comment by Thorgen Kloppinson - "When the facts are ... (U1282)
posted 17 minutes ago
Having started his sentence at HMP Dumfries, he was later sent to the State Hospital at Carstairs, Lanarkshire, after he was diagnosed with schizophrenia.
He was returned to the prison when doctors found his condition could be controlled with medication.
In January 2019, Cardos was served with a deportation order – but immediately launched a challenge with the Asylum and Immigration Tribunal.
He argued that the medicines he was receiving to treat his mental health would not be available in Gambia.
======
What's the problem then? The system is working as it should, no?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You conveniently omitted the part where the UK promised to both supply and pay for his medication
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 29 minutes ago
Only 1% of voters think that the Rwanda bill will help stop the boats.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2023/12/12/one-percent-of-voters-believe-rwanda-bill-will-stop-boats/
Tories will still claim they are doing what the public want though.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What makes it worse is I only realised this week we agreed to pay for their accommodation costs and living expenses for the up to 5 years they're in Rwanda.
So we're paying £300m plus expenses for 5 years to deport at best a couple of hundred people a year.
Of all the policies to hitch your government to, this is quite possibly the dumbest and most desperate.
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 22 minutes ago
comment by Thorgen Kloppinson - "When the facts are ... (U1282)
posted 17 minutes ago
Having started his sentence at HMP Dumfries, he was later sent to the State Hospital at Carstairs, Lanarkshire, after he was diagnosed with schizophrenia.
He was returned to the prison when doctors found his condition could be controlled with medication.
In January 2019, Cardos was served with a deportation order – but immediately launched a challenge with the Asylum and Immigration Tribunal.
He argued that the medicines he was receiving to treat his mental health would not be available in Gambia.
======
What's the problem then? The system is working as it should, no?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You conveniently omitted the part where the UK promised to both supply and pay for his medication
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That's still the law and system working well. That's how it works. He's in jail. Who do you expect to pay for his medication? Or should we let him back to Gambia where he probably dies?
Can you explain what the issue is please?
comment by What would Stuart Pearce do? Active Measures. (U3126)
posted 29 minutes ago
comment by Thorgen Kloppinson - "When the facts are in your favour, you argue the facts. When facts are not in your favour you argue the process." (U1282)
posted 8 minutes ago
Having started his sentence at HMP Dumfries, he was later sent to the State Hospital at Carstairs, Lanarkshire, after he was diagnosed with schizophrenia.
He was returned to the prison when doctors found his condition could be controlled with medication.
In January 2019, Cardos was served with a deportation order – but immediately launched a challenge with the Asylum and Immigration Tribunal.
He argued that the medicines he was receiving to treat his mental health would not be available in Gambia.
======
What's the problem then? The system is working as it should, no?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Did a bit of digging and found the judgement.
"The central issues on the appeal related to the treatment the Appellant would receive for his mental health in the Gambia. He has been prescribed a monthly depot injection of paliperidone to treat his paranoid schizophrenia since 2012/2013, such that his mental condition has been stable. The SSHD accepted in the appeal that depot injections of paliperidone, or risperidone, would not be available to the Appellant in the Gambia."
See also [12, 13, 14] in regard to the panel's findings in regard to the risks of deportation.
https://tribunalsdecisions.service.gov.uk/utiac/ui-2022-004930
The fundamental point of human rights in a civilised society is that they apply to all. Even those who have committed heinous acts.
https://www.un.org/en/global-issues/human-rights#:~:text=Human%20rights%20are%20rights%20inherent,and%20education%2C%20and%20many%20more.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
comment by The Welsh Xavi (U15412)
posted 8 minutes ago
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 29 minutes ago
Only 1% of voters think that the Rwanda bill will help stop the boats.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2023/12/12/one-percent-of-voters-believe-rwanda-bill-will-stop-boats/
Tories will still claim they are doing what the public want though.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What makes it worse is I only realised this week we agreed to pay for their accommodation costs and living expenses for the up to 5 years they're in Rwanda.
So we're paying £300m plus expenses for 5 years to deport at best a couple of hundred people a year.
Of all the policies to hitch your government to, this is quite possibly the dumbest and most desperate.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Imagine travelling thousands of miles from the likes of Afghanistan, across Europe, eventually arriving in France. And discovering the only way to get to the UK, was a further 27 miles via sea.
With a miniscule chance you may end up in Rwanda. What would you do...
Even if the bill gets through parliament, its likely the Supreme Court would again rule it unlawful. Just because parliament has now deemed Rwanda to be a safe country does not make it so. As one legal commentator highlighted, you cannot legislate a dog to be a cat.
I assume you’re wumming now.
Why would he ‘die’ if he’s returned to his country of birth? His medical issues aren’t life threatening
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 5 minutes ago
I assume you’re wumming now.
Why would he ‘die’ if he’s returned to his country of birth? His medical issues aren’t life threatening
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Is that all you would like to respond to? Says a lot.
I said he could die. And death isn't the only problem he could face anyway. It's because his schizophrenia would go out of control and who knows what that would lead to.
International and national law is being complied with here. What exactly is the issue then?
The rationale for the decision was set out in the judgement.
39. The panel had found, based on the Appellant’s previous experiences of deterioration, that in the Gambia symptoms of relapse would be apparent to third parties before the Appellant, and that the external expressions of his illness on relapse would include “violence, aggression, distress and hallucinations”: [77] and [78] of the decision. These were entirely justified findings in light of the expert evidence and the Rule 35 report, which had referred to the risk of “aggression, violence and further offending behaviours” by the Appellant that would be detrimental to the “safety of others”.
