Patrick Finucane

[danny la rouge]

I'm divided 50:50 between the thought that a state does what it needs to do, and the thought that the state must act within its own laws.

Northern Ireland was vicious and brutal place.

We were fighting against people who described them selves as an army, yet had no respect for the rules of war. they were the scum of the earth. People who brutalised their own community. People who, for example, dragged a mother away from her children and tortured her to death, then hid the body, only recently disclosing the location. They did this on the suspicion that she may have been an informer. There are really no adequate words to describe the base depravity of this self-styled army.

It is completely unbelievable that Finucane was unaware of the deeds of the people he defended. It is reasonable to believe that Finucane shared the ethos of those whom he defended. From a government viewpoint, Finucane required to be removed, and they could not do it themselves, so the job was 'contracted out'.

I shed no tears for Finucane, he was well aware of the deeds of the people he defended, and by silence, colluded in those deeds. His death however, is a stain on the character of the government of the time, and is not excusable. The state must operate within its own laws, and on this occasion (one of a number of occasions), it did not do so. Those responsible will not answer for it, and that is unacceptable.

That's an appalling point of view, Sas.

First, we have a legal system where people have a right to a fair hearing and to scrutinise the case against them. To do this effectively we need defence lawyers. We also have a presumption of innocence. You've just implied that everyone Finucane defended was guilty.

"It is completely unbelievable that Finucane was unaware of the deeds of the people he defended".

Do you extend that to anyone ever accused of anything? And are we to dispense with defence lawyers? What kind of legal system would that leave us with? One where one may be accused with impunity and one may not examine those accusations, that's what. Finucane worked as a part of the justice system. A system I assume you endorse.

"It is reasonable to believe that Finucane shared the ethos of those whom he defended."

Just the guilty ones, or the innocent ones too? Do all defence lawyers share the ethos of all those they defend? Perhaps they just believe in treating everyone with fairness and dignity. Perhaps that's their ethos.

And I'll remind you that being guilty of one thing is not proof that you're guilty of another.

"I shed no tears for Finucane"

Why? Because he was a defence lawyer. I'll remind you of your indifference to the murder of defence lawyers if ever you find yourself on charges you're innocent of. It never happens? Yes, it does.

"I shed no tears for Finucane"

I'll remind you of that next time you opine about terrorism.

"I shed no tears for Finucane"

I'll remind you of that next time you accuse others of a callous disregard for human life.

"I shed no tears for Finucane"

I'll remind you of that.

 

[butchersapron]

Nicely done danny.

Would like to remind people that Finucane defended unionists and loyalists in his professional career.

 

[Sasaferrato]

That's an appalling point of view, Sas.

First, we have a legal system where people have a right to a fair hearing and to scrutinise the case against them. To do this effectively we need defence lawyers. We also have a presumption of innocence. You've just implied that everyone Finucane defended was guilty.

"It is completely unbelievable that Finucane was unaware of the deeds of the people he defended".

Do you extend that to anyone ever accused of anything? And are we to dispense with defence lawyers? What kind of legal system would that leave us with? One where one may be accused with impunity and one may not examine those accusations, that's what. Finucane worked as a part of the justice system. A system I assume you endorse.

"It is reasonable to believe that Finucane shared the ethos of those whom he defended."

Just the guilty ones, or the innocent ones too? Do all defence lawyers share the ethos of all those they defend? Perhaps they just believe in treating everyone with fairness and dignity. Perhaps that's their ethos.

And I'll remind you that being guilty of one thing is not proof that you're guilty of another.

"I shed no tears for Finucane"

Why? Because he was a defence lawyer. I'll remind you of your indifference to the murder of defence lawyers if ever you find yourself on charges you're innocent of. It never happens? Yes, it does.

"I shed no tears for Finucane"

I'll remind you of that next time you opine about terrorism.

"I shed no tears for Finucane"

I'll remind you of that next time you accuse others of a callous disregard for human life.

"I shed no tears for Finucane"

I'll remind you of that.

