BBC NEWS | UK | Scotland | Beheading video man sent to jail
A man who used his mobile phone to replay footage of a beheading in Iraq to a hotel shop worker has been jailed for 60 days. Subhaan Younis, 23, played the images to shocked Charlotte McClay last September at a hotel in Glasgow.
...
Euan Edment said jail was a fitting penalty for the breach of the peace.
...
"Miss McClay was shocked, upset and distressed by the images. This is a serious offence and something she will remember for a long time, perhaps for the rest of her life."
...
The court had heard how Younis, of Baliol Street, Glasgow, had been speaking to Miss McClay in the shop at the Moathouse Hotel in the city's Congress Road on 27 September 2004.
...
Defence lawyer Dominic Sillar said: "This was a colossal mistake on Mr Younis's part.
...
"He fully accepts he was responsible for causing her upset. That was not his intention and he apologises for it."
Maybe I'm missing something here, but what exactly was the crime here? Someone showed someone else a video on a phone (the images themselves apparently not illegal), and for that he ends up in prison? Who would even report that to the police in the first place?
Now if he'd tied her up, pinned her eyes open Clockwork Orange style, and forced her to watch the film, then fair enough. A small pic on a mobile that she could perfectly easily look away from is another matter entirely. Mr Younis may not have acted in the best of taste, but I wasn't aware of that becoming a crime.
What a complete and utter waste of judicial time, effort and money, and what a needless criminalisation of a young man's actions.
Wednesday, September 28, 2005
Sunday, September 25, 2005
Saturday, September 24, 2005
Outrageous...
Ask Jeeves decides to axe Jeeves - disgraceful, the poor chap will need to look for a new position now. They'll regret it when they have to dress themselves of a morn, one simply can't cope without a gentleman's gentleman, surely? (yes I know I'm female, but now that I have my own pocket watch I need to wear the trousers to keep it in...)
More Wodehouse here
More Wodehouse here
Tuesday, September 13, 2005
My Favourite Porn Stars
Eating a sausage supper* and listening to the New Pornographers, does life get any better? Well actually, turns out it does - in another "bands from over there taking pity on us over here" development, they'll be playing in the UK in November! No details on when exactly or where as yet, but clearly the Great Gig Organiser In The Sky likes me..
If you want to hear the new New Pornos album (and why wouldn't you, they've got more hooks than a Peter Pan Villains' Convention) then head on over to the
Twin Cinema site, and enjoy!
* to the uninitiated, i.e. non-Scots, this is a battered deep-fried sausage served with greasy, vinegar-soaked chips - mmmnnn. Scotland = coronary capital of Europe you say? Surely not...
If you want to hear the new New Pornos album (and why wouldn't you, they've got more hooks than a Peter Pan Villains' Convention) then head on over to the
Twin Cinema site, and enjoy!
* to the uninitiated, i.e. non-Scots, this is a battered deep-fried sausage served with greasy, vinegar-soaked chips - mmmnnn. Scotland = coronary capital of Europe you say? Surely not...
Monday, September 12, 2005
Happy Happy Joy Joy
I'm a happy bunny today - I've just found out that The Decemberists, one of my favourite bands, are coming to the UK in November! Yay! It's turning cartwheel time here now, in fact I might even have a celebratory play with my recently purchased hula-hoop (it's non-stop glamour and sophistication round my way, you know)...
In other exciting news, Q, the music magazine loved by dads throughout the UK (the grandads prefer Mojo), has devised some cunning formula or other (what we think + nothing else = will this do?) and worked out the identity of the Best British Song Ever! In a surprise move, sure to send shockwaves to the very core of society, they've gone for a Beatles song. What were the chances? Sorry all you musician-types, it seems the game's up and it's time to stop, perfection has already been achieved. Though what Q will write about in twenty years time if you do, heaven only knows...