But noticeable in the conclusions: [66]
"The Appellant will only be given a short period of Restricted Leave as a result of our decision. That is likely, in our experience, to be no more than six months. As the FtT noted in its concluding remarks, it is open to the SSDS during that time to address the basis upon which the appeal was allowed, whether by obtaining specific assurances from the Gambian authorities or otherwise. The SSHD is not obliged to permit the Appellant to remain indefinitely in the United Kingdom; she must only do so whilst it is clear, as it was to the FtT, that the measures she intended to put in place were insufficient to prevent a likely breach of Article 3."
I feel like the original question "can anyone tell me a reason he wasn't deported" was a WUM on itself
The courts decision was the reason
Anyone that wants an immigrant deported, and the UK and the parts of the West that's so concerned about immigration, should firstly lead by example by demanding the immediate return and deportation of all their own criminals doing their crime in foreign countries.
You can't just demand deportation of criminals from this country without demanding other countries do the same and return our criminals to us. Let's have an international frenzy of criminal deportations.
Secondly, elect leaders that will actually solve internationally problems instead of aggravating them. Perhaps more people will then choose to stay in their own country.
comment by Thorgen Kloppinson - "When the facts are in your favour, you argue the facts. When facts are not in your favour you argue the process." (U1282)
posted 5 hours, 23 minutes ago
comment by clapfreesince2003 (U22207)
posted 5 hours, 38 minutes ago
comment by bmcl1987 - the M stands for meltdown 🤓 (U14177)
posted 1 hour, 22 minutes ago
Let’s break this down step by step;
1) Is the Gambian born convicted rapist in prison?
Two options, yes or no.
If yes, then they’re not out in society. So what is the issue?
If no, we move on to the next step.
2) Did this person go through onerous release assessment?
If yes, then we move to 3a.
If no, then move to 3b.
3a) with the person released having had an onerous assessment, then why are you grumbling as they’ll have been deemed suitable to be a productive member of society?
3b) they’ve been released but the release assessment wasn’t onerous (perhaps as thought was to be shipped overseas) then re arrest and carry out assessment -> back to Q2.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Did you read the article ? The judge deemed him a danger to women.
I’d love to know what crime someone has to commit for you to be deemed suitable for deportation, because the only thing this piece of filth could have done to top his crimes would to be to murder his victim.
Just because he was realised doesn’t mean he’s going to be a productive member of society. Would you employ a man who held a knife to his victims throat whilst he raped her? The piece of 💩 will leech of this country until he snuffs it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah, like all the other rapists. Ate you saying he should be treated differently from other rapists because he is no white? Or because he is an immigrant.
If it's the former then that makes you a racist. If the latter then that makes you xenophobic.
Which one are you?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear Lord I've already said I don't care what colour he is.
He was here illegally, he raped someone, he should be deported. If he had been white, and he raped someone I'd want him deported.
If there was an island where we could send British rapists to I'd send them there, but there isn't, so sadly we have to put up with them.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/feb/13/british-rapist-deported-from-australia
This cheesed me off because this piece of crap had spent most of his life in Australia, but I fully understand why the Aussie did it.
White asylum seekers cannot be that common.
comment by Thorgen Kloppinson - "When the facts are in your favour, you argue the facts. When facts are not in your favour you argue the process." (U1282)
posted 20 minutes ago
Anyone that wants an immigrant deported, and the UK and the parts of the West that's so concerned about immigration, should firstly lead by example by demanding the immediate return and deportation of all their own criminals doing their crime in foreign countries.
You can't just demand deportation of criminals from this country without demanding other countries do the same and return our criminals to us. Let's have an international frenzy of criminal deportations.
Secondly, elect leaders that will actually solve internationally problems instead of aggravating them. Perhaps more people will then choose to stay in their own country.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I hear Clap wants Shamina Begum returned.
comment by Hector (U3606)
posted 6 minutes ago
White asylum seekers cannot be that common.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He wasn't an asylum seeker, please keep up.
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Thorgen Kloppinson - "When the facts are in your favour, you argue the facts. When facts are not in your favour you argue the process." (U1282)
posted 20 minutes ago
Anyone that wants an immigrant deported, and the UK and the parts of the West that's so concerned about immigration, should firstly lead by example by demanding the immediate return and deportation of all their own criminals doing their crime in foreign countries.
You can't just demand deportation of criminals from this country without demanding other countries do the same and return our criminals to us. Let's have an international frenzy of criminal deportations.
Secondly, elect leaders that will actually solve internationally problems instead of aggravating them. Perhaps more people will then choose to stay in their own country.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I hear Clap wants Shamina Begum returned.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I don't want her returned, but I can understand the argument why she should be allowed back.
comment by clapfreesince2003 (U22207)
posted less than a minute ago
comment by Hector (U3606)
posted 6 minutes ago
White asylum seekers cannot be that common.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He wasn't an asylum seeker, please keep up.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's called conversation dummy.
comment by clapfreesince2003 (U22207)
posted 7 minutes ago
comment by Thorgen Kloppinson - "When the facts are in your favour, you argue the facts. When facts are not in your favour you argue the process." (U1282)
posted 5 hours, 23 minutes ago
comment by clapfreesince2003 (U22207)
posted 5 hours, 38 minutes ago
comment by bmcl1987 - the M stands for meltdown 🤓 (U14177)
posted 1 hour, 22 minutes ago
Let’s break this down step by step;
1) Is the Gambian born convicted rapist in prison?
