the criminals are being held up to the scrutiny of the general public.

I was speaking more so in regards to statement.

What's to keep the leader of the outfit from appearing as a grunt man only to be released a year later to do it again?...

No wonder Osama Bin Laden hasn't been caught yet. He looks like a grunt.

[spot]

Originally Posted by K.Snyder

What's to keep the leader of the outfit from appearing as a grunt man only to be released a year later to do it again?...

Because he's well known for previous acts in the same line and his photo's easily downloaded and there had been more newspaper articles about him and his associates than there were about Churchill. They scarcely operated in the shadows, these people. They just lie a lot.

[K.Snyder]

Originally Posted by spot

Because he's well known for previous acts in the same line and his photo's easily downloaded and there had been more newspaper articles about him and his associates than there were about Churchill. They scarcely operated in the shadows, these people. They just lie a lot.

That's very well with this specific instance but it just seems to me that the statement being made, philosophically speaking, in a doctrine making allowances for so called "evilness" doesn't serve even the simplest of logic justice.

I either give too much credit to people and their intelligence or not enough.

How anyone can take up arms without knowing what it is they're fighting for(Please lets not turn this discussion into anything other than what it is -- For the sake of random implication) is not only beyond my fortuitous notions but is divinely immoral.

I don't know why there would be acceptances given such a creed. I cannot understand it, and I'm not sorry for it.

What's left is the ignorant being made as sacrifice. I take nothing back for having said that.

[spot]

The financiers are doing it for a high return on a risky investment, the managers are doing it to steal oilfields and make a huge profit, the mercenaries are doing it for pay. There's a common thread to those motives.

[K.Snyder]

Originally Posted by spot

The financiers are doing it for a high return on a risky investment, the managers are doing it to steal oilfields and make a huge profit, the mercenaries are doing it for pay. There's a common thread to those motives.

Predestined judgments within any judicial system, and their primary virtue being conservativeness to romanticize alternative punishment, not only is grounds for incompetence but is morally wrong as far as I'm concerned.

Why all sentences are discussed before a trial ever commences is beyond me. People are too afraid to suggest leniency yet too afraid to incur irrevocable punishments.

People are either meeting a quota by virtue of leniency or by virtue of unrighteous law.

Ah yes, money.

Money all intertwined into law in the same way it influences those who break it. The common ground being moral justification and those that have the power to either preclude it or abolish it.

I don't know anyone that would suggest money is due justification to murder so I couldn't for the life of me figure out why there are separate punishments within a crime harbored by all those convicted. It goes against my moral logic.

[spot]

I'm not a judicial system but even so, what have I said that suggests I'm pre-judging any trial that might occur or that the courts of Equatorial Guinea have prejudged any case? I want these people tried on the evidence available. There's more than enough available evidence to warrant a trial.

Different jurisdictions have different legal codes, I don't know that of Equatorial Guinea. In Britain, along with lesser charges, they'd all be up on a charge of conspiracy to murder. Obviously there are different sentences for the same crime, there are different degrees of culpability. In England, if found guilty, they'd all be sentenced to life imprisonment with a minimum recommended term before any parole hearing could sit. The minimum recommended terms would vary depending on the judge's view of their actions.

[K.Snyder]

Originally Posted by spot

I'm not a judicial system but even so, what have I said that suggests I'm pre-judging any trial that might occur or that the courts of Equatorial Guinea have prejudged any case? I want these people tried on the evidence available. There's more than enough available evidence to warrant a trial.

I don't believe you have...I was more so speaking about those who do...I was hinting at my disgust of things such as "plea bargaining" etc... etc... from which is enough to make me want to puke! "You're" either guilty of a crime or you're not!...That's the way I see it...The crime should never wholeheartedly dictate the sentences that are suggested before the trial commences. Never!...It's grounds for incompetence and not only is it unpredictable the outcome but it does nothing in the eyes of crime prevention the way I see it.

Originally Posted by spot

Different jurisdictions have different legal codes, I don't know that of Equatorial Guinea. In Britain, along with lesser charges, they'd all be up on a charge of conspiracy to murder. Obviously there are different sentences for the same crime, there are different degrees of culpability. In England, if found guilty, they'd all be sentenced to life imprisonment with a minimum recommended term before any parole hearing could sit. The minimum recommended terms would vary depending on the judge's view of their actions.

Well if everyone did the same the world would be a much better place.........

The "different degrees" would ultimately have to act as a deterrent for me to think that lesser punishments to criminals involved in the same crime would be prudent. This case specifically I'd have to know about every last detail involving the case before I were to give what I personally feel is a rightful judgment...

I do know one thing's for sure, an that's "They should have their hides nailed to the wall" compared to "...released in 2005 after serving a year's sentence in Zimbabwe." is far to great of a gradient as far as I'm concerned.

People not knowing how they're involved in crimes is a completely different story.

It's like someone driving another to a bank so that they can rob it only the robber gets a more lenient sentence because the driver provided the other robber with funding to make it happen.