It is my view, to which I'm entitled. I do not demand, or expect, that you will share it.

You never trod the streets of Northern Ireland in uniform, did you? Had you done so, it may have engendered a different view. You will note that I did not say that the killing of Finucane was just or legal, because it wasn't. That fact does blind me to what Finucane and his ilk were/are, they are apologists for murdering scum. I extend that view to those who specialised in the defence of both lots of murdering scum.

Your comment 'Do all defence lawyers share the ethos of all those they defend?' is naive in the extreme. Most defence lawyers would not see the 'clients' that Finucane defended in a dozen careers, the circumstances in Northern Ireland were not the norm in terms of criminal defence.

 

[Pickman's model]

I'm divided 50:50 between the thought that a state does what it needs to do, and the thought that the state must act within its own laws.

Northern Ireland was vicious and brutal place.

We were fighting against people who described them selves as an army, yet had no respect for the rules of war. they were the scum of the earth. People who brutalised their own community. People who, for example, dragged a mother away from her children and tortured her to death, then hid the body, only recently disclosing the location. They did this on the suspicion that she may have been an informer. There are really no adequate words to describe the base depravity of this self-styled army.

It is completely unbelievable that Finucane was unaware of the deeds of the people he defended. It is reasonable to believe that Finucane shared the ethos of those whom he defended. From a government viewpoint, Finucane required to be removed, and they could not do it themselves, so the job was 'contracted out'.

I shed no tears for Finucane, he was well aware of the deeds of the people he defended, and by silence, colluded in those deeds. His death however, is a stain on the character of the government of the time, and is not excusable. The state must operate within its own laws, and on this occasion (one of a number of occasions), it did not do so. Those responsible will not answer for it, and that is unacceptable.

who made northern ireland a vicious and brutal place, sas?

 

[butchersapron]

It is my view, to which I'm entitled. I do not demand, or expect, that you will share it.

You never trod the streets of Northern Ireland in uniform, did you? Had you done so, it may have engendered a different view. You will note that I did not say that the killing of Finucane was just or legal, because it wasn't. That fact does blind me to what Finucane and his ilk were/are, they are apologists for murdering scum. I extend that view to those who specialised in the defence of both lots of murdering scum.

You don't believe in the rule of law then? Or do you think that those who do should be punished for exercising their rights under that law? This is just anarchy.

 

[Blagsta]

It is my view, to which I'm entitled. I do not demand, or expect, that you will share it.

You never trod the streets of Northern Ireland in uniform, did you? Had you done so, it may have engendered a different view. You will note that I did not say that the killing of Finucane was just or legal, because it wasn't. That fact does blind me to what Finucane and his ilk were/are, they are apologists for murdering scum. I extend that view to those who specialised in the defence of both lots of murdering scum.

Your comment 'Do all defence lawyers share the ethos of all those they defend?' is naive in the extreme. Most defence lawyers would not see the 'clients' that Finucane defended in a dozen careers, the circumstances in Northern Ireland were not the norm in terms of criminal defence.

Wow.

 

[Blagsta]

That's not a good wow btw

 

[Sasaferrato]

who made northern ireland a vicious and brutal place, sas?

Do you have a big piece of paper? There is no simple answer to that, but I take the inference that the British Government played a part.

 

[Sasaferrato]

Wow.

I think a few of you need a reality check.

 

[butchersapron]

Bring back frank - at least he'd never have a gun in his hand.

 

[Blagsta]

I think a few of you need a reality check.

!

 

[Pickman's model]

I'm divided 50:50 between the thought that a state does what it needs to do, and the thought that the state must act within its own laws.

Northern Ireland was vicious and brutal place.

We were fighting against people who described them selves as an army, yet had no respect for the rules of war. they were the scum of the earth. People who brutalised their own community. People who, for example, dragged a mother away from her children and tortured her to death, then hid the body, only recently disclosing the location. They did this on the suspicion that she may have been an informer. There are really no adequate words to describe the base depravity of this self-styled army.