Two options, yes or no.
If yes, then they’re not out in society. So what is the issue?
If no, we move on to the next step.
2) Did this person go through onerous release assessment?
If yes, then we move to 3a.
If no, then move to 3b.
3a) with the person released having had an onerous assessment, then why are you grumbling as they’ll have been deemed suitable to be a productive member of society?
3b) they’ve been released but the release assessment wasn’t onerous (perhaps as thought was to be shipped overseas) then re arrest and carry out assessment -> back to Q2.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Did you read the article ? The judge deemed him a danger to women.
I’d love to know what crime someone has to commit for you to be deemed suitable for deportation, because the only thing this piece of filth could have done to top his crimes would to be to murder his victim.
Just because he was realised doesn’t mean he’s going to be a productive member of society. Would you employ a man who held a knife to his victims throat whilst he raped her? The piece of 💩 will leech of this country until he snuffs it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah, like all the other rapists. Ate you saying he should be treated differently from other rapists because he is no white? Or because he is an immigrant.
If it's the former then that makes you a racist. If the latter then that makes you xenophobic.
Which one are you?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear Lord I've already said I don't care what colour he is.
He was here illegally, he raped someone, he should be deported. If he had been white, and he raped someone I'd want him deported.
If there was an island where we could send British rapists to I'd send them there, but there isn't, so sadly we have to put up with them.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/feb/13/british-rapist-deported-from-australia
This cheesed me off because this piece of crap had spent most of his life in Australia, but I fully understand why the Aussie did it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He's being deported after serving 12 years, yet you want this guy deported immediately, why? You don't even question whether he will serve his sentence once deported. You don't care if he goes free so long as he is out the country.
If you were genuine you'd want him deported after paying for his crime. Don't you think his victim deserves that? That he pay for his crime? Or you don't care about the victim and only want this immigrant out?
The guy deported from Australia didn't have any valid reason not to be deported. This Gambian dude has a good reason that fits the description allowed in international and national law.
comment by Hector (U3606)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by clapfreesince2003 (U22207)
posted less than a minute ago
comment by Hector (U3606)
posted 6 minutes ago
White asylum seekers cannot be that common.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He wasn't an asylum seeker, please keep up.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's called conversation dummy.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's called jumping to conclusions, you fecking dunce.
comment by Thorgen Kloppinson - "When the facts are in your favour, you argue the facts. When facts are not in your favour you argue the process." (U1282)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by clapfreesince2003 (U22207)
posted 7 minutes ago
comment by Thorgen Kloppinson - "When the facts are in your favour, you argue the facts. When facts are not in your favour you argue the process." (U1282)
posted 5 hours, 23 minutes ago
comment by clapfreesince2003 (U22207)
posted 5 hours, 38 minutes ago
comment by bmcl1987 - the M stands for meltdown 🤓 (U14177)
posted 1 hour, 22 minutes ago
Let’s break this down step by step;
1) Is the Gambian born convicted rapist in prison?
Two options, yes or no.
If yes, then they’re not out in society. So what is the issue?
If no, we move on to the next step.
2) Did this person go through onerous release assessment?
If yes, then we move to 3a.
If no, then move to 3b.
3a) with the person released having had an onerous assessment, then why are you grumbling as they’ll have been deemed suitable to be a productive member of society?
3b) they’ve been released but the release assessment wasn’t onerous (perhaps as thought was to be shipped overseas) then re arrest and carry out assessment -> back to Q2.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Did you read the article ? The judge deemed him a danger to women.
I’d love to know what crime someone has to commit for you to be deemed suitable for deportation, because the only thing this piece of filth could have done to top his crimes would to be to murder his victim.
Just because he was realised doesn’t mean he’s going to be a productive member of society. Would you employ a man who held a knife to his victims throat whilst he raped her? The piece of 💩 will leech of this country until he snuffs it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah, like all the other rapists. Ate you saying he should be treated differently from other rapists because he is no white? Or because he is an immigrant.
If it's the former then that makes you a racist. If the latter then that makes you xenophobic.
Which one are you?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear Lord I've already said I don't care what colour he is.
He was here illegally, he raped someone, he should be deported. If he had been white, and he raped someone I'd want him deported.
If there was an island where we could send British rapists to I'd send them there, but there isn't, so sadly we have to put up with them.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/feb/13/british-rapist-deported-from-australia
This cheesed me off because this piece of crap had spent most of his life in Australia, but I fully understand why the Aussie did it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He's being deported after serving 12 years, yet you want this guy deported immediately, why? You don't even question whether he will serve his sentence once deported. You don't care if he goes free so long as he is out the country.
If you were genuine you'd want him deported after paying for his crime. Don't you think his victim deserves that? That he pay for his crime? Or you don't care about the victim and only want this immigrant out?
The guy deported from Australia didn't have any valid reason not to be deported. This Gambian dude has a good reason that fits the description allowed in international and national law.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Did you actually read this article properly. I think you should before commenting.
comment by clapfreesince2003 (U22207)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Thorgen Kloppinson - "When the facts are in your favour, you argue the facts. When facts are not in your favour you argue the process." (U1282)
posted 20 minutes ago
Anyone that wants an immigrant deported, and the UK and the parts of the West that's so concerned about immigration, should firstly lead by example by demanding the immediate return and deportation of all their own criminals doing their crime in foreign countries.
