So, a number of people in the UK have been arrested, gone on trial and some even jailed for saying racist things and expressing values which the UK courts determined were racist even if they were merely against a voluntary ideology like Islam.
As repugnant and frankly, flat out totalitarian as that is, now there is a case where a person may be prosecuted if they do not actually hold racist views.
It seems the man wrote a letter to a judge saying that he could not serve on a jury because his racist and homophobic views meant that he could not be sufficiently impartial for a juror. Fair enough. But as the judge suspects that the man merely wrote that letter to get out of jury duty, he may well be investigated so that the court can satisfy itself that the man actually does hold those illegal views.
I suppose when they discover he does, they will have to prosecute him for that. And if he doesn’t for shirking jury duty.
This of course is the absolutely inevitable consequence of thought crimes. Once you have them, then you will have these dilemmas whenever it suits whoever happens to want to get you.
From the Daily Mail:
‘I’m just too homophobic and racist for this’: Juror tells judge he can’t sit on any cases because of his extreme views
- The man wrote to the judge who then read the letter out at Southampton Crown Court
- ‘I hold extreme prejudices against homosexuals and black/foreign people and couldn’t be impartial,’ he said
- The would-be juror could now face prosecution for contempt
By Martin Robinson and James Tozer
PUBLISHED: 09:42 GMT, 10 September 2012 | UPDATED: 00:56 GMT, 11 September 2012
A juror told a court his homophobic and racist views meant he could not give a defendant a fair trial.
In a letter written to the judge after he was selected from a shortlist to serve in a case, the man claimed his extreme views ‘against homosexuals and black/foreign people’ made it impossible for him to be impartial.
Last night an investigation was under way after the judge reluctantly agreed to dismiss him from the jury and referred the case to the Attorney General, Dominic Grieve.
Scandal: The juror at Southampton Crown Court asked to be stood down because he is racist and homophobic
The letter was made public after he was selected to serve on an assault and dangerous driving trial at Southampton Crown Court.
Presiding Judge Gary Burrell QC read his note out in open court.
The man, who cannot be named for legal reasons, has since been taken off the jury and threatened with prosecution for contempt of court.
This is because Judge Burrell said he could not be sure if he had written the letter just to get out of it.
I wonder what excuse the mustards will use to get out of jury duty and wether they will be investigated
?He should have said ‘I hold what leftists call extreme prejudices against homosexuals and black/foreign people and couldn’t be impartial in the way that modern Judges want me to be”
I suspect he will be punished in some way for “embarssing” the state.
He should have said that he couldn’t possibly sit on a jury because he’s a Shia Muslim and therefore biased against Sunni Muslims, Hindus, Christians, Sikhs, Jews, Buddhists, women, homosexuals, alcohol drinkers, Zionists, Israelis, Americans, Atheists, Agnostics and pork-eaters and pig farmers.
I wonder how they would have dealt with that one!
A couple of years ago, I was dismissed from jury duty for similar reasons. During the jury selection process, the defense attorney read off a litany of crimes the defendant had already been convicted of committing, demonstrating a pattern of violent behavior. After the presentation, the defense attorney and the judge both asked if every member of the jury panel could ignore that information and come to a conclusion without lending bias towards defendant’s priors. Out of two dozen or so potential jurors, only two of us could not ignore this defendents history. Each of us was called into the judge’s chamber to explain ourselves and then dismissed. My position was . . .if they didn’t want me to consider this defendent’s prior violent history – then why expose me to all the sordid details before trial, only to ask me to ignore it?
Can the insanity of the judiciary be topped (ok, by politics maybe, but they’re basically the same people)?! I bet this is one of the reasons why these people love mohammedans: They feel that they are brothers in mind. Because where is the difference between learning the koran by heart or a lawbook, plus life-long training to set aside common sense, instead always follow what the book says (or make believe, because sometimes they find their loopholes, if they want do)?
White Americans are daily accused of being homosexual hating, racist, bigots, right?
Why then are they so surprised and dumbfounded when one actually confesses to such biases?
The left has created this problem by trying to outlaw certain thoughts, that is why I call the hate crime and hate speech laws thought control laws.