In other exciting news, Q, the music magazine loved by dads throughout the UK (the grandads prefer Mojo), has devised some cunning formula or other (what we think + nothing else = will this do?) and worked out the identity of the Best British Song Ever! In a surprise move, sure to send shockwaves to the very core of society, they've gone for a Beatles song. What were the chances? Sorry all you musician-types, it seems the game's up and it's time to stop, perfection has already been achieved. Though what Q will write about in twenty years time if you do, heaven only knows...
It's a grauniad revolution!
The Guardian, the muesli-eating, handwringing, lefty liberal Brit's newspaper of choice enters a new era today - it's gone tabloid (or Berliner as they put it, wouldn't do to sound like one of those nasty common red-tops...).
You can follow the behind the scenes progress in The Editors' Weblog
You can follow the behind the scenes progress in The Editors' Weblog
Wednesday, September 07, 2005
Good news for my telly...
BBC and ITV team up for free satellite service. This is good news for the likes of me - living in the sticks, no cable companies in sight, out of freeview reach, and with inconvenient hills and trees mucking up the reception. Looks like I might not be left high and dry come the digital revolution after all...
Other "in my world" news:
Glasgow is better than Edinburgh - it's official! Well, some people who read a travel magazine say so anyway, and that's good enough for me...
Antony and the Johnsons win the Mercury prize (and the Times wins the most ridiculous headline award). Apparently there's a stushy due to their non-Britishness, but I don't remember an outcry when the nominess were announced. If British-born is clearly stated in the rules, then let the losers weep.
Are GP advanced bookings a problem, asks Aunty Beeb. Why yes, yes they are - in the lack of ability to book ahead sense that is. Not a problem with my GP (apparently they aren't obsessed with government targets) but I know plenty of other people who aren't allowed to make an appointment ahead of time even when requested to do so by their doctor. So instead, they face the lottery of the attempted early morning phone call, when, if you're lucky enough to get through, and have an employer who doesn't mind you spending two hours frantically re-dialling the surgery, you might actually be allowed some medical assistance.
And finally, not long left till the end of the football World Cup qualifying campaign as Scotland play Norway. I'm expecting a "plucky", "brave", but ultimately disapointing performance from Scotland, possibly involving an exit on goal difference or by last minute Norwegian goal, leading to much hand-wringing from the Scottish sporting media. So, same as always then...
Other "in my world" news:
Glasgow is better than Edinburgh - it's official! Well, some people who read a travel magazine say so anyway, and that's good enough for me...
Antony and the Johnsons win the Mercury prize (and the Times wins the most ridiculous headline award). Apparently there's a stushy due to their non-Britishness, but I don't remember an outcry when the nominess were announced. If British-born is clearly stated in the rules, then let the losers weep.
Are GP advanced bookings a problem, asks Aunty Beeb. Why yes, yes they are - in the lack of ability to book ahead sense that is. Not a problem with my GP (apparently they aren't obsessed with government targets) but I know plenty of other people who aren't allowed to make an appointment ahead of time even when requested to do so by their doctor. So instead, they face the lottery of the attempted early morning phone call, when, if you're lucky enough to get through, and have an employer who doesn't mind you spending two hours frantically re-dialling the surgery, you might actually be allowed some medical assistance.
And finally, not long left till the end of the football World Cup qualifying campaign as Scotland play Norway. I'm expecting a "plucky", "brave", but ultimately disapointing performance from Scotland, possibly involving an exit on goal difference or by last minute Norwegian goal, leading to much hand-wringing from the Scottish sporting media. So, same as always then...
Thursday, September 01, 2005
I dream in puns...
Dozed off on the sofa, and ended up with a dream involving Pope Benedict the Whateverth. It seems there was some big party in Rome (which also involved Hercule Poirot morphing into a Willy Wonkaesque Johnny Depp and changing a lightbulb in a mucky old cupboard), with prominent guests including Will Young, Michelle McManus and Javine of not in Girls Aloud and Eurovision fame.