You can't just demand deportation of criminals from this country without demanding other countries do the same and return our criminals to us. Let's have an international frenzy of criminal deportations.
Secondly, elect leaders that will actually solve internationally problems instead of aggravating them. Perhaps more people will then choose to stay in their own country.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I hear Clap wants Shamina Begum returned.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I don't want her returned, but I can understand the argument why she should be allowed back.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Do you not think it is hypocritical to want to return foreign criminals to their original countries, but not want to see British criminals returned to the UK?
comment by clapfreesince2003 (U22207)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Thorgen Kloppinson - "When the facts are in your favour, you argue the facts. When facts are not in your favour you argue the process." (U1282)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by clapfreesince2003 (U22207)
posted 7 minutes ago
comment by Thorgen Kloppinson - "When the facts are in your favour, you argue the facts. When facts are not in your favour you argue the process." (U1282)
posted 5 hours, 23 minutes ago
comment by clapfreesince2003 (U22207)
posted 5 hours, 38 minutes ago
comment by bmcl1987 - the M stands for meltdown 🤓 (U14177)
posted 1 hour, 22 minutes ago
Let’s break this down step by step;
1) Is the Gambian born convicted rapist in prison?
Two options, yes or no.
If yes, then they’re not out in society. So what is the issue?
If no, we move on to the next step.
2) Did this person go through onerous release assessment?
If yes, then we move to 3a.
If no, then move to 3b.
3a) with the person released having had an onerous assessment, then why are you grumbling as they’ll have been deemed suitable to be a productive member of society?
3b) they’ve been released but the release assessment wasn’t onerous (perhaps as thought was to be shipped overseas) then re arrest and carry out assessment -> back to Q2.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Did you read the article ? The judge deemed him a danger to women.
I’d love to know what crime someone has to commit for you to be deemed suitable for deportation, because the only thing this piece of filth could have done to top his crimes would to be to murder his victim.
Just because he was realised doesn’t mean he’s going to be a productive member of society. Would you employ a man who held a knife to his victims throat whilst he raped her? The piece of 💩 will leech of this country until he snuffs it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah, like all the other rapists. Ate you saying he should be treated differently from other rapists because he is no white? Or because he is an immigrant.
If it's the former then that makes you a racist. If the latter then that makes you xenophobic.
Which one are you?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear Lord I've already said I don't care what colour he is.
He was here illegally, he raped someone, he should be deported. If he had been white, and he raped someone I'd want him deported.
If there was an island where we could send British rapists to I'd send them there, but there isn't, so sadly we have to put up with them.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/feb/13/british-rapist-deported-from-australia
This cheesed me off because this piece of crap had spent most of his life in Australia, but I fully understand why the Aussie did it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He's being deported after serving 12 years, yet you want this guy deported immediately, why? You don't even question whether he will serve his sentence once deported. You don't care if he goes free so long as he is out the country.
If you were genuine you'd want him deported after paying for his crime. Don't you think his victim deserves that? That he pay for his crime? Or you don't care about the victim and only want this immigrant out?
The guy deported from Australia didn't have any valid reason not to be deported. This Gambian dude has a good reason that fits the description allowed in international and national law.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Did you actually read this article properly. I think you should before commenting.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Of course I did.
"Cunliffe, who reportedly emigrated from Britain in 1967 and is now in his 60s, has lost an appeal against the Australian department of immigration's decision that he should be deported to the UK.
A department spokeswoman said: "The federal court dismissed Mr Cunliffe's appeal against the ministry's decision to cancel his visa so now he continues to be an unlawful non-citizen. He remains in immigration detention until arrangements can be made for his deportation."
So yeah, he didn't have any valid reasons to oppose deportation as his appeal was dismissed. The Gambian guys appeal was allowed as he had valid grounds. There's a difference.
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 52 seconds ago
comment by clapfreesince2003 (U22207)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Thorgen Kloppinson - "When the facts are in your favour, you argue the facts. When facts are not in your favour you argue the process." (U1282)
posted 20 minutes ago
Anyone that wants an immigrant deported, and the UK and the parts of the West that's so concerned about immigration, should firstly lead by example by demanding the immediate return and deportation of all their own criminals doing their crime in foreign countries.
You can't just demand deportation of criminals from this country without demanding other countries do the same and return our criminals to us. Let's have an international frenzy of criminal deportations.
Secondly, elect leaders that will actually solve internationally problems instead of aggravating them. Perhaps more people will then choose to stay in their own country.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I hear Clap wants Shamina Begum returned.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I don't want her returned, but I can understand the argument why she should be allowed back.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Do you not think it is hypocritical to want to return foreign criminals to their original countries, but not want to see British criminals returned to the UK?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No, why would I want a terrorist in our country? Just because I don't want her here doesn't mean I think the Kurdish should be lumbered with her. She was born here, and as much as I dislike her, I think it's out duty to take her back.
Sign in if you want to comment
Arguing w/strangers cause I'm lonely thread
Page 3879 of 4863
3880 | 3881 | 3882 | 3883 | 3884
posted on 13/12/23
comment by Thorgen Kloppinson - "When the facts are ... (U1282)
posted 17 minutes ago
Having started his sentence at HMP Dumfries, he was later sent to the State Hospital at Carstairs, Lanarkshire, after he was diagnosed with schizophrenia.
