Stuart Hill (Captain Calamity) Forvik

[tarsus]

Perhaps the sheriffs know that he is correct in what he says and they feel that they have to hit him hard.

[Watter]

The thing is last year our MSP's voted to end short prison sentances of less than 12 months yet  Mr Hill gets a 2 month sentence for a non violent offence  so what's going on ? Confiscation of his recording device should have seen an end of the matter . .https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-48594321

Edited February 25, 2020 by Watter

[Wheelsup]

Unless no other appropriate sentence is suitable.

However if you feel so strongly, you could hire a lawyer , as many of the people he has hounded have done.

Edited February 25, 2020 by Wheelsup

[tarsus]

Police state.

[Colin]

He should have presented a Common Law defense.  That way, the court would have had to prove that there was a "victim" and that a crime against a person had been committed. 

He would also have had the right to be judged by his peers.  Not some desk jockey in a wig.

[Colin]

Yo want to see a police state in action.  Take a look at this;

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/world-us-canada-51638871/six-year-old-girl-arrested-at-florida-school

[tarsus]

Colin, It does not start all of a sudden, it gradually creeps in.

[Claadehol]

Perhaps Tarsus, if you were one of Calamity's victims and had to pay a solicitor, or had your property broken into, you would have less sympathy with this individual.

 

There are solid reasons for recording devices being banned from court cases. Not least the privacy and protection provided for witnesses.

 

"Police state" may make a good letter heading, and may in some cases be appropriate, but here you are talking nonsense.

[Colin]

Colin, It does not start all of a sudden, it gradually creeps in.

I am well aware of how it has crept it.  I watched it over many years.

 

That is why I suggested that "Common Law" be used as a defense.  All other laws are "Acts of Parliament" and are "Admiralty Law" which requires "Consent". 

 

By even turning up in court of your own free will is "Consent".

[Colin]

 

 

There are solid reasons for recording devices being banned from court cases. Not least the privacy and protection provided for witnesses.

 

I would argue that in only a very small minority of cases does the witness need any "privacy" or "protection".

 

Witensses are "called" (named) in an open court and their testimony is then a matter of public record.  Where is the "privacy" or "protection"  in that ?  After all, the court records what they say, so why shouldn't an individual ?

[Wheelsup]

There is a problem if you don’t recognise the only laws we have. Perhaps he should have merely been confined to barracks, on Forvik.

[Colin]

There is a problem if you don’t recognise the only laws we have. Perhaps he should have merely been confined to barracks, on Forvik.

Agreed,  but is the problem with the "Laws" or the "individual" ?

[Watter]

Just read the article in the Times about Stuart Hill's trial where he repeatedly asked the Sheriff  to prove his authority by showing when and how Orkney and Shetland became part of Scotland . You would think that would be a simple matter but the Sheriff appeared unwilling or unable to do so why is that ?.

Edited February 29, 2020 by Watter

[Wheelsup]

It’s the Sheriffs duty to uphold Scottish law not question it. Way above his pay scale.

[NullVoid]

Because other claimants who may want to hold sovereignty over those islands aren't going to launch a full scale invasion to annex territory held by an ally with a very well equipped military,

With those odds you can only hope for a pyrrhic victory and lots of burned bridges diplomatically.

 

Unless a huge political movement a least in the northern isles or a movement to reestablish Greater Norway compels their Government to raise the matter with the British government.

Instead he should have contacted the embassy or consulate and a lawyer in a relevant Scandinavian country to raise the matter in their court and found out what their response was.

 

If a backlash to Scottish Independence leads to calls for Scottish Balkanisation then and only then will the matter be visited and debated,

 

if the United kingdom of England, Wales & N.Ireland for whatever reason wants to cede isles that would otherwise be governed by the proposed Kingdom/Republic of Scotland they could and would likely due this due to strategic reasons or skepticism over the newly independent Scotland as to retain access to British assets there.

 

We don't have a real political movement for any of this to happen and besides a small number of passionate individuals people are apathetic/indifferent to this kind of thing,

Can you even name 3 local politicians or candidates who are pushing for Shetland or Orkney autonomy/independence right now.