At some point Her Maj Queen Lizzie puts a call through to Pope Benny, demanding to know why he hasn't handed over his Popehood, or whatever the hell it's called, to Will Young yet, as apparently that's why the big do was being held. Whether he won it in Pope Idol or not, I really couldn't say.
Right, I'm off to check what they're putting in my water supply...
At some point Her Maj Queen Lizzie puts a call through to Pope Benny, demanding to know why he hasn't handed over his Popehood, or whatever the hell it's called, to Will Young yet, as apparently that's why the big do was being held. Whether he won it in Pope Idol or not, I really couldn't say.
Right, I'm off to check what they're putting in my water supply...
Trials and Tribulations
I've been watching Death on the Staircase on BBC2, an eight-part documentary following the trial in North Carolina of Michael Peterson. He was accused of the murder of his wife Kathleen, who died, as the title suggests, at the bottom of a staircase in their home. The film-makers followed the defence and, to a more limited degree, the prosecution teams in the assessment of the evidence and building of their cases, the trial, and, in tonight's show, the verdict.
Obviously some bias is inevitable as soon as a camera is present (merely choosing where to point the thing sees to that), and the team clearly had more access to the Peterson family and their lawyers, but on the whole the trial was presented in an impartial manner, allowing the events to speak for themselves.
And what those events showed was a shaky prosecution case, unreliable forensic witnesses, and a judge who allowed the inclusion of material irrelevant to the crime being investigated. As the basis of conviction is supposed to be "beyond reasonable doubt", there certainly seemed to be enough holes in the case for a not guilty verdict to be returned. Having avoided the temptation to google my way to knowledge of the outcome, watching Peterson being found guilty was something of a shock.
While I'm still unconvinced by either the prosecution or defence explanations of Kathleen's death, the onus is on the prosecution to prove guilt, which they singularly failed to do. The defence team may not have proved Peterson innocent, but then they don't have to. The verdict seemed to be based more on prejudice and "gut feeling" than on logical examination of the evidence, an unfortunate side-effect of the jury system. It's a scary though that your future could be in the hands of a randomly chosen bunch of strangers who may send you to prison based on nothing more than hunches, biases and a lack of understanding of scientific evidence. Having said that, it's still the best system available, and the one least open to corruption and cover-up.
It seems the slow grind of the US judicial system is taking its course, and Michael Peterson's case will be going to appeal, so this isn't the end of the case yet. Hopefully the film-makers will keep us updated with its progress, as the insights provided were fascinating, even if the conclusions documented were somewaht depressing.
Obviously some bias is inevitable as soon as a camera is present (merely choosing where to point the thing sees to that), and the team clearly had more access to the Peterson family and their lawyers, but on the whole the trial was presented in an impartial manner, allowing the events to speak for themselves.
And what those events showed was a shaky prosecution case, unreliable forensic witnesses, and a judge who allowed the inclusion of material irrelevant to the crime being investigated. As the basis of conviction is supposed to be "beyond reasonable doubt", there certainly seemed to be enough holes in the case for a not guilty verdict to be returned. Having avoided the temptation to google my way to knowledge of the outcome, watching Peterson being found guilty was something of a shock.
While I'm still unconvinced by either the prosecution or defence explanations of Kathleen's death, the onus is on the prosecution to prove guilt, which they singularly failed to do. The defence team may not have proved Peterson innocent, but then they don't have to. The verdict seemed to be based more on prejudice and "gut feeling" than on logical examination of the evidence, an unfortunate side-effect of the jury system. It's a scary though that your future could be in the hands of a randomly chosen bunch of strangers who may send you to prison based on nothing more than hunches, biases and a lack of understanding of scientific evidence. Having said that, it's still the best system available, and the one least open to corruption and cover-up.
It seems the slow grind of the US judicial system is taking its course, and Michael Peterson's case will be going to appeal, so this isn't the end of the case yet. Hopefully the film-makers will keep us updated with its progress, as the insights provided were fascinating, even if the conclusions documented were somewaht depressing.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)