He was returned to the prison when doctors found his condition could be controlled with medication.
In January 2019, Cardos was served with a deportation order – but immediately launched a challenge with the Asylum and Immigration Tribunal.
He argued that the medicines he was receiving to treat his mental health would not be available in Gambia.
======
What's the problem then? The system is working as it should, no?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You conveniently omitted the part where the UK promised to both supply and pay for his medication
posted on 13/12/23
For 2 months.
posted on 13/12/23
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 29 minutes ago
Only 1% of voters think that the Rwanda bill will help stop the boats.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2023/12/12/one-percent-of-voters-believe-rwanda-bill-will-stop-boats/
Tories will still claim they are doing what the public want though.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What makes it worse is I only realised this week we agreed to pay for their accommodation costs and living expenses for the up to 5 years they're in Rwanda.
So we're paying £300m plus expenses for 5 years to deport at best a couple of hundred people a year.
Of all the policies to hitch your government to, this is quite possibly the dumbest and most desperate.
posted on 13/12/23
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 22 minutes ago
comment by Thorgen Kloppinson - "When the facts are ... (U1282)
posted 17 minutes ago
Having started his sentence at HMP Dumfries, he was later sent to the State Hospital at Carstairs, Lanarkshire, after he was diagnosed with schizophrenia.
He was returned to the prison when doctors found his condition could be controlled with medication.
In January 2019, Cardos was served with a deportation order – but immediately launched a challenge with the Asylum and Immigration Tribunal.
He argued that the medicines he was receiving to treat his mental health would not be available in Gambia.
======
What's the problem then? The system is working as it should, no?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You conveniently omitted the part where the UK promised to both supply and pay for his medication
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That's still the law and system working well. That's how it works. He's in jail. Who do you expect to pay for his medication? Or should we let him back to Gambia where he probably dies?
Can you explain what the issue is please?
posted on 13/12/23
comment by What would Stuart Pearce do? Active Measures. (U3126)
posted 29 minutes ago
comment by Thorgen Kloppinson - "When the facts are in your favour, you argue the facts. When facts are not in your favour you argue the process." (U1282)
posted 8 minutes ago
Having started his sentence at HMP Dumfries, he was later sent to the State Hospital at Carstairs, Lanarkshire, after he was diagnosed with schizophrenia.
He was returned to the prison when doctors found his condition could be controlled with medication.
In January 2019, Cardos was served with a deportation order – but immediately launched a challenge with the Asylum and Immigration Tribunal.
He argued that the medicines he was receiving to treat his mental health would not be available in Gambia.
======
What's the problem then? The system is working as it should, no?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Did a bit of digging and found the judgement.
"The central issues on the appeal related to the treatment the Appellant would receive for his mental health in the Gambia. He has been prescribed a monthly depot injection of paliperidone to treat his paranoid schizophrenia since 2012/2013, such that his mental condition has been stable. The SSHD accepted in the appeal that depot injections of paliperidone, or risperidone, would not be available to the Appellant in the Gambia."
See also [12, 13, 14] in regard to the panel's findings in regard to the risks of deportation.
https://tribunalsdecisions.service.gov.uk/utiac/ui-2022-004930
The fundamental point of human rights in a civilised society is that they apply to all. Even those who have committed heinous acts.
https://www.un.org/en/global-issues/human-rights#:~:text=Human%20rights%20are%20rights%20inherent,and%20education%2C%20and%20many%20more.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
posted on 13/12/23
comment by The Welsh Xavi (U15412)
posted 8 minutes ago
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 29 minutes ago
Only 1% of voters think that the Rwanda bill will help stop the boats.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2023/12/12/one-percent-of-voters-believe-rwanda-bill-will-stop-boats/
Tories will still claim they are doing what the public want though.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What makes it worse is I only realised this week we agreed to pay for their accommodation costs and living expenses for the up to 5 years they're in Rwanda.
So we're paying £300m plus expenses for 5 years to deport at best a couple of hundred people a year.
Of all the policies to hitch your government to, this is quite possibly the dumbest and most desperate.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Imagine travelling thousands of miles from the likes of Afghanistan, across Europe, eventually arriving in France. And discovering the only way to get to the UK, was a further 27 miles via sea.
With a miniscule chance you may end up in Rwanda. What would you do...
Even if the bill gets through parliament, its likely the Supreme Court would again rule it unlawful. Just because parliament has now deemed Rwanda to be a safe country does not make it so. As one legal commentator highlighted, you cannot legislate a dog to be a cat.
posted on 13/12/23
I assume you’re wumming now.
Why would he ‘die’ if he’s returned to his country of birth? His medical issues aren’t life threatening
posted on 13/12/23
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 5 minutes ago
I assume you’re wumming now.
Why would he ‘die’ if he’s returned to his country of birth? His medical issues aren’t life threatening
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Is that all you would like to respond to? Says a lot.
I said he could die. And death isn't the only problem he could face anyway. It's because his schizophrenia would go out of control and who knows what that would lead to.
posted on 13/12/23
International and national law is being complied with here. What exactly is the issue then?
posted on 13/12/23
The rationale for the decision was set out in the judgement.
39. The panel had found, based on the Appellant’s previous experiences of deterioration, that in the Gambia symptoms of relapse would be apparent to third parties before the Appellant, and that the external expressions of his illness on relapse would include “violence, aggression, distress and hallucinations”: [77] and [78] of the decision. These were entirely justified findings in light of the expert evidence and the Rule 35 report, which had referred to the risk of “aggression, violence and further offending behaviours” by the Appellant that would be detrimental to the “safety of others”.