It is completely unbelievable that Finucane was unaware of the deeds of the people he defended. It is reasonable to believe that Finucane shared the ethos of those whom he defended. From a government viewpoint, Finucane required to be removed, and they could not do it themselves, so the job was 'contracted out'.

I shed no tears for Finucane, he was well aware of the deeds of the people he defended, and by silence, colluded in those deeds. His death however, is a stain on the character of the government of the time, and is not excusable. The state must operate within its own laws, and on this occasion (one of a number of occasions), it did not do so. Those responsible will not answer for it, and that is unacceptable.

tbh i expect most lawyers defending people are well aware of the deeds their clients are supposed to have done, it would be rather difficult to defend them otherwise.

 

[Fedayn]

I think a few of you need a reality check.

Says a man who sheds no tears for lawyer murdered by bigots subcontracted to do so by the very state that says Finucane merely doing what the state decrees he should do. And we need a reality check?

 

[danny la rouge]

It is my view, to which I'm entitled. I do not demand, or expect, that you will share it.

I don't share it. Not in the least. But I'm surprised to see you hold it. I thought you believed in the rule of law.

You never trod the streets of Northern Ireland in uniform, did you?

No, I have never done so. I nevertheless hold opinions about whether defence lawyers are necessary for the operation of a fair legal system. I think they are. Do you?

That fact does blind me to what Finucane and his ilk were/are, they are apologists for murdering scum.

No, they are defence lawyers.

I extend that view to those who specialised in the defence of both lots of murdering scum.

Do you extend it to those who defend people wrongly accused of being murdering scum?

Your comment 'Do all defence lawyers share the ethos of all those they defend?' is naive in the extreme. Most defence lawyers would not see the 'clients' that Finucane defended in a dozen careers, the circumstances in Northern Ireland were not the norm in terms of criminal defence.

Jesus. Do you think the rule of law should have extended to Northern Ireland or not?

 

[likesfish]

northern ireland was a vicious and stupid place that very rarely made the top 10 things the british goverment gave a shit about. when it did they either made things worse or things couldnt possibly get worse
It wasnt the UK's vietnam or anything else whatever the spooks got up to nobody really cared or does now
Maybe if they had the loyalists couldnt have turned it into the shithole it became

 

[Pickman's model]

You never trod the streets of Northern Ireland in uniform, did you?

did you tread the fields of northern ireland too?

 

[Sasaferrato]

Says a man who sheds no tears for lawyer murdered by bigots subcontracted to do so by the very state that says Finucane merely doing what the state decrees he should do. And we need a reality check?

You stand on one side of this conflict. I stand in the middle. You describe the Protestant murders as bigots, how do you describe the Catholic murderers?

 

[Sasaferrato]

did you tread the fields of northern ireland too?

Once or twice. Not often, thankfully.

 

[butchersapron]

You stand on one side of this conflict. I stand in the middle. You describe the Protestant murders as bigots, how do you describe the Catholic murderers?

No you don't.

(As republican kilers btw)

Look at this, agree with me or you are the IRA.

In three posts, from rule of law to death squads. People like you in uniform treading belfast streets - that's someone's nightmare. That's why they exist.

 

[Fedayn]

You stand on one side of this conflict. I stand in the middle. You describe the Protestant murders as bigots, how do you describe the Catholic murderers?

I stand on the side of the working class, which, funnily enough is Protestant, Catholic, Dissenter and of no religion. I do not refer to 'Protestant muderers' as anything. I referred specifically to those people who murdered Finucane, ie William Stobie et al as bigots, because they were/are are exactly that. Just because you take a broad sweeping generalising brush to everything don't assume we are all similarly incapable.

 

[Blagsta]

You stand on one side of this conflict. I stand in the middle. You describe the Protestant murders as bigots, how do you describe the Catholic murderers?

Don't pretend to be neutral in all this. You've just shown you're not.