But noticeable in the conclusions: [66]
"The Appellant will only be given a short period of Restricted Leave as a result of our decision. That is likely, in our experience, to be no more than six months. As the FtT noted in its concluding remarks, it is open to the SSDS during that time to address the basis upon which the appeal was allowed, whether by obtaining specific assurances from the Gambian authorities or otherwise. The SSHD is not obliged to permit the Appellant to remain indefinitely in the United Kingdom; she must only do so whilst it is clear, as it was to the FtT, that the measures she intended to put in place were insufficient to prevent a likely breach of Article 3."
posted on 13/12/23
I feel like the original question "can anyone tell me a reason he wasn't deported" was a WUM on itself
The courts decision was the reason
posted on 13/12/23
Anyone that wants an immigrant deported, and the UK and the parts of the West that's so concerned about immigration, should firstly lead by example by demanding the immediate return and deportation of all their own criminals doing their crime in foreign countries.
You can't just demand deportation of criminals from this country without demanding other countries do the same and return our criminals to us. Let's have an international frenzy of criminal deportations.
Secondly, elect leaders that will actually solve internationally problems instead of aggravating them. Perhaps more people will then choose to stay in their own country.
posted on 13/12/23
comment by Thorgen Kloppinson - "When the facts are in your favour, you argue the facts. When facts are not in your favour you argue the process." (U1282)
posted 5 hours, 23 minutes ago
comment by clapfreesince2003 (U22207)
posted 5 hours, 38 minutes ago
comment by bmcl1987 - the M stands for meltdown 🤓 (U14177)
posted 1 hour, 22 minutes ago
Let’s break this down step by step;
1) Is the Gambian born convicted rapist in prison?
Two options, yes or no.
If yes, then they’re not out in society. So what is the issue?
If no, we move on to the next step.
2) Did this person go through onerous release assessment?
If yes, then we move to 3a.
If no, then move to 3b.
3a) with the person released having had an onerous assessment, then why are you grumbling as they’ll have been deemed suitable to be a productive member of society?
3b) they’ve been released but the release assessment wasn’t onerous (perhaps as thought was to be shipped overseas) then re arrest and carry out assessment -> back to Q2.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Did you read the article ? The judge deemed him a danger to women.
I’d love to know what crime someone has to commit for you to be deemed suitable for deportation, because the only thing this piece of filth could have done to top his crimes would to be to murder his victim.
Just because he was realised doesn’t mean he’s going to be a productive member of society. Would you employ a man who held a knife to his victims throat whilst he raped her? The piece of 💩 will leech of this country until he snuffs it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah, like all the other rapists. Ate you saying he should be treated differently from other rapists because he is no white? Or because he is an immigrant.
If it's the former then that makes you a racist. If the latter then that makes you xenophobic.
Which one are you?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear Lord I've already said I don't care what colour he is.
He was here illegally, he raped someone, he should be deported. If he had been white, and he raped someone I'd want him deported.
If there was an island where we could send British rapists to I'd send them there, but there isn't, so sadly we have to put up with them.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/feb/13/british-rapist-deported-from-australia
This cheesed me off because this piece of crap had spent most of his life in Australia, but I fully understand why the Aussie did it.
posted on 13/12/23
White asylum seekers cannot be that common.
posted on 13/12/23
comment by Thorgen Kloppinson - "When the facts are in your favour, you argue the facts. When facts are not in your favour you argue the process." (U1282)
posted 20 minutes ago
Anyone that wants an immigrant deported, and the UK and the parts of the West that's so concerned about immigration, should firstly lead by example by demanding the immediate return and deportation of all their own criminals doing their crime in foreign countries.
You can't just demand deportation of criminals from this country without demanding other countries do the same and return our criminals to us. Let's have an international frenzy of criminal deportations.
Secondly, elect leaders that will actually solve internationally problems instead of aggravating them. Perhaps more people will then choose to stay in their own country.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I hear Clap wants Shamina Begum returned.
posted on 13/12/23
Hot Girl Begun 🙌
posted on 13/12/23
comment by Hector (U3606)
posted 6 minutes ago
White asylum seekers cannot be that common.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He wasn't an asylum seeker, please keep up.
posted on 13/12/23
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Thorgen Kloppinson - "When the facts are in your favour, you argue the facts. When facts are not in your favour you argue the process." (U1282)
posted 20 minutes ago
Anyone that wants an immigrant deported, and the UK and the parts of the West that's so concerned about immigration, should firstly lead by example by demanding the immediate return and deportation of all their own criminals doing their crime in foreign countries.
You can't just demand deportation of criminals from this country without demanding other countries do the same and return our criminals to us. Let's have an international frenzy of criminal deportations.
Secondly, elect leaders that will actually solve internationally problems instead of aggravating them. Perhaps more people will then choose to stay in their own country.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I hear Clap wants Shamina Begum returned.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I don't want her returned, but I can understand the argument why she should be allowed back.
posted on 13/12/23
comment by clapfreesince2003 (U22207)
posted less than a minute ago
comment by Hector (U3606)
posted 6 minutes ago
White asylum seekers cannot be that common.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He wasn't an asylum seeker, please keep up.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's called conversation dummy.
posted on 13/12/23
comment by clapfreesince2003 (U22207)
posted 7 minutes ago
comment by Thorgen Kloppinson - "When the facts are in your favour, you argue the facts. When facts are not in your favour you argue the process." (U1282)
posted 5 hours, 23 minutes ago
comment by clapfreesince2003 (U22207)
posted 5 hours, 38 minutes ago
comment by bmcl1987 - the M stands for meltdown 🤓 (U14177)
posted 1 hour, 22 minutes ago
Let’s break this down step by step;
1) Is the Gambian born convicted rapist in prison?
Two options, yes or no.
If yes, then they’re not out in society. So what is the issue?
If no, we move on to the next step.
2) Did this person go through onerous release assessment?
If yes, then we move to 3a.
If no, then move to 3b.
3a) with the person released having had an onerous assessment, then why are you grumbling as they’ll have been deemed suitable to be a productive member of society?
3b) they’ve been released but the release assessment wasn’t onerous (perhaps as thought was to be shipped overseas) then re arrest and carry out assessment -> back to Q2.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Did you read the article ? The judge deemed him a danger to women.
I’d love to know what crime someone has to commit for you to be deemed suitable for deportation, because the only thing this piece of filth could have done to top his crimes would to be to murder his victim.
Just because he was realised doesn’t mean he’s going to be a productive member of society. Would you employ a man who held a knife to his victims throat whilst he raped her? The piece of 💩 will leech of this country until he snuffs it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah, like all the other rapists. Ate you saying he should be treated differently from other rapists because he is no white? Or because he is an immigrant.
If it's the former then that makes you a racist. If the latter then that makes you xenophobic.
Which one are you?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear Lord I've already said I don't care what colour he is.
He was here illegally, he raped someone, he should be deported. If he had been white, and he raped someone I'd want him deported.
If there was an island where we could send British rapists to I'd send them there, but there isn't, so sadly we have to put up with them.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/feb/13/british-rapist-deported-from-australia
This cheesed me off because this piece of crap had spent most of his life in Australia, but I fully understand why the Aussie did it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He's being deported after serving 12 years, yet you want this guy deported immediately, why? You don't even question whether he will serve his sentence once deported. You don't care if he goes free so long as he is out the country.
If you were genuine you'd want him deported after paying for his crime. Don't you think his victim deserves that? That he pay for his crime? Or you don't care about the victim and only want this immigrant out?
The guy deported from Australia didn't have any valid reason not to be deported. This Gambian dude has a good reason that fits the description allowed in international and national law.
posted on 13/12/23
comment by Hector (U3606)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by clapfreesince2003 (U22207)
posted less than a minute ago
comment by Hector (U3606)
posted 6 minutes ago
White asylum seekers cannot be that common.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He wasn't an asylum seeker, please keep up.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's called conversation dummy.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's called jumping to conclusions, you fecking dunce.
posted on 13/12/23
comment by Thorgen Kloppinson - "When the facts are in your favour, you argue the facts. When facts are not in your favour you argue the process." (U1282)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by clapfreesince2003 (U22207)
posted 7 minutes ago
comment by Thorgen Kloppinson - "When the facts are in your favour, you argue the facts. When facts are not in your favour you argue the process." (U1282)
posted 5 hours, 23 minutes ago
comment by clapfreesince2003 (U22207)
posted 5 hours, 38 minutes ago
comment by bmcl1987 - the M stands for meltdown 🤓 (U14177)
posted 1 hour, 22 minutes ago
Let’s break this down step by step;
1) Is the Gambian born convicted rapist in prison?
Two options, yes or no.
If yes, then they’re not out in society. So what is the issue?
If no, we move on to the next step.
2) Did this person go through onerous release assessment?
If yes, then we move to 3a.
If no, then move to 3b.
3a) with the person released having had an onerous assessment, then why are you grumbling as they’ll have been deemed suitable to be a productive member of society?
3b) they’ve been released but the release assessment wasn’t onerous (perhaps as thought was to be shipped overseas) then re arrest and carry out assessment -> back to Q2.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Did you read the article ? The judge deemed him a danger to women.
I’d love to know what crime someone has to commit for you to be deemed suitable for deportation, because the only thing this piece of filth could have done to top his crimes would to be to murder his victim.
Just because he was realised doesn’t mean he’s going to be a productive member of society. Would you employ a man who held a knife to his victims throat whilst he raped her? The piece of 💩 will leech of this country until he snuffs it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah, like all the other rapists. Ate you saying he should be treated differently from other rapists because he is no white? Or because he is an immigrant.
If it's the former then that makes you a racist. If the latter then that makes you xenophobic.
Which one are you?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear Lord I've already said I don't care what colour he is.
He was here illegally, he raped someone, he should be deported. If he had been white, and he raped someone I'd want him deported.
If there was an island where we could send British rapists to I'd send them there, but there isn't, so sadly we have to put up with them.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/feb/13/british-rapist-deported-from-australia
This cheesed me off because this piece of crap had spent most of his life in Australia, but I fully understand why the Aussie did it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He's being deported after serving 12 years, yet you want this guy deported immediately, why? You don't even question whether he will serve his sentence once deported. You don't care if he goes free so long as he is out the country.
If you were genuine you'd want him deported after paying for his crime. Don't you think his victim deserves that? That he pay for his crime? Or you don't care about the victim and only want this immigrant out?