 

[Sasaferrato]

northern ireland was a vicious and stupid place that very rarely made the top 10 things the british goverment gave a shit about. when it did they either made things worse or things couldnt possibly get worse
It wasnt the UK's vietnam or anything else whatever the spooks got up to nobody really cared or does now
Maybe if they had the loyalists couldnt have turned it into the shithole it became

Indeed. However, Northern Ireland seems to be returning to a relatively peaceful place, it takes time, but it is getting there. Had there been no government intervention; remember that the stated primary purpose of intervention was protection of the Catholic community; heaven only knows how things would have turned out. Hindsight is a wonderful tool, but even with hindsight it is hard to see what the vast expenditure of young lives and a hell of a lot of money achieved. I very much doubt that the army presence lowered the ultimate body count.

 

[Sasaferrato]

I stand on the side of the working class, which, funnily enough is Protestant, Catholic, Dissenter and of no religion. I do not refer to 'Protestant muderers' as anything. I referred specifically to those people who murdered Finucane, ie William Stobie et al as bigots, because they were/are are exactly that. Just because you take a broad sweeping generalising brush to everything don't assume we are all similarly incapable.

You didn't answer my question.

 

[butchersapron]

Indeed. However, Northern Ireland seems to be returning to a relatively peaceful place, it takes time, but it is getting there. Had there been no government intervention; remember that the stated primary purpose of intervention was protection of the Catholic community; heaven only knows how things would have turned out. Hindsight is a wonderful tool, but even with hindsight it is hard to see what the vast expenditure of young lives and a hell of a lot of money achieved. I very much doubt that the army presence lowered the ultimate body count.

Not been round *** then?

 

[Fedayn]

You stand on one side of this conflict. I stand in the middle. You describe the Protestant murders as bigots, how do you describe the Catholic murderers?

And, let's be clear, you do NOT stand in the middle at all. It is a factually inaccurate, silly assertion without any evidence whatsoever. You stand on the side of the British Army, ie in defence of the 'British State/state machinery. A machinery we are increasingly seeing was not only involved but directing/colluding with murderers and giving free rein to their informers to murder at will and then covering up those crimes. You are not in the middle at all, it is delusional to claim so.

 

[butchersapron]

And, let's be clear, you do NOT stand in the middle at all. It is a factually inaccurate, silly assertion without any evidence whatsoever. You stand on the side of the British Army, ie in defence of the 'British State/state machinery. A machinery we are increasingly seeing was not only involved but directing/colluding with murderers and giving free rein to their informers to murder at will and then covering up those crimes. You are not in the middle at all, it is delusional to claim so.

The whole thread is about that - it's crazy for him to deny it. But, he's crazy.

 

[Sasaferrato]

Don't pretend to be neutral in all this. You've just shown you're not.

I'm absolute neutral. The murdering scum on both sides are just that, murdering scum, Protestant and Catholic. I would feel exactly the same if Finucane had been defending Protestant murdering scum.

 

[Fedayn]

You didn't answer my question.

Becauise yor question was based on your ignorant and stereotyped reading of my point. I was being specific. Perhaps if you could try the same you may get an answer.

 

[Blagsta]

I'm absolute neutral. The murdering scum on both sides are just that, murdering scum, Protestant and Catholic. I would feel exactly the same if Finucane had been defending Protestant murdering scum.

You've just declared your side.

 

[Pickman's model]

Indeed. However, Northern Ireland seems to be returning to a relatively peaceful place, it takes time, but it is getting there. Had there been no government intervention; remember that the stated primary purpose of intervention was protection of the Catholic community; heaven only knows how things would have turned out. Hindsight is a wonderful tool, but even with hindsight it is hard to see what the vast expenditure of young lives and a hell of a lot of money achieved. I very much doubt that the army presence lowered the ultimate body count.

was it fuck: the army went into the six counties in support of the civil authority, the stormont government. from the times, 15/8/1969, '400 troops bring peace to devastated bogside':

when the singing stopped, she [bernadette devlin] told the crowd through a megaphone that she had just spoken on the telephone to major chichester-clark, prime minister of northern ireland. she had asked him if the army were in londonderry to replace or to assist the police. he had told her that they were there to assist them.