The guy deported from Australia didn't have any valid reason not to be deported. This Gambian dude has a good reason that fits the description allowed in international and national law.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Did you actually read this article properly. I think you should before commenting.
posted on 13/12/23
comment by clapfreesince2003 (U22207)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Thorgen Kloppinson - "When the facts are in your favour, you argue the facts. When facts are not in your favour you argue the process." (U1282)
posted 20 minutes ago
Anyone that wants an immigrant deported, and the UK and the parts of the West that's so concerned about immigration, should firstly lead by example by demanding the immediate return and deportation of all their own criminals doing their crime in foreign countries.
You can't just demand deportation of criminals from this country without demanding other countries do the same and return our criminals to us. Let's have an international frenzy of criminal deportations.
Secondly, elect leaders that will actually solve internationally problems instead of aggravating them. Perhaps more people will then choose to stay in their own country.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I hear Clap wants Shamina Begum returned.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I don't want her returned, but I can understand the argument why she should be allowed back.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Do you not think it is hypocritical to want to return foreign criminals to their original countries, but not want to see British criminals returned to the UK?
posted on 13/12/23
comment by clapfreesince2003 (U22207)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Thorgen Kloppinson - "When the facts are in your favour, you argue the facts. When facts are not in your favour you argue the process." (U1282)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by clapfreesince2003 (U22207)
posted 7 minutes ago
comment by Thorgen Kloppinson - "When the facts are in your favour, you argue the facts. When facts are not in your favour you argue the process." (U1282)
posted 5 hours, 23 minutes ago
comment by clapfreesince2003 (U22207)
posted 5 hours, 38 minutes ago
comment by bmcl1987 - the M stands for meltdown 🤓 (U14177)
posted 1 hour, 22 minutes ago
Let’s break this down step by step;
1) Is the Gambian born convicted rapist in prison?
Two options, yes or no.
If yes, then they’re not out in society. So what is the issue?
If no, we move on to the next step.
2) Did this person go through onerous release assessment?
If yes, then we move to 3a.
If no, then move to 3b.
3a) with the person released having had an onerous assessment, then why are you grumbling as they’ll have been deemed suitable to be a productive member of society?
3b) they’ve been released but the release assessment wasn’t onerous (perhaps as thought was to be shipped overseas) then re arrest and carry out assessment -> back to Q2.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Did you read the article ? The judge deemed him a danger to women.
I’d love to know what crime someone has to commit for you to be deemed suitable for deportation, because the only thing this piece of filth could have done to top his crimes would to be to murder his victim.
Just because he was realised doesn’t mean he’s going to be a productive member of society. Would you employ a man who held a knife to his victims throat whilst he raped her? The piece of 💩 will leech of this country until he snuffs it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah, like all the other rapists. Ate you saying he should be treated differently from other rapists because he is no white? Or because he is an immigrant.
If it's the former then that makes you a racist. If the latter then that makes you xenophobic.
Which one are you?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear Lord I've already said I don't care what colour he is.
He was here illegally, he raped someone, he should be deported. If he had been white, and he raped someone I'd want him deported.
If there was an island where we could send British rapists to I'd send them there, but there isn't, so sadly we have to put up with them.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/feb/13/british-rapist-deported-from-australia
This cheesed me off because this piece of crap had spent most of his life in Australia, but I fully understand why the Aussie did it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He's being deported after serving 12 years, yet you want this guy deported immediately, why? You don't even question whether he will serve his sentence once deported. You don't care if he goes free so long as he is out the country.
If you were genuine you'd want him deported after paying for his crime. Don't you think his victim deserves that? That he pay for his crime? Or you don't care about the victim and only want this immigrant out?
The guy deported from Australia didn't have any valid reason not to be deported. This Gambian dude has a good reason that fits the description allowed in international and national law.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Did you actually read this article properly. I think you should before commenting.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Of course I did.
"Cunliffe, who reportedly emigrated from Britain in 1967 and is now in his 60s, has lost an appeal against the Australian department of immigration's decision that he should be deported to the UK.
A department spokeswoman said: "The federal court dismissed Mr Cunliffe's appeal against the ministry's decision to cancel his visa so now he continues to be an unlawful non-citizen. He remains in immigration detention until arrangements can be made for his deportation."
So yeah, he didn't have any valid reasons to oppose deportation as his appeal was dismissed. The Gambian guys appeal was allowed as he had valid grounds. There's a difference.
posted on 13/12/23
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 52 seconds ago
comment by clapfreesince2003 (U22207)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Thorgen Kloppinson - "When the facts are in your favour, you argue the facts. When facts are not in your favour you argue the process." (U1282)
posted 20 minutes ago
Anyone that wants an immigrant deported, and the UK and the parts of the West that's so concerned about immigration, should firstly lead by example by demanding the immediate return and deportation of all their own criminals doing their crime in foreign countries.
You can't just demand deportation of criminals from this country without demanding other countries do the same and return our criminals to us. Let's have an international frenzy of criminal deportations.
Secondly, elect leaders that will actually solve internationally problems instead of aggravating them. Perhaps more people will then choose to stay in their own country.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I hear Clap wants Shamina Begum returned.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I don't want her returned, but I can understand the argument why she should be allowed back.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Do you not think it is hypocritical to want to return foreign criminals to their original countries, but not want to see British criminals returned to the UK?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No, why would I want a terrorist in our country? Just because I don't want her here doesn't mean I think the Kurdish should be lumbered with her. She was born here, and as much as I dislike her, I think it's out duty to take her back.
Page 3879 of 4863
3880 | 3881 | 3882 | 3883 | 3884